Boulder – University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill plagiarized, fabricated and falsified material and seriously deviated from accepted research practices in his writings, a report released Tuesday said.
The ethnic-studies professor’s academic misconduct was serious enough that CU could fire him or suspend him without pay, at least for two years, the committee report said.
“Professor Churchill’s misconduct was deliberate and not a matter of an occasional error,” it said.
Churchill’s writings show an “indifference to the proper attribution of scholarly work to its genuine author” and a “pattern of failure to understand the difference between scholarship and polemic.”
Four of the five scholars who examined Churchill’s work for four months thought CU should suspend him without pay – two suggested two years and two suggested five years. The fifth committee member said the university should fire him.
Two of the committee members who recommended suspension agreed the misconduct was severe enough that CU could fire Churchill.
Churchill’s fate is in the hands of provost Susan Avery, arts and sciences dean Todd Gleeson and interim chancellor Phil DiStefano, who are expected to announce a decision by mid-June.
Churchill, who received the report Tuesday morning, told 9News the findings were false. He also said that no committee members were competent in his field or any other areas discussed, except law, and that people competent in his field were excluded.
Churchill took particular exception to a finding that he was disrespectful of Indian oral traditions when he wrote about an 1837 smallpox epidemic. The committee was “a bunch of white academics” who “overruled” what Native Americans have told him, he said. “I have disrespected no one. They did,” he said.
Churchill attorney David Lane told 9News he plans to take a case to federal court if CU fires Churchill.
Churchill has two weeks to write a response to the report.
The committee investigated seven allegations against Churchill, finding problems in six. They include his interpretation of Indian law and his suggestion that the U.S. government intentionally spread smallpox to Indians.
The committee said Churchill’s tendency “is to attack” anyone criticizing his work. The panel disagreed with his description of scholarly process, calling it “impoverished.”
The report quoted Churchill as saying this about his research methods: “I’ve got this general understanding. You say, ‘but can that general understanding be confirmed?’ Well, I’m looking to confirm it. I’m also looking for information, and I told you this at the outset, I’m looking to prove it’s true.”
The committee, consisting of three CU professors and two from other universities, decided to keep secret the way each member voted. Committee chairwoman Marianne Wesson, a CU law professor, said they had been subjected to “a certain amount of abuse” from the public and wanted the protection of confidentiality as they spoke with one another.
Politicians, including state Rep. Josh Penry of Grand Junction and state Sen. Shawn Mitchell of Broomfield, both Republicans, called on CU to fire the professor.
“The speech is free, but it doesn’t mean he can enjoy it and maintain a taxpayer-funded position,” Mitchell said.
Gov. Bill Owens suggested Churchill resign, saying his “prolonged presence … besmirches the reputation of a fine university and its many outstanding teachers.”
The chairman of the university’s regents, Paul Schauer, thanked the committee for its work and declined to comment further, as did CU president Hank Brown and other administrators.
If provost Avery and dean Gleeson recommend termination, Brown and the regents will have the final decision, and they said they did not want to influence the process.
Faculty council chair Rod Muth said the report shows that the Churchill case is not the norm.
“Either the man is immensely sloppy or, as they indicate in the findings, dishonest,” Muth said. “For this many things to be substantiated, it says the individual is not paying attention to standards of scholarly practice.”
The university has the legal right to suspend Churchill without pay for two or five years, said J. Eric Elliff, counsel to CU’s Standing Committee on Research Misconduct.
The typical punishment in cases this serious is usually dismissal or suspension of pay, said Jonathan Knight, director of academic freedom and tenure at the American Association of University Professors.
Knight said Churchill has been given a fair investigation and is not being pursued because of his controversial statements.
“From our point of view, there were requisite safeguards on his fitness to continue,” he said. “The report followed procedures.”
The five-member ad hoc committee was formed by CU’s Standing Committee, which determined in September there was enough evidence against Churchill for a full-blown investigation.
The Standing Committee now is looking into recent allegations against Churchill by activist and author Ernesto Vigil.
