This is an AP story.


Students Sue Over Academic Freedom

At the University of North Carolina, three incoming freshmen sue over a reading assignment they say offends their Christian beliefs.


In Colorado and Indiana, a national conservative group publicizes student allegations of left-wing bias by professors. Faculty get hate mail and are pictured in mock "wanted" posters; at least one college says a teacher received a death threat.


And at Columbia University in New York, a documentary film alleging that teachers intimidate students who support Israel draws the attention of administrators.

The three episodes differ in important ways, but all touch on an issue of growing prominence on college campuses.

Traditionally, clashes over academic freedom have pitted politicians or administrators against instructors who wanted to express their opinions and teach as they saw fit. But increasingly, it is students who are invoking academic freedom, claiming biased professors are violating their right to a classroom free from indoctrination.

In many ways, the trend echoes past campus conflicts – but turns them around. At one time it was liberal campus activists who cited the importance of "diversity" in pressing their agendas for curriculum change. Now conservatives have adopted much of the same language in calling for a greater openness to their viewpoints.

Similarly, academic freedom guidelines have traditionally been cited to protect left-leaning students from punishment for disagreeing with teachers about such issues as American neutrality before World War II and U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Now those same guidelines are being invoked by conservative students who support the war in Iraq.

To many professors, there's a new and deeply troubling aspect to this latest chapter in the debate over academic freedom: students trying to dictate what they don't want to be taught.

"Even the most contentious or disaffected of students in the '60s or early '70s never really pressed this kind of issue," said Robert O'Neil, former president of the University of Virginia and now director of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression.

Those behind the trend call it an antidote to the overwhelming liberal dominance of university faculties. But many educators, while agreeing that students should never feel bullied, worry that they just want to avoid exposure to ideas that challenge their core beliefs – an essential part of education.

Some also fear teachers will shy away from sensitive topics, or fend off criticism by "balancing" their syllabuses with opposing viewpoints, even if they represent inferior scholarship.

"Faculty retrench. They are less willing to discuss contemporary problems and I think everyone loses out," said Joe Losco, a professor of political science at Ball State University in Indiana who has supported two colleagues targeted for alleged bias. "It puts a chill in the air."

Conservatives say a chill is in order.

A recent study by Santa Clara University researcher Daniel Klein estimated that among social science and humanities faculty members nationwide, Democrats outnumber Republicans by at least 7-to-1; in some fields it's as high as 30-to-1. And in the last election, the two employers whose workers contributed the most to Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign were the University of California system and Harvard University.

Many teachers insist personal politics don't affect teaching. But in a recent survey of students at 50 top schools by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, a group that has argued there is too little intellectual diversity on campuses, 49 percent reported that at least some professors frequently commented on politics in class even if it was outside the subject matter.

Thirty-one percent said they felt there were some courses in which they needed to agree with a professor's political or social views to get a good grade.

Leading the movement is the group Students for Academic Freedom, with chapters on 135 campuses and close ties to David Horowitz, a one-time liberal campus activist turned conservative agitator. The group posts student complaints on its Web site about alleged episodes of grading bias and unbalanced, anti-American propaganda by professors -- often in classes, such as literature, in which it's off-topic.

Instructors "need to make students aware of the spectrum of scholarly opinion," Horowitz said. "You can't get a good education if you're only getting half the story."

Conservatives claim they are discouraged from expressing their views in class, and are even blackballed from graduate school slots and jobs.

"I feel like (faculty) are so disconnected from students that they do these things and they can just get away with them," said Kris Wampler, who recently publicly identified himself as one of the students who sued the University of North Carolina. Now a junior, he objected when all incoming students were assigned to read a book about the Quran before they got to campus.

"A lot of students feel like they're being discriminated against," he said.

So far, his and other efforts are having mixed results. At UNC, the students lost their legal case, but the university no longer uses the word "required" in describing the reading program for incoming students (the plaintiffs' main objection).

In Colorado, conservatives withdrew a legislative proposal for an "academic bill of rights" backed by Horowitz, but only after state universities agreed to adopt its principles.

At Ball State, the school's provost sided with Professor George Wolfe after a student published complaints about Wolfe's peace studies course, but the episode has attracted local attention. Horowitz and backers of the academic bill of rights plan to introduce it in the Indiana legislature -- as well as in up to 20 other states.

At Columbia, anguished debate followed the screening of a film by an advocacy group called The David Project that alleges some faculty violate students' rights by using the classroom as a platform for anti-Israeli political propaganda (one Israeli student claims a professor taunted him by asking, "How many Palestinians did you kill?"). Administrators responded this month by setting up a new committee to investigate students complaints.

In the wider debate, both sides cite the guidelines on academic freedom first set out in 1915 by the American Association of University Professors.

