Posted on 05/26/2005 7:06:57 AM PDT by AdamSelene235
Ward Churchill's assertion that he wrote five essays as a ghostwriter for colleagues has become a line of questioning in the University of Colorado's inquiry into his alleged academic misconduct, his attorney said.
Churchill said he is prepared to defend what he called "a reasonably standard practice" in academia - a characterization disputed by some national academic leaders. His attorney, David Lane, argued that the issue should not even be considered because it is outside the parameters of CU's stated interest in Churchill's alleged plagiarism.
"This is something they have now stumbled upon," Lane said Wednesday. "Whatever it takes to get Ward Churchill, that's their mission."
One scholar who Churchill says published an essay of his under her name denies it.
The ghostwriting issue emerged in Boulder as part of Churchill's defense - that instead of borrowing from essays, he actually wrote them, he said. He discussed the issue with the committee auditing his scholarship Tuesday.
Churchill said he consulted CU rules and two lawyers and does not believe he did anything wrong.
"There's not even a definition of academic misconduct in this regard," he said. "If there's an issue of that, fine. Let's deal with the issue and not call it something else - plagiarism."
Lane said the law supports Churchill's right to write for others. A byline is a "branding choice," according to an article in the latest edition of the Notre Dame Law Review that Lane provided.
But those who set standards for scholarship in several academic disciplines said that ghostwriting, while common in biographies of celebrities and politicians, is unacceptable in academic publishing.
Professors remain concerned that Churchill's rights to due process and free expression remain protected, but they are not likely to defend ghostwriting, said Larry Estrada, president of the National Association for Ethnic Studies and director of the American cultural studies department at Western Washington University.
"Proper credit and acknowledgment for original scholarship and research is the essence of faculty work within the university environment," Estrada said in an e-mail Wednesday. "That should remain inviolate, and any breach of that would have to be considered a serious matter."
At JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, authors are required to reveal who helped with their articles and how.
Concerned by reports that some papers about drugs have been ghostwritten by agents of the pharmaceutical industry, the World Association of Medical Editors recently issued a bulletin condemning ghostwriting as "dishonest and unacceptable" in the academic sphere.
The editors of journals and handbooks published by the Modern Language Association, an influential humanities organization, consider ghostwritten work to be plagiarism.
MLA executive director Rosemary Feal believes being a party to "the false assumption of authorship" is improper, she said.
"I would imagine that authorizing someone to pass off writing as their own when you've done it - everyone would agree that's an ethical violation," she said.
Churchill said he gave away some of the papers as personal favors.
"Nobody's name went on a piece I wrote that they didn't know about," he said. "They agreed with it or didn't care one way or another or just wanted a résumé hit."
One scholar for whom Churchill says he wrote, M.A. Jaimes Guerrero of the women's studies department at San Francisco State University, has denied it to the Rocky Mountain News. She and Churchill were once married. Neither she nor her department head returned calls Wednesday. Members of the faculty committee reviewing Churchill's work also did not respond.
Too bad he's not a "ghost"... (wow! that was harsh)
Wouldn't Churchill think of himself as a "spiritwriter" rather than a ghostwriter?
LOL!!!
I wonder if the attorney for the corrupt NYC cops will now argue that it is wrong for the government to investigate the homicides they committed because the government's original investigation was only in reference to their money laundering activities.
Churchill is an obscene joke. But why this disqualifies him as a college professor is beyond me.
"Churchill said he gave away some of the papers as personal favors."
What a crock!
All I've got to say to Churchill is PROVE IT!
Because ghostwriting is considered 'unethical', and outside the pervue of the Institution who is paying his salary!
Time for the "Chief" to be put on the reservation. LOL
it'll be interesting to see how much Col U. pays him to go.
no telling how much the school has already lost in almum donations and enrollments...
Churchill needs to be in an institution where everybody has a foil hat, and the nurses are very understanding.
i never understood how he reached this status in a university.
one, he has no research doctorate.
two, his "research" is emotional antedote.
three, his "research" loosely follows noam chomsky and howard zinn, et al.
four, his status and his department's status rest upon ethnicity, not research with a defined methodology. but, his ethncity is faudulent.
Yes, but, yes, but, yes, but...
Can you imagine how pathetic you would have to be to want this fool to ghostwrite for you?
I meant to ask why his being an obscene joke disqualifies him from being a college professor. Why discriminate against him in particular?
Only now he's admitted to not actually being American Indian.
But he says he met the 3 criteria....
..which are....
1.He said he was American Indian.
2.People believed he was American Indian.
3.He has a piece of paper designating him as honorary American Indian with the Cherokee tribe....(which he supposedly received by promising them to write a true history of the Cherokee)
I'm more American Indian than him....!!
He doesn't have one drop of Indian blood, and I do!...at least 1/8 worth!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.