The Regents and Ward Churchill "this is not about footnotes"

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.counterpunch.org/saito06212007.html

June 21, 2007

Now is the Time to Speak Out!
The Regents and Ward Churchill
By NATSU SAITO

In the next few weeks, the Board of Regents of the University of Colorado (CU) will vote on the dismissal of Professor Ward Churchill. This is the final opportunity for public input in this process.

Over the past two and a half years, many of you have opposed CU's attempts to fire Ward. Ward and I have engaged in this struggle not for the sake of his job (he will always write, speak and teach), nor because we enjoy battling bureaucracy, but because it has become emblematic of contemporary efforts to silence those who insist on discussing uncomfortable truths.

Since February 2005, CU administrators have been under intense political and financial pressure to fire Ward for his statements about the 9/11 attacks. To avoid blatantly violating the First Amendment, they have resorted to a pretextual investigation of his scholarship.

After combing through a media barrage of unfounded allegations and his more than 20 books, 100 articles, and over 12,000 footnotes, CU has settled for firing Ward Churchill, a tenured full professor, for six instances of alleged improper footnoting or author attribution (see details below).

Predictably, this has provided sufficient excuse for those who wish to distance themselves from this "controversy" and still believe they support academic freedom. For organizations like Lynne Cheney's neoconservative American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), it is a major victory for the corporatization of higher education.

[Gabi Hayes]

1. and who sits on that board, or at least did at the inception, with the Dragon Lady?

pick one

[seemslikeadream]

2. Regents

Stephen C. Ludwig
Democrat


Paul Schauer
Republican


Kyle Hybl
Republican


Thomas J. Lucero, Jr
Republican


Patricia "Pat" Hayes, Chair
Republican


Tilman "Tillie" Bishop
Republican


Steve Bosley, Vice Chair
Republican


Cindy Carlisle
Democrat


Michael Carrigan
Democrat

[Gabi Hayes]

14. sorry, I was talking about that hyped up 'council' that cheney and lieberman cooked up

to go after dirty 'liberals' on campus

Lynne Cheney-Joe Lieberman Group Puts Out a Blacklist
by Roberto J. Gonzalez

AN aggressive attack on freedom has been launched upon America's college campuses. Its perpetrators seek the elimination of ideas and activities that place Sept. 11 in historical context, or critique the so-called war on terrorism.
The offensive, spearheaded by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, a Washington-based group, threatens free speech, democratic debate and the integrity of higher education. In an incendiary report, ``Defending Civilization: How Our Universities Are Failing America,'' the American Council claims that ``colleges and university faculty have been the weak link in America's response'' to Sept. 11. It also asserts that ``when a nation's intellectuals are unwilling to defend its civilization, they give comfort to its adversaries.''

The report documents 117 campus incidents as ``evidence'' of anti-Americanism. More than 40 professors are named, including the president of Wesleyan University, who suggested in an open letter that ``disparities and injustices'' in American society and the world can lead to hatred and violence.

Other examples abound. A Yale professor is criticized for saying, ``It is from the desperate, angry and bereaved that these suicide pilots came.'' A professor emeritus from the University of Oregon is listed for recommending that ``we need to understand the reasons behind the terrifying hatred directed against the U.S. and find ways to act that will not foment more hatred for generations to come.''

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1213-05.htm

these people are as bad as the worst of the McCarthyites: a true danger to academic freedom

[rodeodance]

3. Lynn Chenney and O'Lielly want him out------tells me I want him in. simple

[Raskolnik]

6. What else recommends him for an academic position?

His academic fraud? His plagiarism? His ethnic fraud?

[Raskolnik]

4. No, it isn't about footnotes.

Its about an academic & ethnic fraud getting thrown out on his ass.

