News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Jan. 14, 2008
In the full knowledge of the commitment that I am freely willing to undertake as a student, I promise to respect each and every member of the college community without regard to race, creed, political ideology, lifestyle orientation, gender, or social status sparing no effort to preserve the dignity of those I will come in contact with as a member of the college community. I promise to Bergen Community College that I will follow this code of responsibility.
1. Honesty, integrity, and respect for all will guide my personal conduct.
2. I will embrace and celebrate differing perspectives intellectually.
3. I will build an inclusive community enriched by diversity.
4. I am willing to respect and assist those individuals who are less fortunate.
5. I promise my commitment to civic engagement and to serve the needs of the community to the best of my ability.
The draft policy above — prepared to promote civility and to respond to a series of racial incidents — has led to an intense (and civil) debate at Bergen Community College, in New Jersey. Many professors are aghast at the draft, comparing it to a loyalty oath, and saying that it would make it a punishable offense for a conservative student not to “embrace and celebrate” the ideas of Michael Moore or for a liberal student not to do the same with Ann Coulter. Like loyalty oaths, one idea was to have students sign it (and some feared professors would have to sign too).
Days after college officials were quoted in local papers saying that students who didn’t sign wouldn’t be allowed to enroll, and professors were vowing that the policy would never take effect, the president has said that the policy is only a draft and no students will be kicked out for refusing to sign or for their political views.
The president’s most recent statements have reassured faculty members, but not ended the debate over what to do (if anything) about incidents of incivility.
Bergen Community College
Some who received this postcard sent in remarks about the lack of white men.
Susan Baechtel, a spokeswoman for the college, said that a series of incidents in the fall showed the need for the policy:
The neo-Nazis were not students, and no one has been identified as responsible for the library incident or the comments written on the postcards.
“What we’re trying to facilitate [with the policy is] a positive learning environment,” Baechtel said. “When people are viciously attacked, it doesn’t promote a level learning playing field. We have to come out and promote this level playing field for learning.”
Baechtel added that the policy was drafted with knowledge of the murders at Virginia Tech. “Virginia Tech is starting to frame our thoughts on this,” she said.
But when the proposed policy was sent out by the administration last week, leaders of the faculty union — an affiliate of the National Education Association — immediately objected. George Cronk, a union leader who is chair of the college’s philosophy and religion department, said he found the policy “objectionable in almost every way,” adding that “any critically thinking person couldn’t commit herself or himself to some of the things this document asks for.”
Specifically, he said that people must be entitled to determine that there are views or ideas that they don’t wish to embrace or respect.
“Some intellectual perspectives are evil and others are wrong and many of them must be vigorously opposed — ideas like fascism and racism and anti-Semitism and all kinds of wacky and bad ideas,” Cronk said. Further, some conservative or liberal views, while not necessarily the same as racism, may be ideas that some students may legitimately not wish to embrace, he said. And the policy would make all kinds of students fearful of being expelled if they said what they believed, he said.
“The words ‘inclusiveness and diversity’ are used in academia these days virtually as religious incantations,’” Cronk said. “These terms have a coercive effect. You can’t really say what you mean. You have to be very careful with your language, and it seems like a form of thought control.”
G. Jeremiah Ryan, president at Bergen, stressed in an interview that he understood the faculty concerns and that the draft policy was subject to revision after he hears in more detail from professors. Ryan said he would never support a policy that had the effect of limiting the views students or professors could express. And he said that as a public institution, Bergen couldn’t have a speech code without facing court challenges.
He said, however, that he asked some professors to draft the policy when they told him of an “uptick in behavior” that lacked civility. “If I made a mistake,” Ryan said, it was that he turned to “true believers” to draft the policy.
Ryan said he still believes some code is needed. Like many colleges, Bergen’s existing student regulations cover topics such as plagiarism and paying tuition, but not civility. He said it is important to teach students that there are standards about how people should interact at the college, and that that should be possible while also remembering “that one person’s civility issue is another person’s free speech issue.”
In hindsight, he said, the idea of requiring students to sign a civility code “is probably too far on one end of the continuum,” and not something he would favor.
The debate at Bergen now is healthy, he said, and shows that much of the way to promote civility on campus is through actions, not policies. “We’re going to be talking about it more in orientation, encouraging faculty members to use incidents as teachable moments,” he said.
Faculty leaders praised Ryan for his latest statements, although some said he was backtracking from earlier statements about the draft.