The objecting students emphasize the portion calling on teachers to "set forth justly ... the divergent opinions of other investigators." But many teachers note the guidelines also say instructors need not "hide (their) own opinions under a mountain of equivocal verbiage," and that their job is teaching students "to think for themselves."

Horowitz believes the AAUP, which opposes his bill of rights, and liberals in general are now the establishment and have abandoned their commitment to real diversity and student rights.

But critics say Horowitz is pushing a political agenda, not an academic one.

"It's often phrased in the language of academic freedom. That's what's so strange about it," said Ellen Schrecker, a Yeshiva University historian who has written about academic freedom during the McCarthy area. "What they're saying is, 'We want people to reflect our point of view."'

Horowitz's critics also insist his campaign is getting more attention than it deserves, riling conservative bloggers but attracting little alarm from most students. They insist even most liberal professors give fair grades to conservative students who work hard and support their arguments.

Often, the facts of particular cases are disputed. At Ball State, senior Brett Mock published a detailed account accusing Wolfe of anti-Americanism in a peace studies class and of refusing to tolerate the view that the U.S. invasion of Iraq might have been justified. In a telephone interview, Wolfe vigorously disputed Mock's allegations. He provided copies of a letter of support from other students in the class, and from the provost saying she had found nothing wrong with the course.

Horowitz, who has also criticized Ball State's program, had little sympathy when asked if Wolfe deserved to get hate e-mails from strangers.

"These people are such sissies," he said. "I get hate mail every single day. What can I do about it? It's called the Internet."


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Dec 30, 2004
I'm sorry, I thought college was supposed to be about expanding your mind and all that great stuff. Refusing to read an assignment just because it doesn't jive with your beliefs if just being closed-minded. Nobody's forcing you to ACCEPT what you read-- just to read it. You can form your own opinions (and probably argue them in class), but only AFTER you've actually READ the material. Otherwise, you're just arguing against something you've never even examined-- which doesn't make any sense. And I do think assigning the Quran isn't a bad idea-- Muslims are very misunderstood in our culture, and I can see how young minds could benefit by exploring a culture different from their own. College is about new experiences and expanding your mind, and preparing you for life afterwards-- where you WILL be affected by and surrounded by people of different cultures. Might as well get used to it now.
Lazy college students shouldn't use their religions as excuses not to do work.
on Dec 30, 2004

Reply #17 By: MusiKitty - 12/30/2004 2:42:42 AM
I'm sorry, I thought college was supposed to be about expanding your mind and all that great stuff. Refusing to read an assignment just because it doesn't jive with your beliefs if just being closed-minded. Nobody's forcing you to ACCEPT what you read-- just to read it. You can form your own opinions (and probably argue them in class), but only AFTER you've actually READ the material. Otherwise, you're just arguing against something you've never even examined-- which doesn't make any sense. And I do think assigning the Quran isn't a bad idea-- Muslims are very misunderstood in our culture, and I can see how young minds could benefit by exploring a culture different from their own. College is about new experiences and expanding your mind, and preparing you for life afterwards-- where you WILL be affected by and surrounded by people of different cultures. Might as well get used to it now.
Lazy college students shouldn't use their religions as excuses not to do work.


So if they have family fighting in Iraq, and or that have died during the fighting you would still make them read the Quran? I don't think that would be considered kosher (grin).
What this post is about is that *finally* someone has the guts to say NO we're not going to eat this spoon-fed pablum anymore.
on Dec 30, 2004
How can you possibly object to reading the Qur'an? It's not like it's particularly heavy going. Sure it's flowery, but that just means there are some great pickup lines in there if you can think laterally. And if you don't read it, you can't really claim to be an expert or even educated on the Middle East or any branch of the Muslim faith. It's like refusing to read the Ramayana when studying India, or rejecting Shakespeare and wanting to study English Literature. I think everyone should read the major religious texts, if just to get those great quotable quotes to spout off when challenged. The only defence against bothersome fanatics is knowledge (or some sort of weapon, but I don't think the kiddies should be taught that). And by reading the Qur'an, you'll get a lot of quotables.
on Dec 30, 2004
Reply #19 By: cactoblasta - 12/30/2004 4:46:42 AM
How can you possibly object to reading the Qur'an? It's not like it's particularly heavy going. Sure it's flowery, but that just means there are some great pickup lines in there if you can think laterally. And if you don't read it, you can't really claim to be an expert or even educated on the Middle East or any branch of the Muslim faith


Do any of these children claim to be experts on the middle east? And how can you miss read my original post? I'm not objecting to anything, they are. And that is what I applaud. They didn't wish to read it and had the courage to say "no" to their professors, requardless of the outcome. Trust me, there will be ramifications about this from the school! And just between you and me....personally I will not read it nor do I see any need to.
on Dec 30, 2004
They didn't wish to read it and had the courage to say "no" to their professors, requardless of the outcome.


