lol, I just visited Wesleyan’s redesigned website and someone actually lifted a few of my phrases from this thread for copy! Yikes, I guess they do poke around here
Perhaps they couldn’t resist this gem? “An old-school drag queen would exclaim, ‘Mary!’”
But my more serious thoughts are that if they used your exact wording with no attempt to credit or contact you, then they have plagiarized your writing. I have no idea what the legal aspects of this are, but in academia ethics should, always, supersede legality.
I’m happy they did. I went there practically for free (same aid as Bowdoin), had an incredible experience, and haven’t been able to donate much to the alumni fund.
The main thing was the new lower border on the page, which now reads “Boldness.Rigor. Practical idealism.” At the least, the latter two items seemed inspired by some of what I wrote on here. Might be wrong, but I don’t recall either of those terms ever being featured in their marketing. In any event, far from plagiarism.
That’s perfectly fine from your perspective – I hope I would feel the same way – but it was Wesleyan’s responsibility to find out your thoughts directly from you. Your personal willingness to give back to Wesleyan should have no bearing on the standards Wesleyan holds for itself. But, as you imply, the concept of plagiarism has much to do with the exact nature of the words that are in common (their rareness, placement, etc.). My initial assessment was based on your post alone.
This isn’t a conversation that interests me. Marketing personnel aren’t academics. If they see an idea they like, they use it. I never communicate with the administration. I’ve kept in touch with a few professors, but we never discuss what’s going on with the school’s ranking, etc. Their research continues, unaffected by financial vicissitudes, and our conversations run along personal and philosophical lines. They’d be shocked that I gave thought to such banalities as we fret about here.
Well that settles that 
Can’t help but find this amusing @Wesleyan97 castigates me, then suggests Wesleyan plagiarised his wording.
I find odd than none of you even refer to the original document; Wesleyan 2020 from May 2010, wherein just that wording; “boldness, rigor, and practical idealism” was included in the Mission statement! no less.
When I was researching colleges I read the 2020 document fully, before we visited or DS applied and was accepted, what piqued my interest and one that I continue to explore here was the following, extracted from section IV the Challenges section:-
For decades, Wesleyan has been regarded as one of the top liberal arts institutions focused on undergraduate education. Over the last twenty years, the US News and World Report rankings have had an important impact on the public’s sense of “the best” colleges in America. Wesleyan’s ranking has generally slipped, from 6th in the late 1980s to 13th in 2009. These rankings reflect a more fundamental shift in Wesleyan’s capacity to compete with other schools for faculty, students, and public recognition. While Wesleyan was the wealthiest school in relation to the number of students in the late 1960s and early 1970s, today the university does not have the ability to sustain the levels of spending per student that one finds at some of our peer institutions. This has an immediate negative impact on the rankings. With endowment increasingly taken as a way of measuring educational strength, Wesleyan has seen its standing erode. Prestige plays an important role in student choice, and reclaiming Wesleyan’s status at the very top will be challenging.
I still find this to be the case some 5 years on and nothing is being done to stop the erosion, whatever @circuitrider may say.
Maybe @wesleyan97 also wrote, “Wesleyan, the Independent Ivy.” (See The Gatekeepers.)
I’m relieved that the wording predates this thread by years, as it takes the wind out of @merci91’s sails regarding institutional integrity. I didn’t agree with the negative appraisal of possible borrowing but feared that s/he would milk it until the udders ran dry (and prolapsed). As for “The Independent Ivy,” boy was that a desperately miscalculated campaign. “This Is Why” seems to be working for fundraising. To me it sounds vapid, but all slogans do. The words “practical idealism” (and, to a lesser degree, “rigor”) simply jumped out at me when I visited the website to look up a department page. I don’t know in what way Wesleyan’s idealism has become pragmatic (I was a science major and the work was very rigorous, but not wedded to idealism in any programmatic way); it wasn’t so during my time there and given my earlier musings in the thread about adding programs that address the world’s urgent needs, it occurred to me that whoever writes their copy might have taken inspiration from that. In retrospect, I should have searched for earlier instances but instead came here immediately to report what seemed an amusing development. Mea culpa for the lack of research and the casualness about matters that seem of passionate interest to others. I never read the 2020 thing; nor have I ever read institutional campaign mission statements. Cheers to those who meditate on such writings as a kind of lectio divina. As Miss Brodie said, “For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like.”
A poster has a negative appraisal of possible plagiarism and that offends you? I didn’t want any “wind [in my] sails.” What I wanted was an understanding that didn’t create a disturbance to my faith. Your initial post on this topic implied that Wesleyan used multiple phrases you had written without attribution. I’m also glad that’s not the case. But if it had been, would I think it to be serious? You bet.
It’s odd what can be projected onto a few sentences.
I was bemused, not offended, that in someone’s reality this constituted a grave transgression. Also, given your response, a bit concerned about having handed you ammunition against my school. I erred in writing that “phrases” had been lifted, when only a few words–really two–were in question. And now @circuitrider has mercifully revealed even those to be years old. In any event, we all have our values and priorities. Clearly ours differ. If we were talking about academic writing or any form of substantive discourse, I’d care. But promotional copy? Life is too short.
From your initial post, I actually pictured strings of exact phrases. So that’s serious. “Grave” is another matter, and I think another projection on your part.
As for “ammunition against [your] school” … What, now? My reaction would have been the same for any school. And what have I ever posted against Wesleyan? (Other than my perhaps premature usage of “plagiarism” – which was based on your misleading post – so examine your own responsibility.)
And for the record, @Englishman has suggested I am from Wesleyan (although his post was later edited.) So it appears people see what they want to see.
In this case, I think “snotty hyperbole” would be more apt than “projection”–the intrapsychic stakes aren’t high enough here to mobilize a defense mechanism. To your credit, you haven’t put down the school, but it becomes difficult not to conflate people who have so much to say about a school of which they have no firsthand experience. But you’re in the midst of a college search though for your kid, right? So your interest comes honestly.
So, someone was “[snottily hyperbolic]” in defense of your words … It’s still misguided name-calling. But I won’t reciprocate as your intent seems benign.
I was being snottily hyperbolic by using the word “grave.” Your tone was quite earnest and even.
Perfect.
My niece is beginning her search now. I personally have respected Wesleyan for a number of reasons, and have recommended she look at the school. To some extent this is pending her self-assessment of what she wants – a challenging concept to for a 16-year-old to formulate and articulate. Though recently that seems to be changing. Thanks for your interest.
Delete.