Class Time Should Be Sacred
by P.D. Lesko
IN THE MARCH 28, 2003 issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education, I read a piece about a part-time faculty member at Citrus College who had been put on administrative leave after, “students said that she had offered them extra credit for writing and sending letters to President Bush that opposed going to war with Iraq.” In addition, students alleged that the instructor also offered extra credit to those who wrote letters to a state senator “about how important adjunct faculty members are to our education.”
According to the piece in The Chronicle, students alleged that the instructor devoted the first 10 minutes of class to her political agenda. The instructor, in a letter released through her attorney, claims that the alleged student complaints are “untrue.” In addition, she noted that she had been put on administrative leave without “a fair investigation,” and without “the protections of due process.”
According to a piece published in the March 31, 2003 edition of Community College Week, Adjunct Faculty United, the professor’s union, vowed to fight Citrus College.
“We do not believe that the instructor was given due process,” said Jean Culp, the union’s co-president. “We think [administrators] acted precipitously, and the union plans to do everything we can to protect the instructor’s due process as well as academic freedom.”
Should the instructor at Citrus, who is accused of having her students write letters to politicians, lose her job?
Recently, an assistant professor of anthropology at Columbia stood in front of a 3,000 person rally and called for the defeat of American forces in Iraq. He said he would like to see “a million Mogadishus”–a reference to the city in Somalia where, in 1993, American soldiers were ambushed and 18 killed. His name and comments ended up in Newsday, The Chronicle of Higher Education, the European Journal of International Law, the New York Post and the topic of more Internet chat groups than I can even count. There’s even a congressman from Arizona who is circulating a petition among his colleagues calling for Columbia to fire the poor sod. Should he be fired, or perhaps put on administrative leave?
One faculty member allegedly expressed her political beliefs to students in the classroom; the other, admittedly, expressed his political beliefs during a teach-in outside of the classroom. In neither instance, was the faculty member teaching a course about politics. They both simply wanted to express their opinions to their students. So what is the difference between their actions? The Columbia assistant professor chose to speak out in a public forum; the part-time faculty member chose to use class time. There is a very important difference between the two venues, and as a result, between the actions of the two faculty members.
The Citrus College faculty member is accused of having used class time and graded assignments to further her political causes. The Columbia faculty member expressed his opinions in a public form–opinions which were then picked up by media sources around the world, and used to give (one might argue) Columbia University a black eye in the process. Officials at Columbia, in turn, defended the faculty member’s right to free speech.
Why didn’t the officials at Citrus College do the same thing? Because the faculty member involved was an adjunct and not a full-timer? Probably. On the other hand, if it turns out that the part-time faculty member at Citrus College used class time to express her political opinions, and offered enticements (extra credit) to students who wrote letters to politicians in order to further her political causes, she breached the contract every teacher makes with their students to put the students first in the classroom. As such, if the students’ allegations against the Citrus College faculty member are found to be true, she should be afforded every modicum of due process but dismissed.
Quite frankly, the Columbia faculty member may also end up out of a job, as well, without enjoying any modicum of due process. I believe the Columbia professor expressed opinions that many find reprehensible, but he did not act unprofessionally. However, his dean, department chair, and colleagues will be slow to forgive and forget the assistant professor’s foray into the limelight. His colleagues will serve on his tenure review committee, and the chances are very good that he’ll never be awarded a job-for-life at Columbia.
There’s a good lesson here for any faculty member who takes up class time with personal stories and opinions unrelated to the course material. There’s also a good lesson about how intolerance can be disguised as patriotism and vice versa.
