> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
News
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

Plagiarism by Martin Luther King Affirmed by Scholars at Boston U.

By  Ellen K. Coughlin
October 16, 1991

A committee of scholars established by Boston University to investigate charges that the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized significant portions of his doctoral dissertation has concluded that the document does contain substantial “misappropriation” of others’ writings.

“There is no question,” the committee said in a report issued last week, “but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation by appropriating material from sources not explicitly credited in notes, or mistakenly credited, or credited generally and at some distance in the text from a close paraphrase or verbatim quotation.”

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

A committee of scholars established by Boston University to investigate charges that the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., plagiarized significant portions of his doctoral dissertation has concluded that the document does contain substantial “misappropriation” of others’ writings.

“There is no question,” the committee said in a report issued last week, “but that Dr. King plagiarized in the dissertation by appropriating material from sources not explicitly credited in notes, or mistakenly credited, or credited generally and at some distance in the text from a close paraphrase or verbatim quotation.”

The committee recommended that a letter, stating that the document contained “improprieties” in its citations, be placed with the official copy of King’s dissertation in the university library. King received a doctorate in theology from Boston University in 1955.

Plagiarism in the dissertation and in other student papers King wrote was first discovered by researchers at the Martin Luther King, Jr., Papers Project at Stanford University.

Clayborne Carson, a historian who is director of the King Papers Project, published an initial report of the findings in the June 1991 issue of The Journal of American History. Complete details will appear in the relevant volume of the King papers, which is expected to be published next year.

ADVERTISEMENT

When reports of the plagiarism first became public a year ago, Boston University officials asked four theology professors -- three on its own faculty and one at American University -- to examine the allegations specifically concerning the dissertation. The four scholars have substantially corroborated what Mr. Carson and his colleagues found.

“It’s a fair reading of the evidence,” Mr. Carson said of the Boston University report, “and about what I would have expected them to conclude.”

The committee also noted that, at the time King was a student there, Boston University had explicit rules about citation and offered an explanatory course that King attended.

“Dr. King is responsible,” the report said, “for knowingly misappropriating the borrowed materials that he failed to cite or to cite adequately.”

Committee members did say that, while King repeatedly misappropriated the words of his sources, he did not try to pass others’ ideas off as his own.

ADVERTISEMENT

Revelation of the plagiarism has raised questions about the adequacy of the supervision of King’s work. The committee said it found no evidence that the two faculty readers of the dissertation, L. Harold DeWolf and S. Paul Schilling, had breached normal standards of academic supervision. Committee members suggested that the plagiarism had not been caught because no one had reason to be suspicious.

The committee rejected out of hand any suggestion that King’s degree should be revoked, partly because such a move is virtually unheard of and partly because, despite the inadequate citations, the dissertation “makes an intelligent contribution to scholarship.”

“To some extent, we’re talking about a very curious precedent,” John H. Cartwright, a professor of social ethics at Boston and one of the members of the committee, said in an interview.

Mr. Carson agreed. “There’s just no way they could retroactively make a judgment about the awarding of the doctorate,” he said, “because King’s not around to defend himself.”

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin