June 15, 2008

AAUP Weighs In on Hot-Button Academic Issues

Washington — At its annual meeting here, the American Association of University Professors passed four resolutions on Saturday that deal with hot-button issues in academic labor, campus safety, the curriculum, and international relations.

One resolution calls on universities not to automatically terminate or decline to appoint professors who refuse to sign a “loyalty oath.” The AAUP’s action followed a controversy at California State University at Fullerton, which fired Wendy Gonaver, a lecturer in American studies, because she had refused to sign an oath required of all state employees. An agreement was subsequently reached to reinstate Ms. Gonaver.

Another measure responds to recent legislative efforts in more than a dozen states that would have allowed people to carry concealed weapons on campuses and urges state legislatures not to pass such laws. In 2004, Utah’s state legislature barred colleges from restricting the carrying of concealed guns on the state’s campuses. The AAUP resolution says that colleges “regard the presence of weapons as incompatible with their educational missions.” The only people who should be allowed to have guns on campuses, it says, are campus security and police officers.

Intelligent design and other permutations of creationist thought are the focus of a third resolution. The association urged legislatures not to pass laws that determine what kinds of theories and ideas can be taught in science classes. The resolution says that several states, including Alabama, Florida, and Louisiana, have recently taken up proposals that would allow science teachers to critique “prevailing scientific theories.” Those proposals, said the AAUP, are veiled attempts to allow the teaching of creationism.

The fourth successful resolution urges the government of Iran to “remove barriers that deny access to higher education on religious or ethnic grounds.” In particular, the AAUP wants to ensure that Iran does not keep members of the Baha’i religious community “out of universities.”

A proposed resolution on the Middle East proved too controversial for a majority of members to approve and was sent back to an AAUP committee for reconsideration. That proposal urged the government of Israel to grant exit visas to residents of the Gaza Strip who want to study abroad. —Robin Wilson

Comments

1. So why should it be controversial to urge <<the government of Israel to grant exit visas to residents of the Gaza Strip who want to study abroad.>>?

   — jon    Jun 15, 07:15 PM    #

2. Such a strong-willed group and obvious believers in the notion of academic freedom. Display the steadfastness of your convictions by resolving to approach the government of Iran to change its policies and/or directions, then allow your bluster to expose itself as just that by deeming a resolution to approach the government of Israel to move in a similar direction too controversial. Incredible group of hypocritical milquetoasts. Shame on you.

   — Bob    Jun 16, 08:23 AM    #

3. By proposing a resolution forbiding that scientific theories be scientifically critiqued in classrooms AAUP has lost its scientific reason for existence and has become instead a dogmatic instituion.

   — Enezio E. de Almeida Filho    Jun 16, 08:43 AM    #

4. What is the AAUP even doing wasting time considering resolutions that are clearing out of its realm of influence? I don’t really think Iran will even hear about the resolution much less care.

   — D    Jun 16, 09:59 AM    #

5. During my academic career spanning more than four decades, the AAUP has been about as effective as the UN.

   — Gary Brooks    Jun 16, 10:32 AM    #

6. Like many forms of academic governance, AAUP members have relatively few teaching responsibilities and/or research obligations, so the membership self-selects, with predictable results.

   — J    Jun 16, 12:57 PM    #

7. The message of most posts above is almost beyond belief. Academe would be much the poorer and academic freedom virtually non-exisstent without AAUP. All the resolutions are on the mark. I just wish the Gaza exit visa one had passed.

   — Dave    Jun 16, 01:18 PM    #

8. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. Science is Caesar’s. Creationists, please heed your savior’s admonition.

   — original marci    Jun 16, 01:59 PM    #

9. #3: “Creationism” or “Intelligent Design” do not critique scientific theories scientifically. That’s the whole point of the religionists who want to drum the theory of evolution (why not the theory of gravity, or the theory of general relativity, too?) out of the classroom because it doesn’t jibe with their faith.

   Here’s a counterproposal: Nobody in a state, e.g., Louisiana, with a “teach the controversy” law concerning evolution can be convicted of a crime on the basis of DNA evidence.