Professors also said that they see civility problems, but question whether a code will do much about that. Cronk said students at the college reflect societal norms and the declining civility everywhere.
He also said he objected to the statement that the policy reflected the tragedy at Virginia Tech.
“What happened at Virginia Tech is something like a natural disaster, even though it was done by a human being,” Cronk said. “It was not the kind of thing that pledges of civility would have done anything to have stopped. That person might have signed all the pledges of responsibility in the world. It’s an absurd and naive idea to think that printing things in catalogs, or requiring students or faculty to sign this, we’d then be safe.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
“embrace and celebrate"; that is a bit over the top. The idea is nice, but this particular language indicates knee-jerk reaction rather than well thought out wording. Aside from that, should not these ideas, sans “embrace and celebrate” be part of the school mission statement, and or motto? No loyalty oath is ever acceptable to everyone; I’d be hard pressed to sign something like that myself. There should be better, more constructive ways to deal with the problems being faced.
curious, at 8:15 am EST on January 14, 2008
This policy is perfectly fine if it is identified as a goal for faculty (and students), but not as an enforceable code.
The employee handbook at Bergen already includes very vague language prohibiting “Actions disruptive to the effective, efficient, or orderly operation of College activities, as deemed so by the College.”
I am also disturbed that the “n-word” is “absolutely forbidden” at the college, since that would require banning many African-American students, faculty, and writers.
Cronk’s critiques seem quite right.
John K. Wilson, collegefreedom.org, at 8:30 am EST on January 14, 2008
“where are the white males?” is not a question that should require the attention of the thought police. Readers of this forum should look at the photos used to represent their own colleges. It is likely that vanishingly-few white males will be pictured, at time when the gender imbalance has increased the need to make men of all colors feel welcomed in higher education.
Reality, at 9:10 am EST on January 14, 2008
Orwell would be proud. This is straight out of the propaganda handbook that guides totalitarian governments – so-called “offensive” remarks, and off to the re-education camp you go!
No one should want to live in a sanitized society in which every utterance is scrutinized and is “approved” or “disapproved”. I would rather be offended and argue a refutation than have a self-appointed thought police determine what should or should not offend me.
It is a disgrace that such an attempt at speech regulation should arise in the academic arena, whose mission should be to promote a free debate between ideas, no matter how unpleasant, and without a requirement to “embrace and celebrate” these or those particular ideas. This is akin to McCarthyism — but from the left.
IND2002, at 9:55 am EST on January 14, 2008
I think a loyalty oath is the last thing this college needs. The faculty and administration can set a good example and can explain their views to the students.
Banning the use of the n word and equivalent slurs is fine. But telling people what to think is over the line or over the top.
They seem to have real problems in their community with racists and nazis, but I would think of debate, presenting facts, and enforcing basic rules are all methods they should be using. I would stop short of telling people what to think.
Loyalty oaths also appeared in Catch-22.
Jerry, at 10:20 am EST on January 14, 2008
Truly, is anyone surprised?
ockhamsrazor, at 10:25 am EST on January 14, 2008
I’m one of those who think racism, facism, sexism and the like are not the sort of thing we want to foster—socialism, though, I’m fine with that :)—but this is certainly not the way to do it. It’s about as silly as last summer’s funeral for the “n-word.” Why can’t the truth emerge and come to the fore through the free exchange of ideas? Why can’t the bigots speak their minds and show their hands so they can be discredited? About the best one can hope for these kinds of “oaths” and the suppression of “offensive” speech is that they will drive discussion underground, out of the light.
Yes, if I’m a Jew, non-white, or some other minority, and most likely if I’ve got a working brain, I’m going to be offended by the neo-nazi or similar tripe, but then it’s my responsibility to rise up against it, to fight it. I’ve had my feelings hurt plenty of times, in school and out, as a student and teacher. This crud has to see the light of day so it can be stomped down, even if it becomes the political and rhetorical equivalent of whack-a-mole. That’s what living in a free and open society is supposed to be about, not the coddling of the offended and silly, unenforceable oaths.
bradley bleck, instructor at Spokane Falls CC, at 11:00 am EST on January 14, 2008
Having grown up in Bergen County, I know that the vast majority of students there attended either a virtually all-white high school or one that is predominantly minority (something like 90% of the minorities in Bergen live in one of 4 or 5 of the county’s 70+ towns). So many students there are unexposed to sharing a classroom or a community with people different than them. Maybe this credo needs some wordsmithing, but it’s a step in the right direction.
