Povećaj veličinu slova Vrati na prvobitnu veličinu slova Samnji veličinu slova štampaj štampajPošalji prijatelju
THE CASE OF MILJANA RADIVOJEVIĆ
UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON “PRODUCED” AT LEAST ONE FALSE DOCTOR OF PHILOSOFY - THE CASE OF MILJANA RADIVOJEVIĆ
Miljana Radivojevic got her PhD degree in 2012 at UCL. Before that and, specially, after – she did a lot to promote herself as one of the greatest archaeologists in Europe! According to her biography published at the official web-site of University Cambridge, Division of Archaeology, she published 11 articles (in most of them she was a co-author) and participated in three chapters in three books, also as a co-author, mostly with Dr. Thil Rehren. We suppose that Dr. Rehren was, probably, her supervisor during her PhD studies at UCL. For such a “brilliant” career these results are, really, very poor! So, 14 co-authorized articles of “Dr.” Miljana Radivojevic could not be assumed as a work of self-called “famous archaeologist”! In some of them it looks like she was just “added” as one of the authors, since the topic of the article is not in line with her field of research!
But, let us come back to her PhD thesis. In the very wide and serious analysis of her thesis Duško Šljivar has found that she has used many articles and projects to write two crucial chapters of her PhD thesis! Specially, she copied a lot from the State research project financed by the National Museum from Belgrade: “Archaeometallurgy in the Vinča Culture”. One of project’s directors is Duško Šljivar, who has made this serious analysis about the plagiarism in Miljana’s PhD thesis. The most important fact which clearly shows that Miljana Radivojevic committed pure plagiarism is that the title of her thesis is “Metal Production in the Vinča Culture”!!! Almost the same title as the title of the project!!! Duško Šljivar says:
An arrangement was made with Dr. Thilo Rehren and Miljana Radivojević from UCL in Great Britain. On two occasions, they used mobile XRF to examine the samples located within the depot of the National Museum, and forwarded approximately 500 of those samples to London for more detailed analyses. It was agreed that the results obtained may be used "solely" for the preparation of PhD dissertation of M. Radivojević. For this purpose, Belovode probe III technical documentation was also added to serve as the illustrated archaeological appendix to her dissertation. The text publish in Starinar is a clear evidence of her inobservance of the arrangement agreed between us as colleagues and professionals!
It goes without saying that all authors use and quote published works. However, while visiting Belovode site, Miss Radivojević copied the entire documentation relevant for this site without informing the site manager about this and subsequently used the documentation in her paper.
If Dr. Thilo Rehren has participated in Miss Radivojevic work, specially if he has supervised her PhD thesis work, he could be, also, co-participant in this scientific crime. The fault of the UCL is that the doctoral studies department or some other administrative body - did not check if there was any percentage of plagiarism in PhD thesis of Miljana Radivojevic. In 2012 they had the software to do it. The already mentioned project of the National Museum in Belgrade has been lasting for more than 20 years! And it is World wide known. “Archaeometallurgy in the Vinča Culture” (Project title) and “Metal Production in the Vinča Culture” (Miljana’s PhD thesis title) – are absolutely the same titles! Word “metallurgy” means metal production and processing! So, 100% the same titles and (probably) the same percentage of plagiarism! But, no one can check it, since this PhD thesis is unreachable (“locked”) for next four years!!! Fortunately, some chapters are “reachable” and the plagiarism in them are nearly 100%! The authorities of the UCL should explain why this PhD thesis is unreachable for public opinion!? Even more, they have to inform scientific public opinion how many plagiarized PhD theses they hide at UCL? Probably – no one?
Duško Šljivar concludes his analysis:
Such improvisations are present throughout the text, accompanied by approximate observations in conclusive discussion, without quoting the authors who dealt with this problem for decades and who, more or less, and from different standpoints, pointed to the metallurgical aspects of Vinča culture. Despite violations of copyrights due to manipulation of findings and due to numerous technical errors, this work is a compilation of already published papers on the metallurgy of the Vinča culture and illustrated appendixes… It is now clear why the PhD dissertation of M. Radivojević is made unavailable to the public.