[seemslikeadream]

7. some may disagree

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=43&ItemID=13069

Opposition Mounts as University of Colorado President Calls for Ward Churchill to be Dismissed
by National Project in Defense of Dissent and Critical Thinking in Academia -- NPDDCTA
June 14, 2007

Defend Critical Thinking


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Reggie Dylan: [phone] Matthew Abraham: [phone] Email: [e-mail] Website: www.defendcriticalthinking.org


In a letter to the Board of Regents, University of Colorado President Hank Brown has called for the dismissal of tenured Ethnic Studies Professor Ward Churchill. His recommendation goes beyond that of the faculty investigative committee that examined charges of research misconduct; and of the faculty Privilege and Tenure (P&T) committee that recently heard Churchill's appeal. Gov. Bill Ritter of Colorado joined Brown in calling for the firing of Churchill, as his predecessor Bill Owens did two years earlier. The Board of Regents is expected to make a final decision in this case at a public hearing some time in July.



A growing number of scholars see CU's investigation of Churchill's scholarship as completely illegitimate and a dangerous precedent threatening dissent and critical thinking in the universities. The CU - Boulder chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) has written that "we believe that the investigation now is widely perceived to be a pretext for firing Churchill when the real reason for dismissal is his politics." The investigation was launched in the wake of controversy provoked by an essay Churchill wrote after 9/11.



Churchill noted in response to Brown's letter that "the University had received no formal or written complaints about my scholarship when it initiated this 'investigation.' All of the allegations investigated were either solicited or brought directly by University administrators." He also noted that "The Investigative Committee charged with conducting a 'fact-finding, nonadversarial' investigation was chaired by law professor Mimi Wesson, who - in February 2005 - had compared me to 'charismatic male celebrity wrongdoers' like O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton, and had already come up with the faulty 'traffic stop' analogy the Committee used to justify its conclusions." The committee included no American Indians or experts in American Indian Studies, and scholars that had used Churchill's research in their own work were removed from the committee.



The report of the committee hearing Churchill's appeal found that Churchill proved by a "preponderance of the evidence" that "but for" his exercise of his protected first amendment rights, the subsequent investigation of his scholarship would never have been initiated.



In a recent open letter to colleagues around the country Dr. Margaret LeCompte, President of the Boulder AAUP Chapter, wrote: "What has happened at the University of Colorado makes a mockery of both due process and academic freedom protections, AND what faculty believe. It is a cruel violation of the delicate balance between faculty rights and administrative responsibilities. The entire process was a sham---imitating the form, but not the intent, of due process and fair, objective, scholarly investigation."



Two faculty groups that have examined the report of the investigative committee claim that the report is seriously flawed. In an unprecedented action, both have now filed formal charges of academic misconduct against the members of the faculty committee. The most recent group to do so, made up of principally Indigenous scholars from around the country and Canada, documented "many instances of fraud, fabrication, plagiarism and/or serious deviation from accepted scholarly practices" which "demonstrate a consistent pattern of deliberate misrepresentation intended to discredit Professor Churchill's larger body of scholarship." Eric Cheyfitz, Ernest I. White Professor of American Studies and Humane Letters at Cornell University, has found "the Report turns what is a debate about controversial issues of identity and genocide in Indian studies into an indictment of one position in that debate."



The implications of this case go beyond the threat to Churchill's reputation and career, as serious as those are. The attack on Churchill is seen by many in academia as part of a much broader attack on academic freedom and critical thinking and dissent. Dr. LeCompte notes, "It is not limited to Colorado. In fact, it is a test case by the US right wing to emasculate faculty rights in US universities."



This is illustrated by the recent denial of tenure for DePaul University political scientist Norman Finkelstein. Though he was supported by his department, Finkelstein was denied tenure after an intense campaign spearheaded by Harvard Law School's Alan M. Dershowitz, who called Finkelstein "worse than Churchill." Many DePaul faculty and others were alarmed at Dershowitz's heavy-handed tactics and saw them as an attempt to punish one side of a controversial debate. Finkelstein said that DePaul's decision was based on "transparently political grounds" and was an "egregious violation" of academic freedom.



Churchill noted in his response to Brown's letter that "President Brown, his new VP Michael Poliakoff, and Regent Tom Lucero, like Bill Owens, are key players in Lynne Cheney's American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). ACTA and similar neoconservative groups have received generous funding Castle Rock (Coors), Scaife, Bradley and Olin foundations to eliminate Ethnic, Gender and Peace Studies Programs and to purge higher education of those who think critically, challenge historical orthodoxy, or otherwise threaten the status quo."