Committee members have not announced whether Vigil’s six accusations, including that Churchill wrongly described Salvadoran peasants as Indians and that he got the name of a village wrong, merit an in-depth probe.
The investigation into Churchill’s work began because of controversy over his essay comparing some victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to Nazi bureaucrat Adolf Eichmann, who managed plans to exterminate European Jews. The essay surfaced in the public eye in January 2005.
University administrators determined that free-speech rights prevented Churchill from being punished for the essay, but regents voted in February 2005 to review Churchill’s work.
Staff writers Kevin Simpson, Arthur Kane and John Ingold contributed to this report.
Staff writer Jennifer Brown can be reached at 303-820-1593 or jenbrown@denverpost.com.
What happens next
Ward Churchill has two weeks to file a written response to the report with the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct.
The committee will combine Churchill’s response with the investigative committee’s report and write recommendations for action.
That document will go to Todd Gleeson, dean of arts and sciences, and Susan Avery, provost, who will determine what sanctions, if any, will be taken against Churchill.
The regents and CU president Hank Brown have the final say on whether Churchill will be terminated.
Churchill can appeal to the Privilege and Tenure Committee.
Source: University of Colorado
The Churchill file
January 2005
Protests erupt over Ward Churchill’s invitation to speak at Hamilton College in New York because of an essay in which he called 9/11 victims “little Eichmanns.”
Churchill resigns as chair of the ethnic-studies department but retains tenure.
February 2005
Gov. Bill Owens suggests Churchill resign.
University of Colorado regents apologize to “all Americans” for Churchill’s remarks.
In a fiery speech on campus, Churchill defends his writings.
Churchill’s ethnic heritage is questioned, and he admits that he is an “associate” of the Keetoowah Band of the Cherokee tribe, not a full member, but says he is still part Cherokee.
Scholars elsewhere voice doubts about Churchill’s work.
Regents form a panel to review his writings and speeches.
March 2005
CU president Betsy Hoffman resigns.
Regents consider a buyout offer for Churchill, but that shrivels after accusations of plagiarism grow. They also find that the statements about the 9/11 victims and advocacy of violence were protected by the First Amendment. The University Standing Committee on Research Misconduct is handed the investigation.
April 2005
Churchill submits a 50-page reply to CU questions.
Churchill admits he ghost-wrote under other scholars’ names, stating the scholars were colleagues who knew he had done so.
June 2005
CU begins examining its tenure- related procedures.
August 2005
The Standing Committee recommends investigating academic misconduct allegations further.
September 2005
CU launches a full-blown investigation into seven allegations of research misconduct against Churchill.
May 2006
The committee investigating the allegations hands over its report to the University Standing Committee on Research Misconduct.
Churchill threatens to take the University of Colorado to federal court if the “latest round of witch-hunting is not stopped.”
Compiled by Jan Torpy and Vickie Makings of the Denver Post Research Library
Panel members
Chair: Marianne Wesson, professor of law, University of Colorado at Boulder. Wesson specializes in criminal law, evidence, trial practice, and law and literature.
Robert N. Clinton, professor of law, Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University. Clinton is a co-author of case books on Indian law and federal courts, and has written about federal Indian law, American constitutional law and history, and federal courts.
José E. Limón, director, Center for Mexican-American Studies and professor of American and English literature, University of Texas at Austin. Limón, an anthropologist, has published widely about U.S.-Mexico cultural relations, folklore, literature and popular culture.
Marjorie K. McIntosh, professor of history, University of Colorado at Boulder. McIntosh has written four books and many articles about the history of England, and has worked in Uganda and studied Yoruba women in Nigeria.
Michael L. Radelet, professor and chair, Department of Sociology, University of Colorado at Boulder. Radelet studies capital punishment and racial biases in the death penalty.
Nonvoting members:
Linda Morris, Office of Research Integrity, University of Colorado at Boulder.
J. Eric Elliff, Morrison & Foerster LLP, Denver, counsel to the committee.
