Jan. 24, 2008

Harassment vs. Academic Freedom, Round Two

Donald Hindley

Donald Hindley first learned through twin October 30 letters that he was deemed in violation of Brandeis University’s nondiscrimination policy for allegedly uttering “inappropriate and racially derogatory statements.” The provost, Marty Krauss, informed the professor of politics that a “monitor” would observe his classroom and that he would be required to attend “anti-discrimination training.” The administration’s sanctions were deemed unusual by veteran observers of academic freedom, such as the American Association of University Professors, and the allegations set off a furor among faculty members at the institution, named for the free-expression defender and Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.

“Brandeis still refuses to let me or my lawyers know what I am supposed to have said or done that allegedly constituted racial harassment and/or discrimination,” Hindley said in an e-mail.

Last month, the provost rejected an appeal by the university’s Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities, leading Hindley to seek counsel and outside backing to pressure the university directly. At issue is a fundamental dispute about which is more important: protecting academic freedom, or ensuring students’ willingness to come forward with allegations of harassment?

The monitoring of his class has stopped this semester, and Hindley has so far refused to participate in the mandated training sessions. According to statements he and others have made to campus newspapers, the allegations revolve around students’ interpretation of comments he made using the term “wetback,” a derogatory reference to Mexican immigrants. Hindley, who has taught at Brandeis for almost 50 years, said he was using the term in his Latin American politics course in the context of explaining how it had been used historically. The department chair, Steven L. Burg, has previously said that at least two students approached him separately about Hindley’s remarks.

A campus publication, The Brandeis Hoot, pseudonymously interviewed one of the students, who said Hindley had used phrases like “mi petite negrita” and “wetbacks.”

“It seems to me that the administration is almost happy this came about, so they can nail him,” the student told the paper. “He’s been around forever and I’ve heard comments of dislike from the past decades — there have been other complaints [about] that. I think they’re attempting to give him his due process now since he has been here so long — at least that’s the impression that I’ve heard.”

Officials from the university declined to comment last week, but pressure mounted on Wednesday when the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education publicized Hindley’s case on its Web site.

The dispute first escalated when the Faculty Senate took up the issue in a November 8 emergency session, unanimously expressing that it was “seriously concerned about procedures.... The Human Resources policies stress the importance of resolving such issues in an ‘informal manner’ with ‘flexible’ solutions. Furthermore, the Provost’s letter to the professor includes reference to ‘termination’ as a possibility if the professor does not accept the suggested remedies. This violates section VIIC2a of the Faculty Handbook: ‘When considering suspension or dismissal, the Provost will first consult with the Faculty Senate Council.’ No such consultation occurred before this letter was delivered.”

Accepting Hindley’s appeal, the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities wrote to the provost on November 29, asking her to fully reverse her decision, citing threats to academic freedom, procedural irregularities and excessive punishments. For example, the committee said that the sanctions against Hindley should have been lifted under the appeals process; instead, a monitor was immediately sent to his classes after the decision.

The committee argues that the administration didn’t follow basic procedures as outlined in the Faculty Handbook and the nondiscrimination policy, such as allowing Hindley to choose a witness to be present throughout the process. Responding to the committee’s letter on December 10, the provost rejected its findings and referred to “errors, both factual and legal,” in the analysis. “I am committed to academic freedom for our faculty and students, but I am equally committed to the principle that we will not tolerate racially harassing speech,” Krauss wrote.

She continued that when interviewed by the investigator, Hindley admitted to making the remarks but was “dismissive of their impact.” (Hindley, for his part, has referred to the proceedings as “the Stalin purges.”)

Krauss cited portions of the university’s nondiscrimination procedures stating that those rules, not the Faculty Handbook, govern the process of handling such allegations. The faculty committee, in asserting its power to appeal the ruling, maintains that the handbook grants it jurisdiction in the case. Neither side is backing down, as a response the committee sent to the Faculty Senate chairman on the same day, December 10, made clear:

“We must face the possibility that our faculty dispute resolution process is breaking down. The latest conflict with the Provost over jurisdiction, legal interpretations, and complex facts may have entered the stage where further exchanges are futile, or at least too complicated for most faculty colleagues to follow in detail. There is something very serious that is now broken, and the Senate may be the only route for restoring some sense of order.”

— Andy Guess

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.

Comments

Free speech on campus

I thought I could no longer be shocked by tales of free speech suppression on college campuses but this story reveals just how far the support for free speech has eroded in many places in academia. What is next? Is some college going to ban Huck Finn from its college library?

Perhaps if this story gets a lot of publicity, college faculty will take a good look at their speech codes and harassment policies with a critical eye and realize how threatening they are to the functioning of a university.