Opposition to this impending firing has been increasing nationally, as more and more academics recognize the stakes involved in the Churchill case. An open letter signed by numerous prominent scholars, including Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Derrick Bell and Immanuel Wallerstein was published in the New York Review of Books in April. Scores of others have written letters of support, and there was a recent Emergency National Forum in Boulder of academics and supporters. The Society of American Law Teachers has written a letter arguing against a firing.



Richard Falk, visiting Distinguished Professor at University of California, Santa Barbara recently wrote: "All of us who value academic freedom should now stand in full solidarity with Ward Churchill. The outcome of his case at the University of Colorado is the best litmus test we have to tell whether the right-wing's assaults on learning and liberty will stifle campus life in this country. Never in my lifetime have we in America more needed the sort of vigorous debate and creative controversy that Ward Churchill's distinguished career epitomizes. We all stand to lose if his principled defense fails."



# # #



Signed:



Matthew Abraham - Department of English, De Paul University.



William Ayers - Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior University Scholar, University of Illinois at Chicago.



Derrick A Bell - Visiting Professor of Constitutional Law, New York University School of Law.



Timothy Brennan - Departments of English and Cultural Studies & Comparative Literature, University of Minnesota.



Renate Bridenthal - Emerita Professor of History, Brooklyn College, The City University of New York.



Bob Buzzanco - Department of History, University of Houston.



Dana Cloud - Associate Professor of Communication Studies at the University of Texas (Austin).



Drucilla Cornell - Professor in the Departments of Law and Political Science at Rutgers University.



Sandi E Cooper - Professor of History, College of Staten Island and the Graduate School, The City University of New York.



Richard Delgado - University Distinguished Professor of Law and Derrick Bell Fellow, University of Pittsburgh. Richard A Falk - Albert G. Milbank Professor of International Law and Practice at Princeton University; Visiting Distinguished Professor (since 2002), Global Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara.



Seth Kahn - Assistant Professor of English, West Chester University of PA.



Rashid Khalidi, Edward Said Professor of Arab Studies, Middle East Institute, Columbia University.



Vinay Lal - Department of History, University of California, Los Angeles.



Gary Leupp - Professor of History at Tufts University, and Adjunct Professor of Comparative Religion.



Henry Silverman - Professor and Chairperson Emeritus, Department of History, Michigan State University.



Immanuel Wallerstein - Senior Research Scholar, Yale University.



Tim Wise - Author of "White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son," and "Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White."



For more information, contact us at [phone] [e-mail] www.defendcriticalthinking.org



Or contact any of the faculty listed below to arrange an interview:



Matthew Abraham: [e-mail]; [phone].



Timothy Brennan - [e-mail]; [phone].



Dana Cloud - [e-mail]; [phone].



Drucilla Cornell - [e-mail]; [phone].



Seth Kahn - [e-mail]; [phone].

[Raskolnik]

11. I'm certain that some do feel differently.

I have no use for Mr. Churchill, however. At absolute best he is a shoddy scholar and an ethnic poseur.

At worst, and most likely in my opinion, he's a fraud on several levels that damages the cause he purports to advance.

[H2O Man]

12. Thank you.

Very powerful response.

[seemslikeadream]

13. CU Professor Tom Mayer Debunks Plagiarism Charges Against Ward Churchill - June 11, 2007

http://wardchurchill.net/files/mayer_on_plagiarism_charges_0607.pdf

CU Professor Tom Mayer Debunks Plagiarism Charges Against Ward Churchill - June 11, 2007
June 19, 2007 on 11:07 pm | In Academic Freedom
The research misconduct charges against Ward Churchill are of two general kinds: charges of faulty research and charges of plagiarism. The faulty research accusations have been largely discredited through the efforts of professors Eric Cheyfitz, Michael Yellow Bird, David Stannard, Huanani-Kay Trask, James Craven, Ruth Hsu, and others. These independent scholars, all of whom are intimately familiar with Native American history and culture, have shown that the Report of the Investigative Committee (henceforth called Report) finding Churchill guilty of research misconduct contains numerous errors of omission and commission. The Report improperly converts legitimate scholarly controversies into indictments of the positions taken by Professor Churchill.

