May 16, 2006

Churchill Investigation Results

Ward Churchill has been unanimously determined to have engaged in serious academic misconduct.

Findings
The conclusions of the investigative committee that examined seven allegations of research misconduct against University of Colorado ethnic studies professor Ward Churchill:

Charge A: That Churchill misrepresented the General Allotment Act of 1887 in his writings by incorrectly writing that it created a "blood quantum" standard that allowed tribes to admit members only if they had at least half native blood.
Finding: Falsification, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications.

Charge B: That Churchill misrepresented the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 by incorrectly writing that the act imposed a "blood quantum" requiring artists to prove they were one-quarter Indian by blood.
Finding: Falsification, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications.

Charge C: That Churchill incorrectly claimed there was "some pretty strong circumstantial evidence" that Capt. John Smith introduced smallpox among the Wampanoag Indians between 1614-1618.
Finding: Falsification and fabrication.

Charge D: That in several writings Churchill falsely accused the U.S. Army of committing genocide by distributing blankets infested with smallpox to Mandan Indians in the Upper Missouri River Valley in 1837.
Finding: Falsification, fabrication, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications, and serious deviation from accepted practices in reporting results from research. The committee also found that Churchill was "disrespectful of Indian oral tradition."

Charge E: That Churchill claimed as his own work a 1972 pamphlet about a water-diversion scheme in Canada titled "The Water Plot." The work actually was written by a now-defunct environmental group, "Dam the Dams."
Finding: Plagiarism.

Charge F: That Churchill plagiarized part of an essay written by Rebecca L. Robbins in a book he published in 1993.
Finding: No misconduct

Charge G: That Churchill plagiarized the writings of Canadian professor Fay G. Cohen in a 1992 essay.
Finding: Plagiarism.

While three of the panel members believe that the misconduct rises to the level at which termination might be justified, the panel offered a 4-1 recommendation in favor of a 5-year suspension. I would argue that such a suspension is insufficient, and that the higher penalty must be invoked in order to establish the seriousness of the misconduct and the importance of intellectual and academic honesty in the context of academic freedom.

I would also note that the charges in question have NOTHING to do with the inflammatory statements made regarding the victims of the 9/11 terrorist acts – they have to do with serious violations of scholarly standards and ethics. That is as it should be.

Posted by: Greg at 10:42 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
6kb generated in CPU 0.0036, elapsed 0.0099 seconds.
19 queries taking 0.0073 seconds, 28 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
[/posts]