The University of Colorado's investigation of Ward Churchill could be a lengthy affair.

The detailed rules of the standing committee on research misconduct lay out a calendar that stretches to 224 days - 7 1/2 months - from start to finish. The panel can end it earlier, but it also can go longer.

The 12-member committee - consisting of a faculty member from each college or school within the university, as well as one representative from the faculty assembly, one from the staff council and one graduate student - operates largely in secret.

It has heard fewer than a dozen cases in the past 20 years, and there is no record that the committee has made any finding of misconduct during that time, according to CU spokeswoman Pauline Hale.

At least one of the committee members, associate professor Steven R. Guberman in the School of Education, joined nearly 200 faculty members at the Boulder campus in signing a petition opposing the university's preliminary investigation of Churchill.

The committee's work began March 24, when interim Chancellor Phil DiStefano said there was enough evidence to investigate questions about Churchill's scholarship and his claims of American Indian ethnicity.

Here's the process the committee will follow, according to CU's rules:

At many turns, either the committee or an investigating subcommittee that it appoints must take recorded votes on whether to continue.

Even after the committee issues reports and findings, Churchill has the right to come back in and give another defense, requiring the committee to revote.

If Churchill is cleared, the committee must determine to what extent his reputation has been damaged and how that might be atoned.

The group's first duty, after it received the Churchill allegations, was to conduct an inquiry to determine whether it should conduct a fuller investigation. This inquiry was supposed to take no longer than 60 days.

As part of the initial work, Churchill appeared before the committee for nearly two hours May 24. Earlier, he had submitted a 50-page response to the charges.

A recorded vote of the committee and a written report is required to continue with a full investigation.

If the committee votes to continue, it must notify Churchill, who may come in and meet with the committee afterward. After listening to him again, the committee must take another vote on whether to proceed.

If that vote passes, it must notify the appropriate dean and vice chancellor with full documentation.

The standing committee then appoints an investigative committee of three to five members, some of whom may come from outside the university. This new committee operates under the same rules regarding witnesses, exhibits and other evidence, and must begin within 30 days.

This committee has another 120 days to do its work and report to the standing committee.

Unless it needs more time.

There are three findings it can make: misconduct, no culpable conduct but serious research error, or no error or misconduct.

Even at this point, there's an "are you sure" process. When the investigators give their findings to the standing committee, it may ask for more information or even further investigation.

The standing committee then notifies all the parties about its findings and asks for responses. Based on those responses, the committee then decides whether to forward the results to the dean or chancellor with any recommended action.

Criteria for misconduct

CU's definition of research misconduct:

• 1. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or other serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing, carrying out or reporting results from research;

• 2. Material failure to comply with federal requirements for protection of researchers, human subjects or the public, or for ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals;

• 3. Failure to meet other material legal requirements of research; or

• 4. Failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications.

On the panel

Members of the standing committee on research misconduct:

• Russell Moore, professor, kinesiology and applied physiology

• Cortlandt Pierpont, professor, chemistry and biochemistry

• Sanjai Bhagat, professor, Leeds School of Business

• Steven R. Guberman, associate professor, School of Education

• Ron Pak, professor, civil engineering

• Bella Mody, professor, School of Journalism and Mass Communication

• Richard Collins, professor, School of Law

• Judith Glyde, professor, College of Music

• Uriel Nauenberg, professor, Department of Physics

• Linda Morris, assistant, Office of Associate Vice Chancellor for Graduate Education/Research

• Tind Shepper Ryen, United Government of Graduate Students representative

• Joseph Rosse, committee chairman and director, Office of Research Integrity

Back to Top