Who are all these Professors who have been bullied

[cali]

off campuses in the U.S.? Yes, it looks like Dershowitz is instrumental in Finklestein not getting tenure, but is there really an epidemic of Professors not getting tenure. Because it's always been my impression that David Horowitz' organization has been remarkably inept.

[rurallib]

1. I know one was Ward Churchill.

[Sadie4629]

3. I thought Churchill's problem

was that he had falsified his credentials.

[Malikshah]

5. Many of the charges have been looked into-- at this point, there's not been

a trial, except in the public media coverage and blogs.

The damage is done regardless-- he had tenure but was fired.

[seriousstan]

4. Oh, I guess academic misconduct, plagerism and outright lieing had nothing to do with it.

Poor, poor widdle Churchhill. Boo fucking hoo.

[Malikshah]

8. Please provide evidence of all this-- I've not been able to find an

objective accounting of his litany of misdeeds and the evidence to back up the one-line ad hoc attacks on him.

I've read up on Churchill's case and spoken with people in the field and have yet to get anything concrete. Just rumors and innuendo

[Malikshah]

9. self-delete posted wrong

eom

[seriousstan]

22. here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill_misconduct_issues

http://www.colorado.edu/news/reports/churchill/churchillreport051606.html

You didn't look too hard.

[Malikshah]

23. I looked hard--I avoided the wikipedia as it does not provide the entire

story (see my response to another discussion of Ward Churchill regarding the "serious misconduct")

Wikipedia is hardly a reliable source.

As for the Univ of Colorado website...it is less reliable--total CYA loveliness.

I was looking for objective material. I have found material from Churchill's site, and from the usual suspects, but have yet to find an objective piece of coverage--

Thanks for the judgmental statement though regarding my research abilities :)

[seriousstan]

24. Now I can comment on your "objective" abilities.

What more do you want than the actual points and determinations of the board that investigated this asswipe? You obviously will never be satisfied until you find something that supports your position. The UC documents detail EXACTLY the charges, research and conclusions. Deal with it.

[Malikshah]

26. Wow-- "asswipe" Now there is an objective term. "Deal with it"

What a wonderful method of discourse.

I provided a different assessment of his serious research misconduct elsewhere in this thread. I take it that this is pure B.S. then.

The two sources provided are not objective. That should be clear from the get go. It wouldn't stand in any basic argument.

I asked a simple question and am now accused of trying to find something to support my position? What position? The fact that I don't wholeheartedly accept Wikipedia or the University that fired Churchill's statements without any sort of outside support?

Why the vitriol? I'm asking if anyone has any reputable non-biased sources--I've yet to find any as all appear to be from one side or the other. Since when is this basic question a cause for nastiness?

Breathe. Chill out. Have some dip.

[rurallib]

15. All that may be true. No one bothered to look into it until he

pissed off the reich wing. I am not defending the guy.

[cali]

7. Ward Churchill

as far as I understand it, was ousted for his scholarship- or lack thereof:

The Investigative Committee, a five-member subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct, agreed unanimously that Churchill had engaged in "serious research misconduct," including four counts of falsifying information, two counts of fabricating information, two counts of plagiarizing the works of others, improperly reporting the results of studies, and failing to "comply with established standards regarding author names on publications." In addition, the committee found him "disrespectful of Indian oral traditions." Two members found that Churchill's actions did not warrant dismissal and that the most appropriate sanction was suspension. While the remaining three found that his conduct was grounds for dismissal, they were split as to what the most appropriate sanction was — two believed suspension was appropriate and one stated dismissal was appropriate.<9>

The Standing Committee on Research Misconduct, after examining the findings of the Investigative Committee, disagreed on what sanctions should be imposed on Churchill. Six members voted for dismissal. Two members voted for a five year suspension without pay, and one voted for a two year suspension without pay.<31>

In its report, the investigative sub-committee "expresses its concern regarding the timing and perhaps the motives for the University's decision to forward charges made in that context."<9> The Standing Committee's final report, however, states that they could not ignore the charges against Churchill given their seriousness.<31>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Churchill

[Malikshah]

18. The serious research misconduct....am looking for clear citation

"CU has characterized the charges against Ward Churchill as falsification and fabrication of evidence and plagiarism. In fact, the specific findings of the Appeal Panel were that he (a) failed to provide sufficient evidence on three facts relating to an 1837 smallpox epidemic; (b) cited to material he had ghostwritten (tho’ no one can point to any standard prohibiting this); (c) published an article in which a co-author’s name was deleted by the magazine; and (d) copyedited a piece (written and edited by others) which, unknown to him, plagiarized Fay Cohen."

[mitchtv]

2. L:ynn Cheney is a makin a list

and checkin it twice

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Maybe Finkelstein's Horowitz's first success.

He seems to have plenty of enablers.

[cali]

10. I suspect that

Dershowitz gets the dubious credit for that.

[Maddy McCall]

11. Pick up an issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education sometime.

There is ABSOLUTELY an epidemic of tenured professors losing tenure, and of tenure-worthy professors being denied tenure, because of political reasons.