What in God's name are they doing in college then? The most essential part of a post-school education is expanding your philosophical and mental mind through encountering new ideas and new ways of doing things. If they don't want to have to be challenged by the ideas in a particular book, they can either go to a less responsible university/college or take their chances that the exams won't cover it. As for readings set before term begins... don't they realise that anything covered there will be covered again in the actual courses? It seems more like bloodymindedness than anything else that makes them protest this.

Although of course if they are successful, I shall definitely use their arguments to avoid reading Huntington again, or the schlock of many of the more dull writers. Whether I'm better educated because of it is doubtable.
on Dec 30, 2004
Really? They can actually have their students read religious texts in public schools?
Of course we can, and we do. What we cannot do is tell anyone that one religion or another is the "correct" one.
College or not, the government should not be preaching religion, which it is doing when employees of a public college funded by the government is forcing their students to read religious texts.
I agree with the first half of your statement but disagree with the second half. How can you hope to explain the history of civilization and put today's world in perspective if students do not read the beliefs of the various religions?

Much of the material I use I gather myself, but, ironically, most of the religious texts come right out of our mainstream high school textbook. We spend quite a bit of time contrasting the worldviews of Kafka and Nietzsche to that of scripture.

By the way, we have a student club that has met regularly for years to discuss scripture and pray around the flagpole before school.
on Dec 30, 2004
College or not, the government should not be preaching religion, which it is doing when employees of a public college funded by the government is forcing their students to read religious texts.
on Dec 30, 2004
drmiler--- Yes, I *would* (if I were a professor) force a student whose family member was killed in Iraq to read the Quran, if he/she were in my class. Why wouldn't I? Not all Muslims are terrorists/insurgents, and I believe that any student could benefit by exploring another culture. Why should he/she be exempt from required reading? If I, as a professor, think that my students' minds could be expanded and their understanding of the world be increased by reading the Quran, then I WOULD require it. Just because some terrorists and fundamentalists have used the Quran to justify their killings doesn't mean the Quran itself is a bad book. Think of all the terrible things the Bible has been used to justify (witch trials, the Crusades, slavery). Does that mean the Bible is a bad book? If I thought my students could learn about historical culture, etc. by reading the Bible, then I would assign it, whether my students were Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, or atheist. Reading a book that a culture considers holy doesn't mean you're automatically going to believe it. It's just gaining a better understanding of the culture and religion that DOES accept the book as fact. Sorry, that was a very long and drawn out explanation.
on Dec 31, 2004

Reply #24 By: MusiKitty - 12/30/2004 11:41:56 PM
drmiler--- Yes, I *would* (if I were a professor) force a student whose family member was killed in Iraq to read the Quran


And that my dear would more than likely end up with you in court being sued. I myself would consider that most inconsiderate. As would more than likely the jury.
on Dec 31, 2004
So now we need to take each student on a case-by-case basis and create a custom reading list for each of them based on their family history, religious beliefs and personal philosophies? I'm sorry, that doesn't fly. One of the first lessons everyone needs to learn in college is that you are not a special case anymore, that the harsh world outside of your parents house doesn't give a rats ass who you are or what your family does and will not treat you with kid gloves to avoid hurting your feelings or sensibilities.

Saying someone should be excused from a reading because they had a family member killed in Iraq is like excusing someone from a History of the 20th Century class during the WWII part if their grandfather served and died. Personal tragedy should not be an excuse to remain ignorant. I'm sorry, my ancestors were persecuted by the Roman Catholic church... I have to be excused from any history reading that involves the church because I feel it offensive.

You go to a University or college to learn, to learn things you would not normally be able to or would not be motivated to on your own. I think including the Quran as required reading is a good idea, especially in current times. Walk down a street in any American town or city, randomly ask them some basic Bible trivia, and you'll find most Americans have a basic grasp of it. Now, do the same with Quran trivia... I bet you'll get much different results. Most people are completely and utterly ignorant of the book, and the religion, yet they're ready to condemn it for being evil. It would help things out a lot if more people at least were aware and understood the book and religion on an intellectual level.

On the argument that it's a state school and shouldn't push any religion... then I guess you think any reference to "God" in any pledge or historical document should be removed... afterall it is a religious reference and we can't be making those as a state institution. You don't get it both ways.

Heaven forbid anyone would have to learn anything that doesn't fit neatly into their little image of the world.
on Dec 31, 2004
Reply #26 By: Zoomba - 12/31/2004 3:38:08 AM
Saying someone should be excused from a reading because they had a family member killed in Iraq is like excusing someone from a History of the 20th Century class during the WWII part if their grandfather served and died.


Your analogy stinks! Making them learn something from Nazi Germany or Feudal Japan would be alot closer to being the same.
on Dec 31, 2004
I think what we have here is a fundamental conflict of values, and freedom of religion is only a tangent.

