Action Shows Lack of Confidence in Faculty · 07 August 2005
Action Shows Lack of Confidence in Faculty
Centre Daily Times--08/08/05
The state House recently established a committee to investigate the alleged lack of "academic freedom" at Pennsylvania's public universities. Its chief sponsor, Lancaster County Republican Gibson Armstrong, asserts "there is national trend toward indoctrination, rather than education" at U.S. universities. He wants to investigate "academic freedom" in the classroom and look at hiring, promotion and grading practices.
Here is one 33-year veteran Penn State faculty member's reaction to the investigation.
I was disappointed to learn that Rep. Kerry Benninghoff, R-College Township, not only supported the resolution, but co-sponsored it. Reps. Mike Hanna, D-Lock Haven, and Lynn Herman, R-Philipsburg, voted against it, and Herman, in particular, deserves praise for voting no when nearly all his fellow Republicans supported it.
As Benninghoff surely knows, even members of the state General Assembly sometimes misbehave, and the same is true of employees of universities. That is why both institutions established procedures to deal with unprofessional conduct.
But supporters of this investigation evidently lack confidence that university faculty behave professionally or that its administrators apply existing procedures to address allegations of faculty classroom misconduct.
Co-sponsoring the resolution is a strange way for Benninghoff to demonstrate his understanding of how the university works or how his constituents working at Penn State do their jobs.
Gibson's campaign to put politicians in charge of determining how universities operate is not a response to spontaneous complaints from students. It is part of an orchestrated nationwide campaign by Students for Academic Freedom.
This group, headed by 1960s left-wing radical now turned right-wing radical conservative David Horowitz, has inspired similar resolutions in at least 18 other states. Indeed, much of the language of Gibson's resolution is taken from Horowitz's Academic Bill of Rights.
This coordinated campaign alleges its concern only is for "diversity" of thought and "academic freedom" for students. However, the radical right-wing agenda behind it is obvious.
Every example of alleged ideological indoctrination and faculty misconduct on the Students for Academic Freedom Web site's Second Year Achievement Report alleges bias by a "liberal" professor against a conservative viewpoint.
Claiming this movement is about "academic freedom" is legislative doublespeak.
Gibson claims his legislation is based on 50 complaints from students around the state.
Anyone who takes at face value the allegations and complaints of classroom indoctrination and intimidation (many likely from ideologically motivated and/or disgruntled students) hasn't spent much time teaching. Nor do these politicians give adequate credit for students' ability to think for themselves and not blindly accept everything faculty members say.
For an example of partisan politicians seeking to increase big government's intrusion into places where it has no business, look no further.
To assess grading fairness, will our politicians-turned-investigators require faculty to turn over all papers, exams, quizzes and comments so they can grade students?
To avoid offending students by presenting views they are uncomfortable with, I would not be able to invite Benninghoff to class for fear that liberal students would charge me with providing a forum for conservative indoctrination.
Socialist students could complain about economics professors who don't give equal time to the operation of socialist economies.
Militant atheists would have lots to complain about in religious studies classes that talk about beliefs in God.
The arrogance of partisan politicians who believe they know how critical thinking should be taught, that they should review what faculty say in class or that they can ascertain when "indoctrination" or bias occurs, truly boggles the mind.
As these folks attempt to use investigation and intimidation to impose a new conservative political correctness on higher education, they risk doing great harm to the finest system of higher education in the world.
James Eisenstein is professor emeritus of political science at Penn State. His opinion does not necessarily reflect that of the university.
Read SAF response.
—