What I find most ironic about the whole censorship movement on campus is that it is done in the name of protecting minorities. Protection of free speech and rules against discrimination are the bottom line in protecting minorities from the whims of the majority. Yet in the name of being “inclusive” and “welcoming” colleges have given a self selected group of little tyrants the right to decide what does and does not constitute offensive speech. In the end the majority will reassert itself and the very codes that were instituted to prevent minorities from being offended will be turned around and used against them.

I graduated from Brandeis in 1964 and I can not imagine that the students or faculty at that time would have ever allowed this kind of heavy handed censorship without a massive revolt.

Let’s hope that this event is a wake-up call to college faculty. If people get the message, let’s hope that it hasn’t come too late.

Jonathan Cohen, Professor of Mathematics at DePaul University, at 8:55 am EST on January 24, 2008

Hopeless Academic Administrators

I share Jonathan Cohen’s outrage and amazement at this perverse travesty of campus due process, common sense, and freedom of speech.

Provost Marty Krauss and Director of Employment Jesse Simone of Brandeis are the two key administrators who showed an utter lack of discernment and interest in the law.

Perhaps, the most depressing thing about this huge embarrassment to Brandeis is the near absence of any intervention by the administration, thus re-affirming that academic bureaucrats are very often the ones who are the ones to sanction, encourage and rationalize the continuing assault on freedom of speech.

I hope the alumni are stirred to action.

Shawna, at 9:50 am EST on January 24, 2008

The bad sign is that the “offensive” words are quoted without context. Free speech in university differs from the free speech on the street in that in a university it should be intelligent, interesting, thought-provoking, original. One can be fired for poor language, for lack of intelligence and thought, not for the words used.

Michael Pyshnov, at 10:20 am EST on January 24, 2008

“At issue is ... ensuring students’ willingness to come forward with allegations of harassment?”

He uttered a heretical term? Spies recruited in classrooms? Mandatory attitude adjustment training? Living in fear of livelihoods taken away for undisclosed offenses?

A few years ago, these were seen as the stereotypical actions of fanatical governments run by despots. Claiming this is for the good of the students sounds like a leaflet right out of one of their propaganda ministries. Sounds like a product of a shifting job market: “Seeking small island nation to control, but will consider similar work at an institution of higher education.""Your actions are noticed, Zhivago.”

Prof Ed, at 10:25 am EST on January 24, 2008

Botched policy and procedure

Clearly, the violation of standardized procedures has yielded this conflict. Is this the first time the professor was warned about his word usage?

To boot, anecdotal evidence is no evidence at all.

That being said, in this day and age when Hispanics face enormous amounts of discrimination as part of the immigration “discussion” (I use the term loosely), I can completely understand their sensitivity.

I also wonder if those offended were native English speakers. Was the prof merely being glib or repeating some other racial remark just for effect (like to demonstrate the ignorance of such things)? If so, non-native speakers especially would not understand the context. (As a matter of fact, neither would many native speakers who didn’t bother to look beyond the terminology.)

Finally, is there any history of grading discrimination? If the prof is a bigot, we probably would see that. We would also see it in student evaluations. Does he avoid helping international students or student of particular ethnic backgrounds? If there documentation and a pattern, then there might be some evidence that this guy is completely out of line. Otherwise, he could just be too loose-tongued, which hopefully can be corrected via a documented discussion and a sincere apology.

kgotthardt, at 10:35 am EST on January 24, 2008

First...

First they came for the capitalists, but I didn’t worry because I was a socialist.

Then they created racial/gender ’support centers’ for minorities, but I supported that because I like diversity.

Then they systematically shut down conservative or non-left-leaning groups, and I applauded because I am not conservative.

Then they started scrutinizing whatever is said that could possibly be misconstrued as offensive to religion/gender/race by even one person and I [censored by the administration]

Assistant Professor, at 11:15 am EST on January 24, 2008

Administrators and Senates

Perhaps the most disturbing feature here is the Provost’s failure to follow procedures laid down in the University’s governance handbooks. Her failure in this case is almost guaranteed to create bad faculty-administration relations for years. If there _is_ a conflict between Brandeis’ faculty disciplinary procedures and its non-discrimination procedures, there should have been consultation before taking action. At the least, she should ask the Senate to work on such issues or appoint a committee with representation from the various interested parties to work on the problems. Faculty (and student and staff) rights need to be respected with due process.

phred, at 11:15 am EST on January 24, 2008

Offensive language

I was involved in a very similar case at the University of Illinois-Urbana that eventually had two trials in federal court. There may be another angle here, as there was in the Illinois case: pushing a long-time professor into retirement. I’ve also heard of similar cases though cannot recall the details. That is, you have a professor who has taught forever, has no plans for retirement and the university wants to get rid of him or her. It is hoped that an incident of this type, and the possibility of a ruined reputation plus all the legal bills, will finally do the trick.

