Major Step Forward for Students for Academic Freedom

                                  -Scroll down for more coverage- 

Higher-Education Groups Issue Statement on Academic Rights and Intellectual Diversity on Campuses

By Sara Hebel

June 23, 2005

 

As many state legislatures and the U.S. Congress consider measures that call on public colleges to rid their campuses of political and other kinds of bias, the American Council on Education and more than two dozen other higher-education groups are releasing a joint statement today that lays out their common positions on intellectual diversity.

 

The groups say that their statement, which lists five principles on academic rights and responsibilities, is meant to clearly stake out their views on academic freedom and their commitment to pluralism of ideas, civility in discourse, and due process for people on a campus who feel they have been treated unfairly because of their beliefs.

 

Among other things, the groups' document states that neither students nor faculty members should be put at a disadvantage because of their political views, that all academic decisions should be based solely on considerations that are intellectually relevant to the subject matter of the course, and that anyone who feels mistreated should have clear access to an institutional grievance process.

 

The statement also lays out the groups' views on other matters that are central to many of the measures, commonly known as the "academic bill of rights," that Republican lawmakers have introduced in several state legislatures and that Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives have included as part of their plans to renew the Higher Education Act.

 

Several higher-education groups have voiced concerns that the academic-bill-of-rights proposals would encourage state and campus officials to control faculty members on academic matters rather than trust their professional judgment. Legislative bodies, many in academe argue, should not be meddling in decisions about who should teach and what they should teach.

 

The higher-education organizations' statement says that the merits of competing academic ideas should be judged by colleges and by using professional, intellectual standards set by the "community of scholars" at each institution. The document also says that government's recognition and respect for colleges' independence is essential to achieving academic and intellectual excellence.

 

Reaction to the statement was positive across the ideological spectrum.

 

"It is important to speak out strongly and sharply," said Jonathan Knight, director of the department of academic freedom and tenure at the American Association of University Professors, which signed the joint statement. "Higher-education organizations together need to express their concerns about these efforts to, in effect, legislate academic standards."

 

David Ward, president of the American Council on Education, said he pressed efforts to forge a joint statement because he began to worry that higher-education officials were not participating enough in the debate. Making an affirmative statement, he said, would help his and other groups clearly declare to the public and to lawmakers that they share a commitment to political and intellectual pluralism on campuses.

 

"Right now I'm not sure the public knows where we stand on this," Mr. Ward said. "I hope that, by being proactive, we can determine how far apart we really are" from those who support the academic-rights measures.

 

David Horowitz, president of the California-based Center for the Study of Popular Culture, has led a national campaign to urge state legislators and members of Congress to press the academic bill of rights, after hearing complaints from college students from across the country who have said that they faced discrimination because of their conservative views. Mr. Horowitz's legislative proposal urges colleges to foster a variety of political and religious beliefs in such areas as making tenure decisions, developing reading lists for courses, and selecting campus speakers.

 

Mr. Horowitz praised the college groups for issuing their statement, calling it a "huge step forward" that displays their commitment to many of the central themes of the legislation he is pressing.

 

"This is the kind of dialogue I had been hoping for from the beginning," Mr. Horowitz said. "I consider this a tremendous victory for academic freedom and a huge opportunity for all of us to work together."

 

He said he hoped that the higher-education groups' action would spur college officials in states such as Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, where academic-rights measures have been introduced in legislatures, to open discussions with the bills' sponsors to seek nonlegislative remedies to lawmakers' concerns about campus climates. And Mr. Horowitz said he would like to see institutions across the country take the college groups' statement and use its principles to enact campus codes that would more forcefully protect students' rights.

 

Republican members of Congress, including Rep. John A. Boehner of Ohio, chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, also released written remarks that welcomed the higher-education groups' statement.

 

"I applaud the higher-education community for coming to the table and working with us to forge stronger protections for students on college campuses," Mr. Boehner said. "I'm encouraged by the cooperation and openness that led to this agreement, and I'm eager to move forward in that spirit with renewal of the federal higher-education programs."

 

The full text of the higher-education groups' statement will be available on the American Council on Education's Web site today.

