Professor Churchill has outraged the Colorado and national communities as a result of profoundly offensive, abusive, and misguided statements relating to the victims of the horrific 9/11 terrorist attacks on America.
As repugnant as his statements are to many in the University community, however, they are protected by the First Amendment.
Allegations have been made that Professor Churchill has engaged in research misconduct; specifically, that he has engaged in plagiarism, misuse of others' work, falsification and fabrication of authority.
These allegations have sufficient merit to warrant referral to the University of Colorado at Boulder Standing Committee on Research Misconduct for further inquiry in accordance with prescribed procedures. The research misconduct procedures afford Professor Churchill an opportunity to review and to respond to the allegations before any determination is made. If the Committee determines that Professor Churchill engaged in research misconduct, the Committee is to make recommendations regarding dismissal or other disciplinary action.
Also referred to the Committee is the question of whether Churchill committed research misconduct by misrepresenting himself to be American Indian to gain credibility, authority, and an audience by using an Indian voice for his scholarly writings and speeches.
Other issues brought to the attention of the reviewers, such as teaching misconduct, were not found to warrant action.
Read the report here.
This is a reasonable, but not entirely satisfactory, position for the University to take. Churchill's rhetoric was strenuously denounced and the University dissociated itself from his positions as well it should. Churchill will not be punished for his speech, and that too is right and proper. His falsification of his record and charges of research and publication misconduct will be considered, and that too is proper. If he is to be demoted or dismissed that is where the charges will be filed.
I have trouble, though, with the charge of "fabrication of authority." This assumes that ethnic heritage in and of itself confers a special authority on a scholar, and that there is something like a distinctive "Indian voice" that has a preferred place within the universe of scholarship. These points are arrant nonsense. Just the fact that the university takes them seriously indicates that there are still serious institutional and intellectual deficiencies at CU.
No comments:
Post a Comment