In this essay I will argue that the three plagiarism charges discussed in the Report are also without compelling force. Significantly, all these charges pertain to Churchill’s work as an intellectual within the broad but fractured movement to emancipate indigenous people. None of the papers accused of plagiarism were written for the purpose of building an academic career. This is important because the norms of authorship within the social movement context differ substantially from those within the academic domain.

All three plagiarism charges refer to publications that are now fourteen or more years old. Although various persons hostile to Professor Churchill (e.g. John LaVelle, see section two below) have circulated rumors of misconduct for at least a decade, no action was taken against Churchill until he became a political pariah (through the exercise of free speech). On the contrary, prior to his persecution for lack of mandatory patriotism, Churchill was honored as a valuable member of the University of Colorado faculty. He was appointed chair of the Ethnic Studies Department, placed on influential University committees, and given prestigious teaching awards.

The source of all three plagiarism charges is the University of Colorado administration rather than the putative victims of Churchill’s putative misconduct. In two of the three cases the supposed victims made no complaint at all and do not appear critical of Professor Churchill. In the third case, the CU administration solicited a complaint, but the perpetrator of the plagiarism remains obscure and the complaint is not specifically directed against Churchill.

[Raskolnik]

16. I don't agree that the charges have been "debunked." "Minimized," perhaps.

Just to clarify, I do not think Churchill is the biggest villain on the public stage, or even the biggest villain on the academic stage. I do think he is a jackass of the first order, however, and believe his sloppy (at best) academic work and his ethnic pretensions do nothing in the long run to actually advance the causes he purports to care about.

[Gabi Hayes]

17. gee, I think I'll agree with you, and all your scary, definitive documentation, as opposed to

all the unsourced assertions presented here

great job!

[Raskolnik]

18. Thanks Gabi, I'm glad you're on board.

I've read the provided link, and I don't think it amounts to a "debunking" of the charges of plagiarism. I think it offers some rationalizations for Churchill's actions, but I still think his actions were improper in an academic setting.

When his academic sloppiness is combined with his ethnic fraud, I'm left with very little to admire about Mr. Churchill.

Good to have you on board, Gabi!

[Gabi Hayes]

19. nice gainsaying. where's your evidence?

I'm sure everybody else here will take your word over those of those supporting him

continute siding with Lynne Cheney, Daniel Pipes, etal, though

that enhances your credibility by leaps and bounds

[Raskolnik]

20. I'm not asking anyone to take my word.

I'm simply saying that base on the available evidence (the reports, the responses, the press coverage, etc.), I believe Mr. Churchill's work falls short of academic standards through either sloppiness or intentional misconduct.

And just so we're on the same page, are you denying that Mr. Churchill fraudulently claimed Native American ancestry & fraudulently claimed tribal membership? It may not be first degree murder, but that kind of bullshit has always raised large red flags for me about an individual's integrity and sincerity.

[Gabi Hayes]

21. fraudulently claimed?

care to expand upon that?

you keep making accusations without citing sources

I've done some googling, and while there are plenty of examples of your assertion, there are others, including a blood test (admittedly not made public, from what I've read) that support Churchill.

in other words, two sides to the story, which is more complicated than you make it seem. since you haven't, again, supported your claim, I'll leave it for others to decide on the merits.

If he is lying about his heritage, of course, it's not a good thing, but what does it have to do with his academic standing?should his employer fire him based on that alone, especially in consideration of the apparently trumped up "academic" basis for his firing

AFA your other unsupported assertion of his so-called academic shortcomings, why should anyone buy your assertions, as opposed to the material provided by others on this thread?

it's interesting, again, that you side with the likes of Lynne Cheney and Daniel Pipes in accusing him of various academic depredations

absent your providing specific proof of Churchill's unfitness for employment, why should anybody buy what you're selling?

you could be right, but just repeating your claims over and over, without backing them up makes you seem just as credible as, well.....Ward Churchill

[Raskolnik]

22. Yes, by all appearances fraudulently claimed.

At various points Mr. Churchill has claimed varying degrees of Cherokee and Creek blood as well as claimed membership in the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. At least two Colorado newspapers investigated and found not a bit of Native American ancestry for Mr. Churchill after tracing his family back to the late 18th century. Nor, as it turns out, is he a member of the Cherokee tribe, which has been emphatically confirmed by the tribe itself.