 

 

American Council on Education Press Release

 

NEWS RELEASE:

 

The American Council on Education

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:                         Contact:            Tim McDonough, (202) 939-9365

                                                                                                Paul F. Hassen, (202) 939-9367

 

STATEMENT ON ACADEMIC RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OFFERED BY HIGHER EDUCATION COMMUNITY

 

Washington, DC (June 23, 2005) ¨C The American Council on Education (ACE) and 22 other higher education organizations today released a statement on intellectual diversity on college and university campuses, titled: Academic Rights and Responsibilities.

 

The statement contains five central or overarching principles that are “widely shared within the academic community.”

 

“During the past decade, higher education has come under increasing criticism for a lack of commitment to political and intellectual pluralism such criticism is based on information from a very few cases and ignores our general practices,” said David Ward, president of ACE.  “On behalf of today’s campuses public and private, two year, four year, faith-based, and non-sectarian we are releasing a statement of principles upon which academic rights and responsibilities are based on.  We believe this construct will clearly outline higher education’s position in future discussions on this topic.”

 

Among the key points in the statement are the following overarching principles:

 

• American higher education is characterized by a great diversity of institutions, each with its own mission and purpose. This diversity is a central feature and strength of our colleges and universities and must be valued and protected.  The particular purpose of each school, as defined by the institution itself, should set the tone for the academic activities undertaken on campus. 
• Colleges and universities should welcome intellectual pluralism and the free exchange of ideas.  Such a commitment will inevitably encourage debate over complex and difficult issues about which individuals will disagree.  Such discussions should be held in an environment characterized by openness, tolerance and civility.
• Academic decisions including grades should be based solely on considerations that are intellectually relevant to the subject matter under consideration.  Neither students nor faculty should be disadvantaged or evaluated on the basis of their political opinions.  Any member of the campus community who believes that he or she has been treated unfairly on academic matters must have access to a clear institutional process by which his or her grievance can be addressed. 
• The validity of academic ideas, theories, arguments and views should be measured against the intellectual standards of relevant academic and professional disciplines.  Application of these intellectual standards does not mean that all ideas have equal merit.  The responsibility to judge the merits of competing academic ideas rests with colleges and universities and is determined by reference to the standards of the academic profession as established by the community of scholars at each institution. 
• Government’s recognition and respect for the independence of colleges and universities is essential for academic and intellectual excellence.   Because government gives great discretion and autonomy to campus officials, colleges and universities have a particular obligation to ensure that academic freedom is protected for all members of the campus community and that academic decisions are based on intellectual standards consistent with the mission of each institution.   

“We hope this statement will be seen as a resource for opinion leaders and policymakers in Congress and in state capitols, as well as for college and university presidents across the nation,” Ward added.

 

In addition to ACE, the organizations endorsing this statement include:  

 

• American Association of Community Colleges
• American Association of State Colleges and Universities
• American Association of University Professors
• American Dental Education Association
• Association of American Colleges and Universities
• Association of American Universities
• Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges
• Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities
• College Student Educators International
• College and University Professional Association for Human Resources
• Council for Advancement and Support of Education
• Council for Christian Colleges and Universities
• Council for Higher Education Accreditation
• Council for Opportunity in Education
• Council of Graduate Schools
• Council of Independent Colleges
• EDUCAUSE
• National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities
• National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges
• National Association of Student Personnel Administrators
• The Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers
• University Continuing Education Association

Founded in 1918, ACE is the major coordinating body for all the nation's higher education institutions, representing more than 1,600 college and university presidents, and more than 200 related associations, nationwide. It seeks to provide leadership and a unifying voice on key higher education issues and influence public policy through advocacy, research, and program initiatives.

 

 

 

University Needs Academic Bill of Rights

At long last, a statement in support of intellectual diversity from the academic community.

 

By Sara Dogan

June 29, 2005

Over the last two years, in my capacity as the national campus director of Students for Academic Freedom, I have worked with students across the nation to combat the partisan abuse of the classroom and to encourage universities to adopt an Academic Bill of Rights. This campaign is a nonpartisan effort to advance fairness, civility and greater intellectual diversity in our nation’s institutions of higher learning and it ought to have immediately gained the support of everyone interested in the health and integrity of higher education in the United States.

