Sorry. . .

Here's the text of the article:


MARION -- Ohio Sen. Larry Mumper, R-Marion, is issuing a plea to fellow legislators to demand equality on college campuses.

The equality he is demanding is not one of race or gender. He is proposing a bill that he said would "open up debate" by prohibiting political bias at institutions of higher learning.

While not detailed in his bill, Mumper believes that bias currently exists and is leaning a bit too far towards the liberal left. The bill, similar to ones introduced in other state legislatures, is likely to spur controversy and already has an Ohio State University at Marion professor asking Mumper to offer up some proof.

Mumper is co-sponsor of Senate Bill 24, which if passed would establish an academic bill of rights for higher education. Among other actions, the bill would:

# Prohibit "political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination" by instructors;

# Ban them from "persistently introducing controversial matter" not related to their subject of study;

# Require institutions to offer a broad range of opinions and viewpoints;

# And ban professors from discriminating against students based on their beliefs.

Mumper said he has been concerned about political bias on campuses for quite a few years and has heard horror stories from students who fear retribution if they express contrary views. He said his bill would prevent higher education from leaning too far in either direction.

"It opens up debate," he said. "It allows students to question theories, participate in classes without fear professors will grade them down."

His bill closely resembles conservative activist David Horowitz's proposed

Academic Bill of Rights, also being pushed in other states including Indiana. Horowitz, in a column in FrontPage magazine.com, speaks out against what he calls a "blacklist of conservatives on American college campuses, their marginalization in undergraduate life and their virtual exclusion from liberal arts faculties."

Mumper, in an interview with The Columbus Dispatch, said he believes many professors undermine students' values because "80 percent or so of them are Democrats, liberals or socialists or card-carrying Communists" out to indoctrinate students. He said Friday that those exact words were meant in jest but said he does believe the wide majority are liberal.

He said he also believes a majority of invited speakers lean towards the left, but insists he isn't trying to turn the balance too far to the right either.

"I think it should be a situation where they should hear both sides," he said. "I just want things to be fair and open."

Efforts by states to push the Academic Bill of Rights has drawn criticism from the American Association of University Professors. Member Graham Larkin, a Stanford University professor, said in an AAUP column that such monitoring would "deprive people of fundamental liberties of expression" and any legislation would "lead to an ethical and administrative quagmire."

"Don't believe the double-talk," he wrote. "Mr. Horowitz and the so-called Students for Academic Freedom are enemies of free thought and free speech."

Mumper's bill has generated opposition from Ohio State University, where provost Barbara Snyder called such steps unnecessary and said universities already "support and encourage wide-ranging and robust explorations of the universe of ideas."

She said it also questions the professionalism of academics who have devoted their lives to teaching and to the principles of free expression and an open exchange of ideas.

Ohio State University at Marion Professor Dan Christie, who teaches psychology and peace studies, questioned whether Mumper can provide evidence that students are being indoctrinated.

Considering that conservatives are currently in charge, Christie said students are often familiar with the right side and must be given the left side in order to be given a well-rounded view.

"It's really our responsibility to figure out where our students are and where we have to go to round their views," he said.

Christie invited Mumper to come to the campus and explain his views as well as offer proof. Mumper said he would be willing to do so.

"I have reams and reams of examples," he said.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"this sort of proposal has been discussed in other states, i think Colorado for example. "

---

Yep. It's usually closely tied to "scientific creationism" initiatives at the K-12 level.

However, I will opine that if a law is needed ito "ban professors from discriminating against students based on their beliefs", well, they have a real problem in Ohio.

Wait, I figured out that they had a real problem in Ohio last November...

invictus--the proposals i've seen deal exclusively with higher education. students saying that they are intimidated by their professors political beliefs, or that professors intimidate the students because of the students' political beliefs. that was the issue in colorado.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Egad
"Most institutions (public and private institutions adhering to the tenants of academic freedom) have procedures in place.........."

---

Would USM qualify as one of those institutions adhering to the tenants of academic freedom in the sense of your post?

# Ban them from "persistently introducing controversial matter"

and yet

# Require institutions to offer a broad range of opinions and viewpoints

ok, so I introduce creationism (e.g.) to offer a broad range, but don't I get busted for introducing controversial matter? I wonder how he expects this to work?

in colorado students filed lawsuits against a faculty member. the students were members of the college young republicans. the faculty member also received harrassing email.

The part about "persistently introducing controversial matter" is taken right out of the AAUP red book.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i know of an incident within the last 12-18 months here where an IHL board member contacted the university about an instructor they were concerned was introducing too much inappropriate political comments into the classroom. "

---

Interesting. Can you say anything about the content or the outcome?

don't know about outcome--i believe the instructor was taking shots at the governor. or it may have been during the governor's race and was taking shots at one of the candidates.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"don't know about outcome--i believe the instructor was taking shots at the governor. or it may have been during the governor's race and was taking shots at one of the candidates. "

---

 hopefully w/live ammo; arm yourself comrades, the culture wars will not be metaphorical the next time around

for those interested in the colorado situation, see:  http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36%257E61%257E2654669,00.html?search=filter

As far as I can tell, the percieved problem isn't so much about professors having to watch every word they say in class, it's about some professors acting either for or against students based on those positions. Case in point:

*********
Professor Z at ABC University states in his World History class that he doesn't believe that the Nazi Holocaust was an actual event. Instead, he states that he believes that it was nothing more than Jesiwh propaganda designed to generate sympathy for the Jews and to promote the idea of re-establishing Israel as a nation-state, propaganda subsequently supported and affirmed by the US out of guilt for not helping the Jews more before WWII.