So after all that, it certainly appears that Mr. Churchill was not telling the truth about those matters. (double-secret blood test notwithstanding, of course)

Again, I'm not arguing that this in and of itself is the most serious issue facing the republic. But I do know that people falsely claiming Native American ancestry and misrepresenting themselves as members of a tribe use up a *large* amount of their benefit of the doubt.

[rodeodance]

5. You can have input---petition here:

Quick links :

Two sets of research misconduct charges filed against CU Investigative Committee:
wardchurchill.net/files/misconduct_charges_letter_and_supporting_docs.doc

http://wardchurchill.net/files/rm_indig_sch_052807.pdf

Debunking plagiarism charges: http://wardchurchill.net/files/mayer_on_plagiarism_charges_0607.pdf

The ACTA connection: http://wardchurchill.net/files/cu_acta_ad.pdf

Indigenous Studies: http://wardchurchill.net/files/indig_conf_resol_020307.pdf

NY Review of Books Open Letter: http://wardchurchill.net/files/open_letter_for_nyrb.pdf

Teachers for a Democratic Society petition: http://www.teachersfordemocracy.org/?q=node/19

[rodeodance]

8. and here are email addresses:

I hope you will take the time to e-mail the CU Regents and urge them not to fire Ward Churchill. They can be reached c/o [e-mail] , or individually at

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail],

[e-mail]

(For maximum effectiveness, please cc: [e-mail].)

[rodeodance]

9. Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Wallerstein, others pub. open letter in NYT denouncing CU actions.

The specific charges against Ward have been debunked. Recently, fifteen professors and two attorneys filed two sets of formal research misconduct allegations against the investigative committee which wrote the report used to justify sanctions. These illustrate that the committee members were so determined to convict Ward that they engaged in falsification and fabrication of evidence, twisting the facts to fit their conclusions. In addition, CU Professor Tom Mayer has exposed the pretextual nature of the so-called plagiarism charges.

More generally, Indigenous scholar/activists and their allies have recognized that this is an attack on those who challenge mainstream "truths" about U.S. history, as well as an attempt to eliminate ethnic and gender studies. Public intellectuals including Derrick Bell, Noam Chomsky, Richard Falk, Howard Zinn, and Immanuel Wallerstein published an open letter in the NY Review of Books denouncing CU's actions as part of the repressive post-9/11 "militarist reflex." A petition opposing Ward's dismissal was signed by nearly 500 scholars and activists with Teachers for a Democratic Society. Many other groups have submitted letters and petitions denouncing CU's tactics and calling for Ward's reinstatement.

[seemslikeadream]

10. Ward Churchill Response to CU Pres. Hank Brown’s Recommendation to Dismiss

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20070618230441991

Ward Churchill Response to CU Pres. Hank Brown’s Recommendation to Dismiss
Monday, June 18 2007 @ 11:04 PM PDT
Contributed by: Anonymous
Views: 352
President Hank Brown has quite predictably recommended that the Regents of the University of Colorado (CU) fire me – not, he claims, because of my constitutionally protected statements about 9/11 but because of my scholarship. However, as hundreds of academics around the country have pointed out, CU’s “investigation” has all along been merely a pretext, transparently catering to the political and financial interests which dictate “educational” policy at CU.



Key Facts

1. The evidence has established that the University had received no formal or written complaints about
my scholarship when it initiated this “investigation.” All of the allegations investigated were either
solicited or brought directly by University administrators.

2. Brown relies on the Investigative Committee’s Report of May 9, 2006, the product of a deeply flawed
process conducted by a biased panel which included no American Indians or experts in American Indian
Studies. Ironically, the Report itself contains falsifications and fabrications of evidence of exactly the sort
it claims I engaged in. A number of these are highlighted in formal complaints filed against its authors
by both CU and other professors. The Report simply does not stand up to serious scholarly scrutiny.