 

Twenty-four months into our academic freedom campaign, the educational establishment appears to have finally come around to our point of view. In a statement released Thursday, the American Council on Education, an organization representing more than 1,600 college and university presidents and more than 200 related associations, issued a statement endorsing the key principles of our bill (though it notably failed to refer it by name). Twenty-two additional organizations, including the American Association of University Professors, which has mounted an extensive effort to counter our academic freedom campaign, signed on to the statement.

 

Among the principles recognized by the American Council on Education was the idea that “intellectual pluralism and academic freedom are central principles of American higher education” and “neither students nor faculty should be disadvantaged or evaluated on the basis of their political opinions.” The statement even endorsed one of the most frequently-criticized measures recommended by our campaign: that students and faculty members whose academic freedom has been violated must have access to redress through official and well-publicized grievance procedures on campus.

 

The academic establishment’s wholesale endorsement of these key principles of our academic freedom initiative is nothing short of revolutionary, considering the epithets hurled at our campaign during the last 24 months. We have been called everything from McCarthyists, to Nazis, to Maoists, to members of Orwell’s thought police.

 

The American Association of University Professors called our Academic Bill of Rights “a grave threat to academic freedom” and University of Minnesota political science professor and chairman of the University’s Task Force on Academic Freedom Raymond Duvall told The Minnesota Daily that “what they’re trying to do is to make the University into a place that is less comfortable with liberal viewpoints.” This, despite the fact that our Academic Bill of Rights was directly inspired by the nearly 100-year-old academic freedom philosophy of the American Association of University Professors.

 

In many of the states in which legislators have introduced versions of the Academic Bill of Rights, the sponsors of these bills have faced harsh personal criticism and attacks. Michelle Bachman, the sponsor of our bill in Minnesota, is no exception. A column by Laura Billings in the Pioneer Press called it “a bill intent on dumbing down our institutions of higher learning” and this paper printed an editorial calling it “just another example of the government trying to nose in on the practices of higher education.”

 

The American Council on Education statement is an important breakthrough in our attempts to highlight the critical problems of political abuse and exclusion in the academy. We have heard from hundreds of students across the nation who have been attacked and berated in class for holding political views at odds with their professors. One law professor at the University of Colorado told a student that “The ‘R’ in ‘Republican’ stands for ‘Racist’ ” and called a Republican student a “Nazi” when he was so bold as to object.

 

By stepping forward to address these issues, the American Council on Education, along with the 22 organizations who co-signed their statement, have brought the protection of students’ academic freedom — long an issue advocated for chiefly by external organizations — to the forefront of the debate within the academy. While this is an important first step, it is far from satisfactory. The true test of intent will come during the ensuing months, as we watch to see whether the American Council on Education’s members will take up the challenge set for them and implement the principles endorsed by the American Council on Education on their own campuses.

 

Sara Dogan is the national campus director for Students for Academic Freedom. Please send comments to letters@mndaily.com.

 

 

Detente With David Horowitz

By Scott Jaschik--InsideHigherEd.com--06/23/05

David Horowitz isn’t mentioned by name in a two-page statement being released today by 26 higher education organizations. But the statement, on “academic rights and responsibilities,” is a response to Horowitz’s “Academic Bill of Rights,” which many professors view as an assault on their rights.

 

Organizers of the statement being issued today say that it was an effort to state publicly that academe is not monolithic ideologically and that colleges can — without the government — deal with professors (a distinct few, according to most academic leaders) who punish students for their views. Organizers hoped the statement would deflate the movement in state legislatures and Congress to enact the Academic Bill of Rights. Horowitz called the statement “a major victory” for his campaign and said that it opened up the possibility that he would work directly with colleges on remaining differences of opinion, rather than seeking legislation.

 

Congressional Republicans — some of whom had been expected to push the Horowitz legislation — also praised the statement. And the praise from Republicans and Horowitz pleased many college leaders, who have been frustrated by the way their institutions have been portrayed by Horowitz and some lawmakers as leftist and intolerant.

 

The statement issued today focuses on “intellectual pluralism and academic freedom,” and offers five “overarching principles” for colleges:

Diversity of institutions is a “central feature and strength” of American higher education, and the individual missions of colleges, defined by the colleges themselves, “should set the tone for the academic activities undertaken.”

