We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The authoritarian impulses of do-gooders and the Left are often highlighted here. My "problem" - if it is a problem - is that I instinctively rebel whenever a government tries to tell me that they are doing something for my own good. As red-blooded Americans, we know that government is mostly made up of self-important jackasses who couldn't run a candy store and who surely should not be running my life in any way. I can do that myself, just fine.
One way to start cleaning fraud in academia is to start requiring an honest and forthright Curriculum Vitae from all persons on the teaching staff.
First: require schools, and dates for all education degrees received this information should also include the department which awarded the degree and exactly what was the focus of study(specialty).
Second: require anyone teaching or doing research to only publish the papers they have written. As it is today many, many teachers include their student's papers in their own list of publications. For example, if I have Suzy WOnderful in class and she stops by to get some input into her paper, or project, and I help her to get it published, or I help her to put up a poster presentation, etc., etc. I will list her paper, her project under my Curriculum Vitae "Publications" section. This is wrong and deceptive. In the publications segment of any Curriculum Vitae there should be a separate section clearly titled : advisor to the following presentations by students, or some such title. Something that makes clear this student was under your advisement,and you have now added their paper to your own list of publications. This is an evil practice.
Three: It should be a Federal penalty for anyone fraudulently misrepresenting either their employment, or academic experience in order to get hired. I know it already is, but no one enforces it. Maybe at the state level you could get individual states to go after academic fraud. Academic fraud is a huge problem, but you got to start somewhere.
Second: require anyone teaching or doing research to only publish the papers they have written. As it is today many, many teachers include their student's papers in their own list of publications.
It happens. I knew an engineering prof who had 100+ published papers to his name. Anyone who wanted to use his lab facilities - not just lowly grad students- had to attach the prof's' name to anything published. Which is how someone who is basically an administrator got 100+ papers to his credit.
In the case of an advising prof, I can see how the advising prof's name should be attached, as the adviser most likely added a lot of input and feedback. But " if you want to use my lab you have to add my name" is another issue entirely .
AVI had a posting a while back where he pointed out that the increase in wingnuts' skepticism towards science correlated fairly well with the increase in the incidence of fraudulent scientific papers.