3. Even the Investigative Committee did not agree that their conclusions warranted revocation of tenure
and dismissal. Only one of the five members of the Investigative Committee actually recommended
dismissal. Further, a majority of the Privilege & Tenure (P&T) Appeal Panel recommended only a 1-
year suspension and demotion. Yet, Brown disregards the results of CU’s own process to advocate the
most severe sanction available.

The P&T Appeal Panel’s Conclusions (April 11, 2007):

The P&T Appeal Panel rejected the Investigative Committee’s conclusions that I “fabricated” evidence
concerning the General Allotment Act, the Indian Arts & Crafts Act, John Smith’s role in spreading
smallpox, and the Army’s intention spreading of smallpox to the Mandan in 1837.

The Panel acknowledged that:

1. The standards allegedly applied to my work were never clarified, before or during the investigation.

2. It could point to no evidence that ghostwriting is explicitly prohibited by any standards in any
discipline.

3. The Investigative Committee charged with conducting a “fact-finding, nonadversarial” investigation
was chaired by law professor Mimi Wesson, who - in February 2005 - had compared me to “charismatic
male celebrity wrongdoers” like O.J. Simpson, Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton, and had already come
up with the faulty “traffic stop” analogy the Committee used to justify its conclusions.

The Charges are Evaporating:

According to the Appeal Panel, the only remaining grounds for sanction are:

1. Not providing sufficient evidence that smallpox blankets were taken from an infirmary in 1837, that an
Army doctor or post surgeon told the Mandans to scatter; and that 400,000 rather than 300,000 people
may have been killed;

2. Citing to material I have consistently acknowledged to have ghostwritten; and

3. Publishing an article in Z Magazine from which the editors deleted my insertion of “Dam the Dams” as
a co-author; and copyediting an article (in a book edited by a third party) which, unbeknownst to me, may
have plagiarized another author.

Even if these charges were true – which they are not – to pretend that they constitute grounds for
revocation of tenure and dismissal is ludicrous. No scholar’s work could withstand such fine-tooth
combing, and other professors certainly have not been held to similar “standards” by CU.

The Bottom Line:

Long before this investigation, all of my work was reviewed in the tenure and promotion processes of the
University. I had published more than 4,000 pages (including over 12,000 footnotes) of scholarly work,
and received the University’s top awards and recognitions for teaching, service and scholarship

Everyone agrees that this “investigation” would not have occurred but for my First Amendment-protected
speech. To use minor factual disagreements, citation of ghostwritten material, and editors’ errors as the
pretext for firing me simply illustrates that the administrators of the University of Colorado take political
and financial pressures far more seriously than academic freedom or the Constitution’s guarantees of
freedom of speech, equal protection and due process.

None of this is a surprise, of course. University administrators have been faithfully working to comply
with then-Governor Bill Owens’ February 2005 demand that I be fired. President Brown, his new VP
Michael Poliakoff, and Regent Tom Lucero, like Bill Owens, are key players in Lynne Cheney’s
American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). ACTA and similar neoconservative groups have
received generous funding Castle Rock (Coors), Scaife, Bradley and Olin foundations to eliminate Ethnic,
Gender and Peace Studies Programs and to purge higher education of those who think critically, challenge
historical orthodoxy, or otherwise threaten the status quo.

We’ll see if the Regents will allow political and financial pressure to trump academic freedom.

Ward Churchill
Professor of Ethnic Studies
University of Colorado at Boulder
May 28, 2007

[seemslikeadream]

15. Professors and Attorneys File New Charges Against Committee Investigating Churchill

http://wardchurchill.net/files/press_release_052807.pdf
Five professors and two attorneys today filed new allegations of research misconduct against the University of Colorado committee which wrote the May 9, 2006 Investigative Report in the Ward Churchill case.

The professors and attorneys, a majority of whom are Indigenous, charge the Committee with misrepresenting, fabricating, or suppressing evidence in their Report, and exhibiting bias against Professor Churchill.

The five allegations filed today address the Investigative Committee’s findings regarding the smallpox epidemics of 1616 and 1837. Like many others, this group believes the “investigation” and resulting Report were a pretext intended to silence Professor Churchill and discredit the Indigenous perspectives he articulates



http://wardchurchill.net/files/rm_indig_sch_052807.pdf