Bob Weissberg, Professor Emeritus, at 11:20 am EST on January 24, 2008

No class dialogue?

It seems odd to me that any such complaint about a professor’s use of language or perceived inappropriateness of any kind by a student should not first have been aired in the classroom or, at least, in private discussions with the professor. Any complaint about a professor—grading, “attitude,” whatever—should only be made *after* the complaining student has exhausted the normal routes of communication with the professor. There is a reprehensible flaw in any grievance procedure that does not begin with an interrogation of the complaining student on that point: “Did you object in the classroom? Did you bring up your concern privately with the professor? Etc.” To be sure, the complaining student might respond with reasons why he/she felt or knew that such communication was not possible or prudent, in which case a communication to the professor (protecting the complaining student’s identity, if necessary) should be the next step.

If a student can’t take these steps with the professor—preferably in the classroom, but at least in private—then that’s either the professor’s fault or the student’s. If the former, then that’s where corrective discipline should be directed (like, training on providing open and free student expression, consistent with classroom discipline etc.). Same for the student: If he/she hasn’t spoken up publicly or privately, defended his/her complaint against the professor’s response, and then been unfairly or unreasonably disregarded, then the student needs to go to “training” on what education and academic give and take are all about.

Rod Bell, at 11:45 am EST on January 24, 2008

Proportionality, anyone?

The Brandeis administration could have simply asked Professor Hindley not to use terms that some students might dislike. But no — it insists on monitoring his classes and orders that he go to a re-education camp where he will be subjected to “anti-discrimination training.”

Like many other recent events in academe, we see here an administration with no sense of proportionality. Let members of a preferred minority group make any complaint and the administrators go bananas trying to appease them. Evidently, the commitment to diversity that is now obligatory in higher ed means that you never say “no” to those groups.

George Leef, Vice President for Research at Pope Center for Higher Education Policy, at 12:15 pm EST on January 24, 2008

So where’s the faculty union in this dispute? Oh. . . don’t have one?

Philip, at 12:25 pm EST on January 24, 2008

Brandeis and Derogatory Language

Why didn’t the offended student or students challenge the prof in class or see him after class in the hall or in his office and say, “Just what did you mean by that, Sir!?” I’ll bet an explanation or, if necessary, an apology would have been immediately forthcoming. And that would have been the end of that. Instead, we have anonymous accusations followed by administration actions that were not an inquiry but an inquisition. And a long serving, well-respected professor is subject to abuse. People ought to be ashamed.

Dr. Mario D. Mazzarella, at 12:45 pm EST on January 24, 2008

What’s in the closet

As we really aren’t privy to all the facets involved in this story, the ultimate strategy in play by the administrative arm of this school is unknown. The presumption of “guilty until proven innocent” appears to be the method however. When issues involving academic freedom come up, often the root of the matter involves “other issues” and “Academic Freedom” and/or “political expediency” are the tools of choice in a power play. Did Donald Hindley use Academic freedom responsibly or as Carte Blanc for some unknown agenda is the focus. Which arm if any, is using Academic freedom as a hammer on the other(s) is the real question … the administration, the professor, or the accuser(s).

No Matter! Academic freedom is eroding and will disappear from sight if shell games continue. In any event, any item(s) involved in any investigation should be above board and on the table. When the facts or allegations are sequestered, freedom is the loser!

Bill, at 12:55 pm EST on January 24, 2008

Mathematics

The Faculty Senate should do to the Provost what she did to this professor — censure her and recommend a vote of no confidence immediately. Do this for the sake of the university

John Awunganyi, Mr at Middle College High School, at 2:55 pm EST on January 24, 2008

‘Harassment vs. Academic Freedom, Round Two’

While this could be considered as an intrusion into academic freedom, I see it as an overzelous Provost and political correctness running amuck.

HJ, at 3:05 pm EST on January 24, 2008

Cultural History?

This gives me pause because I teach nearly every semester the cultural history of such racial (and sexist and heterosexist and ethnocentric) epithets and their social function and their social effect. It sounds to me like this is a case of a student who couldn’t (or wouldn’t) make the distinction between “using an epithet” and “teaching about the history of an epithet,” followed by an equally ignorant administration meddling and enabling the idiocy.

This also grates on me the wrong way because (and I realize this is more complicated with the power relationship between professor and student) giving offense should never be justification for stifling speech.

J. Todd Ormsbee, San Jose State University, at 6:45 pm EST on January 24, 2008

Not the Brandeis I knew

Like Jonathan Cohen, I graduated from Brandeis a long time ago (1962 in my case), and I very strongly second his observation that not only the faculty, but the students of my day would not have tolerated this kind of administrator over-reaching. We would have shut down the school if necessary, and we would have been right. A disgrace, and blame must be placed on those to whom Ms. Krauss reports — the President and Provost.

