Comments on: Falling Short of Standards in a Profession with No Standards

By: TDK

TDK — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 18:21:15 +0000

Churchill was hired for reasons having little or nothing to do with teaching ability or upholding academic standards. Therefore, it is unjust for the university to fire him when his political attitudes remain unchanged.

I’m not picking up on your comment except in that it is a good summary of coyote.

The universities claim to maintain good academic standards. You and I both know they looked the other way deliberately when it was in their interest to do so. If Ward Churchill had done quality academic work and made his 9-11 comments I doubt he would be being fired. However he gained a certain notoriety after those remarks and that combined with his academic failings was too embarrassing. They need to get rid of him to be able to maintain that others really do have the academic rigour.

That said we all want universities to be better. To do that we have to raise those academic standards and unfortunately that’s a long journey that starts with a single step.

By: dearieme

dearieme — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 13:06:15 +0000

@Bob: do look at “Chance and Chaos” by
David Ruelle to see his eye-opening complaints about the decline in moral standards in the study of Chaos when physicists entered what had been largely a mathematicians’ field.

I am reminded of it every time I contemplate the moral standards in “Climate Science”.

By: Bob Sykes

Bob Sykes — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 11:15:41 +0000

Some years ago, I read an estimate that around 30% of science and engineering faculty had engaged at one time or another in academic fraud, mostly plagiarism and falsification of experimental data. The problem is supposedly most serious (>30%) in medical research, which is hardly reassuring for those of us approaching geezerdom. From my personal experience in civil engineering departments, I would say the CE rate falls somewhat below 30%, but it is at least 10%. Mathematics is largely immune from fraudulent results, but plagiarism is still a problem.

By: Gringo

Gringo — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:20:28 +0000

As others have pointed out, Ward Churchill is but a drop in the ocean of fraudulent politically correct B@#$#$T-spewing academics. Churchill is correct that he had been getting away with shoddy work for decades, and that it was only his post 9/11 commentary that brought examination to his work. Perhaps in addition to firing him, Colorado should fire those who had previously considered his work to be up to academic standards.

By: The Whited Sepulchre

The Whited Sepulchre — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 23:05:15 +0000

Jon and Mesa,
I think you’re misunderstanding Mr. Coyote’s position on this. Churchill was hired for reasons having little or nothing to do with teaching ability or upholding academic standards. Therefore, it is unjust for the university to fire him when his political attitudes remain unchanged.

By: Yosemite Sam

Yosemite Sam — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:11:44 +0000

With Bill Ayers effectively de facto Secretary of Education, rather than rotting in the cell he so richly deserves, I don’t think anything should surprise us.

By: Brandybuck

Brandybuck — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 03:47:39 +0000

He wasn’t fired for shoddy work, we was fired for plagarism and lying on his resume. Even in the most touchy feely of leftist institutions that’s frowned upon.

By: James A. Donald

James A. Donald — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 02:30:12 +0000

Jon:

Plagarism and using his own ghost-written work as a source seem like they ought to be enough all by themselves. Maybe what I got from the article is wrong?

The article you read is incomplete – it left out the fact that he from time to time threatened to kill people, and was recorded doing so on a telephone call.

Plagiarism, ghost writing, and death threats. These days, those are have ceased to be merely standard procedure and become pretty good academic qualifications, therefore no basis for losing tenure. Clearly he should win his case. How many academics do you think can write without hiring someone else to commit their brilliant thoughts to electrons? Reading, writing, and rithmetic is for lesser people.

By: Spiro

Spiro — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 02:22:19 +0000

Coyote,

As a former academic (now a capitalist pig small business owner) I have to agree with you.
The Ward Churchill situation is not an exception in the current American academia. In fact, spend some time on any state-funded university in this country and you will quickly find DOZENS of faculty with even thinner resumes and weaker intellects. (hint: if you don’t believe me just stroll around in the “social sciences”).
The only reason that this story is getting so much attention is because most average people with real jobs have NO IDEA how far into the ridiculous these departments have traveled in the last 30 years. I think it all started with the acceptance of “post-modern” philosophy as legitimate, but I have no doubt that the dominance of only one political philosophy on college campuses has contributed also.

By: gadfly

gadfly — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:53:06 +0000

Ward Churchill must believe that he has a jury box full of leftist radicals. According to the summary of his testimony in the WSJ:

Mr. Churchill, for his part, remains unrepentant. On the stand this week, he repeated his position that the attack on the World Trade Center was “perfectly predictable,” saying: “When you bring your skills to bear for profit, you are the moral equivalent of Adolf Eichmann.” And he refused to acknowledge that the objections to his scholarship had merit, explaining that history written by white men is full of lies and that he is simply trying to correct for that historical imbalance. The “technocratic corps at the very heart of America’s global financial empire,” dead in the World Trade Center, were legitimate targets, Mr. Churchill insisted, while he is an innocent victim. Perhaps, instead, it was simply that Mr. Churchill’s own chickens finally came home to roost.