The Attack on Academia: The "Students' Bill of Rights"

Oy:

Ohio mulls academic "bill of rights"
By Elizabeth DeForest

Feb. 12, 2005
WESTERVILLE, Ohio -- College sophomore Charis Bridgman tends to keep quiet in class if she thinks her professor might disagree with her Christian-influenced ideas. The 19-year-old says schools such as her Otterbein College in suburban Columbus should be a place for open discussion, but she feels some professors make students afraid to speak up. "They might chastise me, or not even listen to my opinion or give me a chance to explain," she said.

Professors would have to include diverse opinions in classrooms under legislation being pushed in Ohio and several other states by conservatives who fear too many professors indoctrinate young minds with liberal propaganda. Such measures have had little success getting approval in the other states.

"I see students coming out having gone in without any ideological leanings one way or another, coming out with an indoctrination of a lot of left-wing issues," said bill sponsor Sen. Larry Mumper, a former high school teacher whose Republican party controls the Legislature.

The proposal in Ohio to create an academic "bill of rights" would prohibit public and private college professors from presenting opinions as fact or penalizing students for expressing their views. Professors would not be allowed to introduce controversial material unrelated to the course.

Professors dismissed the bill as unnecessary and questioned whether its supporters had ulterior motives, such as wanting more conservative professors.

Similar legislation failed in California and Colorado last year, while the Georgia Senate passed a resolution, which is less binding than a bill, that suggests adoption. The California bill, which would affect only public schools, has been reintroduced and faces opposition from professors and student groups. An Indiana bill is nearly identical to Ohio's.

The Ohio legislation is based on principles advocated by Students for Academic Freedom, a Washington, D.C.-based student network founded by conservative activist David Horowitz. "It doesn't matter a professor's viewpoint," Horowitz said in an interview. "They can be a good professor, liberal or conservative, provided they pursue an educational mission and not a political agenda."

Mumper said he is concerned universities are not teaching the values held by taxpaying parents and students.

He questioned why lawmakers should approve funding for universities with "professors who would send some students out in the world to vote against the very public policy that their parents have elected us for."

A faculty group or school committee could oversee complaints from students who believe their grades were affected by a professor's bias, Mumper said.

Joe White, a political science professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, said students could use perceived discrimination as an excuse to refuse to learn.

"We're not supposed to teach for their comfort," he said. Other opponents, including the American Association of University Professors, say such bills could stifle debate.

"We see nothing but mischief if we invite people from outside of the university to somehow start monitoring what goes on inside the classroom," said David Patton, an AAUP member and professor emeritus of Ohio State University.

Sen. Teresa Fedor, a Democrat from Toledo, agrees: "Can we say 21st century witch hunt and book burning?"

Where does one start with garbage like this? How about with the idea that, public or private, state survailance of what takes place in the classroom is a bad idea? How about with the fact that I simply don't buy the arguement that says that classrooms are hostile environments for students? Or how about the fact that this entire idea of separating politics out from what takes place in the classroom assumes that in a liberal arts setting knowledge can be compartmentalized and subdivided into vacuum-sealed chambers so that the teacher's political perspective never crosses paths with the "real" nature of their course? All of these could be appropriate places to start.

Let me dwell for a moment on the question of just what it is a student gets in a liberal arts education. The Students' Bill of Rights assumes that education is like grocery shopping. If I go to the store, I should be able to pick up milk without having to browse through potato chips. But that's not how liberal arts education works. Liberal arts education is about the transformation of the person. The goal is to bring the student to a recognition of knowledge as a totality, that affects every dimension of their lives. This even goes for math, where student should be able to discuss the way that budget proposals and tax cuts are mathematically comprehensible. As such, there is no real way that a professor can do his or her job without intersecting with broad social, cultural, and political issues.

I certainly agree that if a professor is being relentlessly partisan and punishing or belittling students for their perspective, then the school administration should take action. That is a violation of the professor's professional role. But that's different from a professor getting up in class and honestly debating issues of policy in class, even issues that they themselves care passionately about.

But the complaint of the student at the head of the article does not really seem to be that she is being abused or punished for her perspective, but that the professor might actually challenge her to think differently about her perspective. Heaven forfend! That's a complaint I have no sympathy with. If a student doesn't want to be challenged in class, or even told that they are wrong from time to time, then they don't understand what they've signed on for in a liberal education. And by the way, complacent left-wing students should be challenged just as vociferously as right-wing students.

But, I can't finish without noting my favoriate quote from the piece:

Mumper said he is concerned universities are not teaching the values held by taxpaying parents and students.

He questioned why lawmakers should approve funding for universities with "professors who would send some students out in the world to vote against the very public policy that their parents have elected us for."

Hey, how about his for an answer: Because a free society values and benefits from the right to dissent. Do we really want professors vetted to ensure that they meet tests of popularity? What would Socrates say, I wonder? I imagine Mumper wouldn't know, because I don't think he got the best results of a liberal arts education.