DS, at 1:45 pm EST on January 14, 2008
Even though I am a First Amendment absolutist, I see this all a bit differently. Many academics like to complain that their students grow up in “all white” or homogenous areas and never experience anything ethic or travel. I don’t really know where they get these ideas from, because it doesn’t jive with my experience. (I realize some parents don’t allow their children to travel outside the country alone, but those are outliers and I don’t take them seriously.)
But, instead, I think that most young people and most adults simply are not used to making arguments with intellectual rigor – for good reason – in many situations it is useless. High school administrators are not interested in rigorous briefing of any issue. Many (even in good schools) rule with an iron fist, because it is the only way to manage a transient population of students that will be gone in four years. Parents, friends, and pretty much everyone else a high school student comes into contact with is just not interested in a fulling developed exploration of any issue.
Then, students get to college. Suddenly, academics mouth the language of “intellectual inquiry” and “academic rigor.” Sure, some people might be driven by politics, but most students are told to be “intellectual” and to “explore ideas.” Problem is: they don’t really have a basis for doing this, because they have spent their lives to this point trying to please those in power. So, to them, everything is an applause line meant to curry favor for someone or other.
And so, the students have nothing but a series of snappy lines. Oh, what is the remedy?
To some the remedy is to tell people to “celebrate” ideas. I don’t really know how one can “celebrate” ideas (but if I did, it would involve presents). Naturally this idea is going to be mocked as either 1) silly; or 2) a failed attempt to legislate intellectual rigor.
But, at other schools students are used to arguing difficult ideas. People do learn to understand different positions. Heck, some students even have to argue the merits of racial segregation, and the issues still don’t become personalized.
Larry, at 4:00 pm EST on January 14, 2008
“It is a disgrace that such an attempt at speech regulation should arise in the academic arena”
What would be astonishing is if it arose anywhere else. Where have you been the last 30 years?
Tired Adjunct, at 4:25 pm EST on January 14, 2008
Not a good idea.
I notice the usual trolls have not wrapped their heads around the fact that this thing was *opposed* by faculty, and not just faculty but NEA-aligned unionized faculty.
c, at 5:45 pm EST on January 14, 2008
Grousing about the absence of white males in the postcard photo may be rude and silly, but no sillier than the desperately contrived ‘community’ that is present.
Would the photograph have been used if all the black males, head-scarf wearers, or asians ‘had to leave for class?’ And where are the wheelchairs, guide dogs, colostomy bags?
John Coffin, at 2:10 pm EST on January 17, 2008
Although I have to respect a person’s human rights, why do I have to respect his ideas, opinions, or god forbid his baseless unempirical beliefs?
I don’t respect Islam, because it is a bad system of values. But I respect Muslims, not because they are Muslims, but because they are human beings.
Respect must be earned. I have the right not to respect your ideas and beliefs. How are you going to force me to respect an idea anyways? By inquisitioning me and punishing me for my thoughts?
Muslims who cry for the entitlement to be respected for their senseless religious beliefs are unable to earn it — so they demand others to offer them respect, by force. How different is that from submission?
Hamidreza, at 6:05 am EST on January 18, 2008
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Assists the director, assistant director, and manager on duty with all aspects of exam administration including placement, ... see job
Salary: Commensurate with Experience Date of appointment: Begin as early as March 1, 2009 Responsibilities: Providing the ... see job
Position Number: FY 09-76 Reports to: Director of Student Success Scope: UTB/TSC invites applications for the position of ... see job
Everest Institute, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job
George Fox University seeks a Director of Multicultural Student Programs to work primarily with our undergraduate students. see job
Eastern Kentucky University, located in Richmond, Madison County, Kentucky near the Heart of the Bluegrass, is a ... see job
Reporting to the Director of Disability Resources, the Coordinator of Student Services (Assistive Technology) is responsible ... see job
A GREAT JOB IN A GROWING CAMPUS: DeVRY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK CAREER SERVICES SPECIALIST see job
UCS helps students select a major and career direction, plan for their career goals, learn effective job search skills and ... see job
Posting Description: The University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (UCCS) invites candidates for the key ... see job
“1. Honesty, integrity, and respect for all will guide my personal conduct.”
Isn’t that all students need to agree to in order to be compliant with all of the other verbiage?
justaguy, parent & tax payer, at 7:50 am EST on January 14, 2008