 

Colleges should welcome “intellectual pluralism” and promote an environment where the debates fostered by such pluralism take place with a spirit of “openness, tolerance and civility.”

 

Grades should be based “solely on considerations that are intellectually relevant to the subject matter under consideration,” and students and faculty members should be free from being punished for their political views. Any who feel that they have been discriminated against in this regard should have a “clear institutional process” for a grievance.

 

The validity of ideas should be judged by “the intellectual standards of relevant academic and professional disciplines,” without any presumption that all ideas have equal merit.

 

Government must respect colleges’ “independence,” creating a special obligation for colleges to assure academic freedom for all.

 

There are similar themes in the statement and in the “Academic Bill of Rights,” which has been pushed by Horowitz, a one-time radical turned conservative, in numerous state legislatures and in Congress. Many professors, however, believe that the language in the bill would make professors vulnerable to student complaints any time controversial material was covered and would require colleges to seek ideological balance on topics where most professors think that such balance is absurd (did the Holocaust happen? is evolution real?). While Horowitz has repeatedly denied that is his goal, some of his legislative supporters have said that they see the bill as a step toward changing the way evolution is taught in higher education.

 

In contrast, the statement from the academic groups stipulates that colleges, not the government, should decide on the curriculum and the extent to which departments should seek a diversity of thought.

 

David Ward, president of the American Council on Education, which led the efforts to draft the statement, said the idea was to embrace part of Horowitz’s message, but not all of it. “What was happening was that individuals who were critics of higher education were making, to my mind, perfectly reasonable statements that universities should be places of intellectual pluralism, civility and fairness,” Ward said. “I might quibble about details, but I found myself saying, ‘They have a point.’ “

 

Ward said that while there were “striking similarities” between the association’s statement and the Academic Bill of Rights, it was important to note the way the associations protected faculty and institutional rights. “These are principles, and the idea is that campus should refine them,” he said.

 

Issues of ideological bias, Ward said, are not rampant in American higher education. But he said that the debate over the Academic Bill of Rights did draw attention to the fact that many colleges haven’t outlined what a student should do if he or she feels that they are being discriminated against because of their political views. “Some of our institutions don’t have procedures in place, and they should,” he said.

 

The groups backing the statement includes those whose members are institutions, presidents, deans and professors.

 

One of the college leaders who played a key role in developing the statement — and selling it to conservatives — was Robert C. Andringa, president of the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities. Andringa said he believed that problems with political intolerance are far fewer than Horowitz has charged. And he said that Horowitz’s legislation was wrong because “it is inappropriate for legislative bodies to get involved in academic freedom issues.”

 

The statement is important, Andringa said, “in that it shows that the higher education community recognized the political and public interest in the issue.” He said that the debate had become a public relations problem that was hurting higher education.

 

“This is the kind of thing that translates into lower appropriations in states, and less of a commitment by lawmakers to higher education, so we have to take it seriously,” Andringa said.

 

In an e-mail interview, Horowitz called the statement by the academic groups “a major victory” and said that it created “an opportunity to open a dialogue with educators that had not been possible before.”

 

Horowitz suggested that the statement might make it possible for him and his supporters to stop pushing the Academic Bill of Rights. But he also made clear that was not yet a done deal. “Until the rights are codified by the universities themselves as student rights (professors have these rights written into their contracts) and the grievance machinery is set up,” he said, legislation might be needed. “That depends on the university systems. The door has now been opened for discussions. If the discussions lead to a situation in which the universities are dealing with these problems in a satisfactory manner, then there will be no further need for legislation. At the moment however all this remains to be seen.”

 

Not everyone things Horowitz is a clear winner. Michael Bérubé, a professor of English at Pennsylvania State University, said “there’s no question he put this issue on the agenda.” But Bérubé said that the statement from college groups embraces only “the innocuous parts” of Horowitz’s proposals while rejecting “the truly obnoxious aspect,” a move to have legislators “be empowered to investigate individual teachers and reading lists.”

 

These days, Bérubé said, Horowitz’s audience is “the kind of people who’ll believe anything about universities — or about the United Nations, or PBS, or NPR."