On one hand, we have a traditional view that education should be as broad and deep -- and as widely spread as possible through the population -- as possible. The more people know about the past and the present, our country and the world, the better people live, and the better a democratic society functions. Such people believe in foreign travel, for example, reasoning that one of the best ways to understand your own culture is to see other parts of the world. Such people also believe in reading not only a lot of history but in reading many diverse interpretations of history. At its core, this view trusts that humans have the capacity for great wisdom if only they have the information. Such people invariably refer to this country as democratic and worry a great deal about what that ideal actually entails.

On the other hand, we have an equally old view that the common man is better off without too much knowledge. His mind is all too easily swayed in dangerous and evil directions. Better that he not be exposed to the Quran because the next thing you know he will accept the Muslim religion and become an apologist for Muslim terrorists. Better that he not hear a serious critique of African American culture or the ecology movement because he will become a raging reactionary. When everyday people get a little knowledge, they become dangerous impediments to the experts who really know what is best -- whether in economic or ecological or military or diplomatic matters. Proponents of this view do not attempt a frontal attack on the right of people to read or study; however, they can always be counted on to side with the "less broad knowledge" side in education and the "don't worry about diverse viewpoints" side in the media. They see school as job training, and question the value of learning anything that is not related to making a living. When pressed, such people argue that our country was never intended to be a democracy anyway.

This division is far more important to me than the distinction between liberal and conservative, and it alarms me that I see a swing among both liberals and conservatives towards the second point of view. Whereas liberal/conservative division is mostly momentary, the dispute I outline above is timeless and defines how humans will actually live their lives.

On the issues of this decade I am a liberal, but when I end a year of high school teaching, I do not think to myself: How many students have I persuaded to a liberal point of view? Rather, I think to myself: How many students have I convinced to be curious about the ideas of the world, past and present? How much have I broadened their perspectives and motivated them to go on broadening their perspectives? In my view, such an effort includes a look at the belief systems of the major religions which have so impacted the development of civilization as we know it.

On the national level, and on these forums, there is no end to the clever roadblocks proposed to impede such an effort. "Maybe this will be cruel to someone whose family has suffered at the hands of murderers from another culture?" "Isn't there some law against teaching religion?" "We need to prepare these kids for the world of work."

But here in my school district, things work out much more smoothly. We have fundamentalists and atheists and all kinds of people in between. But in my 30 years of teaching I have never had a single person complain that I am preaching a religion by reading and discussing of popular, philosophical, and sacred texts and discussing the ways that these ideas have formed the world around us.
on Dec 31, 2004
Much of the material I use I gather myself, but, ironically, most of the religious texts come right out of our mainstream high school textbook. We spend quite a bit of time contrasting the worldviews of Kafka and Nietzsche to that of scripture.


I didn't realize that high schools also allowed requiring the reading of religious texts. If that's the case, then I see nothing wrong with colleges doing it too, since it's not being interpreted as a violation of the separation of church and state anywhere else.
on Dec 31, 2004
And that my dear would more than likely end up with you in court being sued. I myself would consider that most inconsiderate. As would more than likely the jury.


Did you even READ my argument, drmiler? You seem to have only read the first line, and then made a snap judgment. I am not going to repeat myself for your sake. If I were a PROFESSOR at a COLLEGE, then I would be paid to TEACH. Not to be "considerate" by which you seem to mean coddling every student who may have a different opinion or outlook. If I think that a certain work would teach my students more about the world around them, then I would ASSIGN IT. I don't care if it's the Quran, the Bible, or freaking Malleus Maleficarum! The students are at school to LEARN. How can you learn if the only things you're taught are the ideas you already accept?!
on Dec 31, 2004

Reply #30 By: MusiKitty - 12/31/2004 6:01:52 PM
And that my dear would more than likely end up with you in court being sued. I myself would consider that most inconsiderate. As would more than likely the jury.


Did you even READ my argument, drmiler? You seem to have only read the first line, and then made a snap judgment. I am not going to repeat myself for your sake. If I were a PROFESSOR at a COLLEGE, then I would be paid to TEACH. Not to be "considerate" by which you seem to mean coddling every student who may have a different opinion or outlook. If I think that a certain work would teach my students more about the world around them, then I would ASSIGN IT. I don't care if it's the Quran, the Bible, or freaking Malleus Maleficarum! The students are at school to LEARN. How can you learn if the only things you're taught are the ideas you already accept?!


YOU obviously did not understand the concept I was trying to convey. In this matter what I personaly think is a moot point. What the judge/jury might think is a different matter entirely. And just an FYI, YES I read your *entire* post. In this day and age as a teacher/professor you must *also* be considerate. Do not be surprised if the students win their case.
3 Pages1 2 3