Martin Wiener, Professor of History at Rice University, at 6:45 pm EST on January 24, 2008

meet the new laughingstock

Who would go to this school now? Knowing that the place is run by cowardly self-important bureaucrats who couldn’t care less about those ivory tower high minded ideals like “academic integrity” and “free speech.”

I’m just stunned that their PR department didn’t stop them. Or their lawyers. Or their alumni. Or their student body. Or the grounds crew, janitors, or just any random passers-by.

This just seems like such an epically bad idea, a universally bone-headed play, that I am dumbfounded every time I read about it.

In closing. This is an abject and total fail.

/facepalm//shakes head

Andrew, at 7:40 pm EST on January 24, 2008

Under the thinning veil of “Truth, even unto its innermost parts", Brandeis has a particular life/world-view with which it intends to inoculate its students; professors who are “very good” at inoculating students with views which challenge the desired views are liable to be ousted by whatever legal (and if necessary, deceptive) means are available, usually as long as they don’t result in too much negative press.

This is certainly not unique to Brandeis.

“Academic freedom” tends to be allowed only when it supports the cause, or doesn’t significantly hurt the cause; the latter is necessary to lessen obviousness of the former.

I applaud and support the professor in his struggle against persecution and his leadership on the path towards truth.

~ Brandeis alumnus, ‘84

Bobby Gordon, at 4:35 am EST on January 25, 2008

It becomes more and more obvious that by restricting the use of certain words, we are making those words more powerful, not less. Why can’t we get to the point where we realize that if I use the N word it reflects badly on me, but has no power over the blacks in my presence because I am not a slaveholder or Bull Connor?

Mike S, at 10:15 am EST on January 25, 2008

“Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”

Justice Louis Brandeis, U.S. Supreme Court (dissenting opinion) Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479, 72 L.Ed. 944, 957, 48 S.Ct. 564, 66 ALR 376 (1928)

Steve Kaiser, at 10:25 am EST on January 25, 2008

Don’t we go too far in dignifying the conflict here by claiming it is a conflict between academic freedom and anti-harassment policies? In this case, isn’t the most disturbing aspect the inability of a university provost to understand the truth of what occurred? A professor cited derogatory terms in a class on racial politics. He did not endorse them. Perhaps he used them sarcastically, giving rise to some confusion. But what should bother all of us is that a university administrator is unable to tell the difference between speaking words for educational purposes and meaning them to hurt. The student who complained isn’t even being helped here; he or she is sadly in need of some guidance in how to understand the spoken word and the ideas encapsulated within, and is instead being treated as sovereign in his or her incomprehension.

John Walson, at 1:15 pm EST on January 25, 2008

Admittedly I listened to Michael Savage tonight but this does sound to me like a broader conspiracy by extreme left to silence any “inappropriate” or politically incorrect speech and certainly the reporting students had this planned with the provost in advance. It is ironic that this is happening on a college campus and a Jewish one at that.

Barbara Latham, at 7:35 am EST on January 26, 2008

Jobs Related to Harassment vs. Academic Freedom, Round Two

or search for jobs directly.

Assistant Director
University of Michigan

Faculty/TA Development Position: CRLT Assistant Director see job

Vice President for Academic Affairs
Graceland University

Graceland is recognized as one of the Outstanding Master’s Level Universities in the Midwest by Princeton Review. see job

Vice President, Student Success (Chief Student Services Officer)
Lone Star College System

Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job

Vice Chancellor for Student Success and Enrollment Management
University of Colorado

Posting Description: The University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (UCCS) invites candidates for the key ... see job

Assistant/Associate Provost for the Arts
Yale University

General Purpose
Note: Review of applications will begin on 01/31/2009. This position is a three-year, renewable ... see job

Vice President for External Affairs
Huntingdon College — AL

Huntingdon College, a coeducational, baccalaureate liberal arts college of the United Methodist Church, located in ... see job

Assistant Director of Multicultural Affairs
Western Carolina University

Western Carolina University, a constituent institution of the University of North Carolina, announces its search for the new ... see job

Vice President for Enrollment Management
Fairmont State University/Pierpont Community and Technical College

Fairmont State University and Pierpont Community & Technical College, with a 120-acre main campus in Fairmont, WV, is part of ... see job

Associate Provost — 7TWUP01
Texas Woman’s University

Texas Woman’s University — Denton Campus Department: Provost Title: Associate Provost Job Code: 7TWUP01 Date Closed: Open ... see job

Vice President for Enrollment Management and Student Success
Fashion Institute of Technology

FIT Where Creativity Gets Down to Business see job