I read every issue of TCHE, and there is an article about this in nearly every issue.

I have two friends whose offices were broken into, their computers stolen and their locks changed...they lost tenure and were fired for speaking against the president of the university. They arrived at campus as usual one morning, were unable to unlock their office doors, and were promptly greeted by campus police (who were used as the university president's henchmen during this time) and escorted off campus. They were told not to set foot back on campus.

These were HIGHLY respected professors--nationally renown scholars in their fields. If I told you one's name, you'd recognize it if you know anything about English literature scholarship. They both were within five years of retirement when this happened.

They fought their dismissal and won. The university president was fired by the state's higher ed board, and things look sooo much better now. New president, movement away from the old president's policy of using public funding for private enterprise.

This happens more frequently than you can know. You only hear about it when it's a sensational story that the media likes...you know, one that includes speaking out against Bush's policies, or somehow has drugs and sex involved.

It absolutely IS epidemic on university campuses.

Edit to add: Chronicle website http://chronicle.com/ Most articles require subscription, but if you watch the front page for several months, you'll see how frequently this sort of thing is occurring.

[cali]

14. Well, it's certainly not epidemic where I live

and I have never heard of any prof being fired or denied tenure for speaking out against bush.

[Maddy McCall]

16. Do you work in the university system?

Because, if you don't, you probably don't hear about it.

[cali]

17. No, I don't, but I know

quite a few people who do. And believe me, in a state the size of Vermont, we'd know.

[Nikki Stone1]

28. I wish I could recommend your post Maddy.

Thank you.

And Horowitz is just emboldening university presidents. It's frightening.

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. True dat

[Progressive_In_NC]

12. In Wilmington, there is a conservative columnist who is suing UNCW

I was reading about it in the paper when I was visiting my inlaws. He writes for that online rag Townhall.com about liberalism in Academia. He's been denied tenure several times over the last 10 years and he claims it's because of his political views.

Other than that, I haven't heard of anybody else in this state.

[Malikshah]

13. Finklestein, Larudee, now el-Haj at Barnard... Abraham (DePaul) is next

for "writing for the pro-jihadist website Counterpunch" ....

I know from personal experience that scholars who know the material, could write the books on certain areas of Middle East Studies, refuse to do so until they have tenure. They refuse to speak out on the subject, refuse to offer substantial courses, etc.

[skip fox]

19. The only ones I've seen not get tenure here at The Univ. of Louisiana

are those who didn't produce a book or a number of articles (as it required). That's in 26 years.

I came up for tenure in a two year period where only 2 of us out of 7 got tenure (a bad budget coule of years after oil prices dropped in mid-late 1980s). The five who didn't, have not produced. Publish or Perish is the bumpersticker in solid, non-ideological institutions of higher education.

[cali]

20. Thanks for your comment.

There seem to be widely diverging viewpoints about whether academics from the left are being "bullied" off campus.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

21. There aren't very many.

Ward Churchill was mentioned. Well, he deserved to go. People like him are a disgrace to academia.

I disagree that Horowitz' campaign has been as inept as we might wish.

Even though they have failed to get professors fired, they have succeeded in scaring many profs to change syllabi, etc. I even know one prof who assigned an Ann Coulter book to appear "balanced."

[Malikshah]

25. The larger is issue is the stifling of discourse. Sometimes it involves

denial of tenure, other times it involves cancellation of talks, or attempts to stop books from being published (e.g., Dershowitz's failed attempts regarding Finklestein's work, Beyond Chutzpah)

Horowitz et al have been trumpeting the liberalism of the US campuses to match the liberalism of the media meme.

More recently, however-- there have been numerous attempts to stifle discourse on the A-I issues/War on Terror Issues, and the like. (Tariq Ramadan being denied entry into the US where he was to have taken up a post at Notre Dame, accusations lodged at a Fulbright scholar in Southern Florida, etc.)

A particularly helpful (in terms of coverage, but not in terms of objectivity) site is www.campus-watch.org

The Middle East Studies Association has a series of articles by scholars of the region that deal with the issue of Academic Freedom and the New McCarthyism on Campus as well. http://www.mesa.arizona.edu/aff/af_other_readings.htm

[cali]

27. Thanks for the links n/t

[ProgressiveEconomist]

29. Have you seen Horowitz's book, "The 101 Most Dangerous Academics"?

I was really appalled when I saw it on a table at Barnes and Noble (Heres a URL that exposes some of its many inaccuracies: http://www.freeexchangeoncampus.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=7&Itemid=34 )

I suspect that most of the 101 "most dangerous" gained tenure long ago. I suspect also, fo rthat very reason, Horowitz and his acolytes have turned their attention to lists of less senior academics that fail far-right litmus tests. But I have not seen such lists, if they exist.

[libnnc]

31. took a course a couple of years ago with a visiting Assistant Prof

who was kinda insulted that he didn't make Whoreowhozit's silly little list :silly:

He said that he did have a few friends and mentors who are on that list though. I told him obviously he wasn't working hard enough :P

I felt privileged to have studied under him while he was here.

I hope he gets more opportunities to piss off little David :D