A theatre scholar is launching a聽legal challenge to a聽London drama school鈥檚 decision to聽throw out claims that her PhD supervisor used 鈥渦nique鈥 ideas from her thesis without attribution.
Jo Ronan, a director and academic, is聽taking the Royal Central School of Speech and Drama, University of London to聽court after it聽rejected an聽allegation that one of her doctoral supervisors had appropriated concepts from her 2018 dissertation for a book on how theatre rehearsals can become more collaborative and less hierarchical.
Dr Ronan, who spent a decade developing her PhD while working as a lecturer at the University of the West of Scotland, said she was 鈥渟hocked鈥 when she heard last year that her theory of 鈥渄ialectical collaborative theatre鈥 was to feature heavily in an upcoming monograph by her supervisor.
She told 糖心Vlog that she felt 鈥渢otally dispossessed鈥 by the alleged plagiarism.
糖心Vlog
Dr Ronan, who founded the performance group BloodWater Theatre in聽2011 to聽experiment with her ideas of 鈥渘on-hierarchical collaborative theatre鈥, said she was also 鈥済obsmacked鈥 by Central鈥檚 decision to dismiss her claim. An initial screening by external investigators appointed by the school found that there was 鈥渟ubstance to the case鈥, she said.
Seeking a judicial review of Central鈥檚 decision, Dr Ronan is currently聽聽her legal costs, which could run to 拢60,000, and up to 拢120,000 if she loses, she estimates. She has raised more than 拢24,000 so far and says she needs to raise 拢30,000 to proceed to the next stage of her action.
糖心Vlog
鈥淭his is not about my ego or me being territorial about the research domain; and as I聽have left academia because of聽this, I聽am not doing this for career progression or status in this field,鈥 said Dr Ronan, who聽did not want to name the supervisor in question.
Instead, she was 鈥渇ighting so hard, not only for myself but for every researcher who is marginalised, at the mercy of those they are beholden to for their livelihood鈥. Dr Ronan added that the episode raised questions about power imbalances in PhD supervision and institutional accountability.
Dr Ronan鈥檚 supervisor is understood to deny any wrongdoing. In a statement, a Central spokeswoman said it took 鈥渁llegations of misconduct extremely seriously and, where disputes may arise, treat[s] everyone involved with dignity and respect鈥.
鈥淎s soon as the allegation was made, we put in place robust procedures to investigate which followed UK聽Research Integrity Office guidelines through the process鈥o ensure a fair outcome as well as to protect the reputations both of those suspected of misconduct when the allegations are not confirmed, as well as those who make the allegations,鈥 she said.
糖心Vlog
鈥淭he two-stage process for investigation was undertaken by panellists external to Central, appointed through a robust selection process which included taking external advice,鈥 the spokeswoman said, explaining that the 鈥渇indings of the independent review ultimately did not uphold the accusation of plagiarism鈥.
POSTSCRIPT:
Note: This article originally stated that plagiarism subject to legal action was alleged to have occurred in a book chapter. It has been corrected to state that plagiarism is alleged to have occurred in a book. It was also originally stated that the screening investigation was carried out by the UK Research Integrity Office. The article has been amended to reflect that it was conducted by external investigators appointed by the school in line with UKRIO guidance.
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to 罢贬贰鈥檚 university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?








