Cross-posted from www.freeexchangeoncampus.org.
The City University of New York is considering a new policy that, in its vagueness, rivals David Horowitz's so-called "Academic Bill of Rights" for the chilling effect it could have on academic freedom. According to a story in today's Inside Higher Ed, the CUNY administration is asking the board to adopt a policy for dealing with student complaints that don't fall under any other established categories, such as discriminiation, sexual harassment or academic dishonesty. The proposal "sets up investigative responsibilities and creates panels to adjudicate those complaints in which a mutual conclusion [between students and their professors] can't be reached."
Inside Higher Ed continues, "[T]he CUNY proposal is very consistent with Horowitz's claim that there are categories of student complaints (he has tended to talk about inappropriate political posturing in class) for which most colleges don't have a current policy."
Not surprisingly, the policy is ringing all kinds of alarm bells for faculty, who are reacting through their governance organizations-the faculty senate and the union, the Professional Staff Congress.
"This sets up this gigantic machinery, without ever defining what one might be complaining about," PSC president Barbara Bowen told Inside Higher Ed. Why such a prophylactic measure is needed at this time is a "mystery," says Bowen.
A statement posted on the University Faculty Senate Web site says, "We think that this proposed policy is a solution to a nonexistent problem, or a problem which the policy may actually trigger and encourage. We fear that it will have a chilling effect on faculty at a time when attacks upon the academic freedom of faculty are not unknown."
It is another example, this time at the institutional level, of a solution in search of a problem. This is evidenced by CUNY's odd logic of proposing this policy at a time when, according to Fredrick Schaffer, General Counsel for CUNY, there are no such complaints filed--although he projects there might be one or two a year. CUNY, by the way, has more than 400,000 students. But as they say, better safe than sorry!
This prophylactic policy, Inside Higher Ed notes, is "seemingly innocuous." Yet it is laden with holes.
The first thing wrong is that the resulting effect would almost certainly be self-censorship among professors who are fearful they might offend any student in their classroom. If a professor of biology tries to teach evolution, all it takes is one student to complain that his or her belief in Intelligent Design is being discriminated against by the professor. Inside Higher Ed reports on the draconian procedure which would follow:
The CUNY rules state that if a student files a complaint, the department chair (or academic dean, if the chair is the subject of the complaint) would conduct a fact-finding investigation within 30 days, try to work out an agreement with everyone involved, and issue a formal finding and recommendation. If either party appeals, the chief academic officer would then serve as chair of an appeals committee, which would have as additional members the chief student affairs officer, two elected faculty members, and one elected student. In considering appeals, the panel would be charged with "particular focus on whether the conduct in question is protected by academic freedom."
Furthermore, the policy undermines the traditional relationship developed between faculty and students based on mutual respect. The policy would put both groups at odds with one another, creating an adversarial relationship where one of mutual respect for each others ideas used to exist.
Finally, the CUNY system contains roughly 50 percent adjunct faculty whose job security is already tenuous at best. Complaints by students who feel they were offended could jeopardize the jobs of many professors. As the statement released by Faculty Senate notes, "We think that this proposed policy is a solution to a nonexistent problem, or a problem which the policy may actually trigger and encourage. We fear that it will have a chilling effect on faculty at a time when attacks upon the academic freedom of faculty are not unknown."
Perhaps, in this case, abstinence would be a better solution for the CUNY trustees to consider. Just say no to bad policies. We know it isn't the hip thing to do right now, but later in life you will be glad you made the right decision.