Student R, who is Jewish, raises his hand and, when recgonized, begins to question Professor Z about his views. Professor Z responds by yelling and screaming at him, calling him a "f***ing idiot" for believing all of that "zionist, racist claptrap." Throughout the remainder of the semester, Professor Z takes continued potshots at Student R, often calling him a "zionist sympathizer" and refering to those who agree with him as "enlightened minds.. Student R eventually recieves a D in the course because he refused to write a research paper on the topic from Professor Z's point-of-view. In fact, several students recieved F's on the same paper and, strangely enough, all of them did not adhere to Professor Z's ideas. The one's who did all recieved C's and above.
*********

Sounds outlandish, huh? Unfortunately, it's not. Although most of the details have been omitted, the above incident actually happened. The lawsuit filed against the professor in question (as well as the university) goes to trial within the next 90 days.

While I will grant that this is an extreme example, it is not atypical of some of the things that have been happening in universities across the country. I don't think that there are a majority of professors out there who are involved in this type of thing, but I have been hearing about more and more of these cases as time goes by. Do professors have the right to their own opinions about any and every subject that there is? Absolutely!!! Do they have the right to "impose" those opinions on on their students, or even on thier fellow faculty members? NO!!! Do they have the right to take punative action against those that disagree with them? Absolutely Not!!!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Gnome Watcher
"As far as I can tell, the percieved problem isn't so much about professors having to watch every word they say in class, it's about some professors acting either for or against students based on those positions. Case in point: ********* Professor Z at ABC University states in his World History class that he doesn't believe that the Nazi Holocaust was an actual event. Instead, he states that he believes that it was nothing more than Jesiwh propaganda designed to generate sympathy for the Jews and to promote the idea of re-establishing Israel as a nation-state, propaganda subsequently supported and affirmed by the US out of guilt for not helping the Jews more before WWII. Student R, who is Jewish, raises his hand and, when recgonized, begins to question Professor Z about his views. Professor Z responds by yelling and screaming at him, calling him a "f***ing idiot" for believing all of that "zionist, racist claptrap." Throughout the remainder of the semester, Professor Z takes continued potshots at Student R, often calling him a "zionist sympathizer" and refering to those who agree with him as "enlightened minds.. Student R eventually recieves a D in the course because he refused to write a research paper on the topic from Professor Z's point-of-view. In fact, several students recieved F's on the same paper and, strangely enough, all of them did not adhere to Professor Z's ideas. The one's who did all recieved C's and above. ********* Sounds outlandish, huh? Unfortunately, it's not. Although most of the details have been omitted, the above incident actually happened. The lawsuit filed against the professor in question (as well as the university) goes to trial within the next 90 days. While I will grant that this is an extreme example, it is not atypical of some of the things that have been happening in universities across the country. I don't think that there are a majority of professors out there who are involved in this type of thing, but I have been hearing about more and more of these cases as time goes by. Do professors have the right to their own opinions about any and every subject that there is? Absolutely!!! Do they have the right to "impose" those opinions on on their students, or even on thier fellow faculty members? NO!!! Do they have the right to take punative action against those that disagree with them? Absolutely Not!!!! "

---

Actually your example makes the point: there are already recourses that students have when such incidents occur. This bill isn't designed to fix anything -- it is designed to appeal to a particular political constituency. Most schools have statements on professional ethics and comportment, professional realtionships with students nd peers, and relationships of power and authority that reinforce what the law already has to say (often more ambiguously) about ethical behavior between faculty and students.

Do such professors exist? Of course. Are there vast numbers of them out there --  doubtful. The question needs to be considered if this is another case of the cure being worse than the disease -- and whether the cost of academic freedom in a university is that there are always a few idiots who will abuse it. Students in this day and age actually have far more options where they can take their grievences than when I went to school -- that many do not should not necessarily be interpreted as a sign that they are quaking in their shoes.   

The effect of this bill isn't to liberate students -- it will chill discussion in the classroom - in both directions.

And of course you are hearing more and more about these things as time goes by -- there is a whole highly developed mechanism designed to ferret out every anecdote and incident with the express design of proving that such incidents are not merely aberant or pervasive. The mechaism isn't accidental and it does not have the intent of promoting discourse at all. 

Before you accept that view as valid, look around at your own school -- do you see rampant faculty abuse of classroom privilege? I would bet that you do not -- and I'd also bet that what you see is what prevails in most universites rather than the exception.

 

 

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: LVN
"Invictus, I have to disagree with you this time -- it has nothing to do with creationism. It has to do with the fact that there is a strong leftist bias on many campuses, particularly in the liberal arts. But again, not a matter for the law to deal with."

---

Didn't say there was a causal relationship between this sort of stuff & creationism. It's just that creationism is part of the same ultra-right-wing agenda as is abridgement of freedom of speech.