Ward Churchill to be fired for research misconduct

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/education/article/0%2C1299%2CDRMN_957_4804376%2C00.html

 

About time....

 

Why did they hire someone like Churchill with such shabby academic credentials? His degrees are not befitting a prof at a major university--unless he's otherwise a brilliant scholar. But I've read a bit of his scholarship. It was remarkable--absolutely incompetent. And I'm not talking about the plagiarism or the lying, I'm just saying that the guy can't research or write or reason as well as the average earnest high school sophomore; there were logical fallacies, embarrassing grammar, and clumsy use of academic language that betrayed the guy had no clue what he was saying, just throwing two dollar words together in a string.

The only rationale for hiring this guy would be his (supposed) ethnicity, his notoriety, and because his fringe views lined up with those of the department. How many more Churchills are out there? And why do we keep sending our children to these Svengalis?

 

We keep sending them there because nobody knows any better. We just assume that the "academics" like this are the most learned among us...when in fact they can sometimes, like Churchill, be some of the most self-absorbed, stuck up people out there.

Want to fix it? Get rid of tenure and such.

As for the statement that this is punishment for Churchill's 9/11 comments? It's not punishment, however Churchill opened himself up for this by making a spectacle of himself with his 9/11 remarks. When you paint a bullseye on yourself, don't get mad when others take aim. Those with skeletons in their closet should not put themselves out there like that...another example of his arrogance.

 

Want to fix it? Get rid of tenure and such.

That is not always the fix. There are great professors who have done well to earn tenure. By the way, tenure is not easy to earn. It takes YEARS. Second, not just anyone gets tenure. You have to go before a committee to attain such. Lastly, tenure probably will not be around for folks like me when I get (one day) a full time position.

 

Speaking of his arrogance, I remember a quote of his as he was walking on campus last year. He was swaggering along (yes, that's pretty much the only word for his gait) with the dark shades, cigarette in hand. James Dean in his own mind. A reporter stuck a mic in his face and asked him what about the charges, what did he think the university would do? He smirked, made some reference to his lawyer, and said something to the effect of: "They mess with me, I'll own this university."

Well, now he gets his chance. Take your best shot, Ward.

 

Why the surprise? The "professor" in question is merely the tip of the iceberg relating to this pervasive problem in academia. Such conduct exhibited by this fringe acadamic is on par with the arrogance and entitlement that has been a part of academia for the past forty years! Many tenured faculty promulgate or support the most outrageous socio-political positions that are completely out of touch with the reality that we ordinary folks are confronted with daily! There is no anxiety regarding consequences for their grossly inappropriate behavior or actions. No surprise here just another case of "defining deviancy down" so that aberrancy is now considered the stardard norm for our society.

 

A little on the shrill side there, Simon, but I agree with you.

 

But if aberrancy is the norm nowadays, doesn't that mean that nothing is aberrant anymore?

 

Not at all! However, it does imply that there are significant numbers of people, who exhibit aberrant (I am not referring to individuals with overt and serious mental illness) thinking, beliefs, appearance, behavior, conduct and actions that years ago would have been perceived as unaccceptable but are currently deemed within the normal range of human behavior. The aberrance is not related to individuals' personal right to be different or to express unusual beliefs but to the intrusion of their aberrant behavior and beliefs on others, their expectation for excessive entitlements in many areas of life accompanied by an oblivious attitude that sends a message to others of go "F" yourself!

Obviously there are fragments of society that continue to uphold traditional values and mores and uphold the concepts of civility, respect, altruism and tolerance towards others. However, with the passage of time and the replacement of traditional values with those of a younger generation that hold disparate belief systems and perspectives marked by "Meism to the extreme", "hyper-ambition and monetary success" in lieu of human connectedness" and "you owe me". This generational change starting in the 1960s appears to have led to a generalized waning of traditional values to a level of tertiary significance and to the emergence of this new societal accepted set of beliefs and behaviors that allows such aberrant conduct to exist and in fact to flourish.

 

Awww...come on, I love a good rant!

 

It was a great rant. And that comment comes from me, a bona fide world class ranter.

 

I second your self-insight.

 

You're right, Simon, you know about my benders, we've crossed swords before.

 

Fraud

Churchill, the native american who isn't a native american, is a fraud. He was a political appointment, clear and simple. I've seen it often in education. Today's big mouthed leftist is tomorrows "professor, board member, administrator." Just watch. Who do you think stocks departments of women's studies, chicano studies, and black studies?

 

Very cogent, Cogent.

To make professor at a major research university with nothing more than a bachelor's and an MA from Illinois-Springfield, nee Sangamon State (which interestingly, Ward couldn't even spell correctly--or didn't care enough to check and correct--on his own faculty bio), a huge school of about 2,400 students, is absurd.

It was nothing but a political appointment.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with small colleges or "just" having a masters degree. But those are community college credentials at best, unless the person otherwise has stellar publishing and is recognized as a brilliant scholar.

But Ward was a lousy scholar, a joke. Anyone who's attempted to struggle through 100 words of his scholarship could see through him. He could neither write nor think. And that had nothing to do with his leftist views, there are brilliant leftists out there. But Ward is not one of them.

His hiring was a matter of some radicals with no integrity hiring a fellow they knew full well was a relative simpleton--but had the proper radical views. Some people care neither about searching for objective truth nor disseminating it, they just want to bite back at the culture that as given them the affluence of a professorship, perhaps from some redirected self-loathing. That explains his hiring and his career.

Now the University of Colorado should also fire everyone who participated in--but did not voice strong objections to--Ward being granted a professorship.

 

I think it would be interesting to see how many conservative professors are out there with Chruchill-like credentials.

Frankly, the Master's might get you an adjunct part time gig, but that's even pushing it.

 

We conservative professors (well, I'm not really a professor, just an adjunct) could never get away with shaky credentials, except maybe at Liberty or Regent or Oral Roberts. But in mainstream academic America--if it can be called mainstream--conservatives better dot their i's, cross their t's, and, above all: shut up.

 

Ward also knows a lot about DL. In fact, he posted here not too long ago under the alias "Kalos".

Just kidding : )