   — Just Passing Through    Jun 16, 02:37 PM    #

10. The AAUP should focus on the increasing use of adjuncts, the erosion of tenure, and academic freedom. While the above resolutions are idealistic, the focus of the organization should be on target with its primary mission. Why is the AAUP straying so far afield? Get back on track; the rest of us need a strong AAUP to represent us.

    — Mary    Jun 16, 03:16 PM    #

11. OK, Bobbi. It was never my intent to be tedious, but I do not want to bore you and others like you. I will do what you wish. I will never post another thing to the Chronicle message boards. To all my fans, good bye.

    — original marci    Jun 16, 03:23 PM    #

12. To Greg: I actually spent all day Thursday on Capital Hill speaking to Congresssional staff members about solutions to the higher costs of education. Just because something is not mentioned in a Chronicle article — doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. The AAUP is very worried about affordability of higher education and almost 100 members spent their own time trying to do something about it (with support from AAUP national and state offices).

    To J: I was at the national meeting. I teach 7 courses/year and have the same research expectations as every other member of my college faculty. The other AAUP members at the conference came from a wide variety of colleges and universities — each with different teaching loads and research expectations.

    It’s extraordinarily useful, before making blog comments, to actually do some research to verify your assertions.

    Not even one of the comments above is substantiated with even a single piece of data. :-(

    Sincerely,
    Saranna Thornton
    Prorfessor of Economics (and AAUP member)

    — Saranna Thornton    Jun 16, 03:48 PM    #

13. I am glad that the national AAUP is doing something better than what AAUP memmbers at ASU are doing. We have jokingly said that AAUP stands of Association of Arrogant and Unproductive Professors because they are nothing but big bullys, have no scholarly activities, most of them are not even good teachers, but politically very strong. That’s why I have been a faculty for almost 30 yrs. but never joined the organization.

    — Sam    Jun 16, 04:10 PM    #

14. I, like Saranna, was at the meeting and also spent Thursday on Capitol Hill lobbying to make a college education more affordable.

    I am also a scientist and spoke out at the plenary session to make it clear the “creation science, “intelligent design,” or whatever you choose to call it cannot be taught in a science class as an alternative to evolution. The reason they cannot be taught in science courses is that they lack a fundamental feature of a SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Any legitimate scientific theory must be testable by experiment and must if the experimental evidence contradicts it be modified or discarded. “Creation Science” by any name fails this test and therefore is not science.

    I suspect that the majority of posters about this message were not at the meeting, and I find that the majority of comments here and elsewhere in response to articles in the Chronicle of Higher Education do not rise to the standards of “civil discourse” let alone academic debate. That is why I rarely read them and even less frequently take the time to respond.

    — Stephen    Jun 16, 04:31 PM    #

15. I am surprised that AAUP has taken up a resolution about creationism. Why shouldn’t alternative views at least be mentioned in classes. I am not suggesting that creationism be taught, but at colleges and universities where we are in the business of exposing students to multiple viewpoints on issues, why would it be wrong to note that there are other beliefs about the origin of the world than that proposed by evolutionists. I think my academic freedom is limited when I can’t mention that everyone does not believe in evolution.

    As for the other resolutions, I think that AAUP should stick to its core issues.

    I have supported the organization and felt it played an important role over the years, but I am beginning to wonder if it has outlived its usefulness.

    — Elizabeth O.    Jun 16, 04:40 PM    #

16. Thanks to Saranna and Stephen for your excellent rejoinders to the nonsense conveyed in most of the postings following this article. Thanks for what AAUP—and you two yourselves—accomplish (obviously with a mimimum of accolades from some colleagues) for all of us in academe.

    And Original Marci, say it ain’t so! I disagree with some of your postings and there are some I don’t understand. But I
    always look for them.

    — Dave    Jun 16, 05:12 PM    #

17. AAUP is an outstanding organization but it needs more teetlh. I am a member for many decades and it has done wonderful things in the State of Georgia’s academic institutions.

    — kvc    Jun 16, 11:31 PM    #

18. #12 and others: The “academic freedom” state laws pertain ONLY to SCIENTIFIC evidence and specifically exclude religious material. Thus, these are not “veiled attempts to introduce creationism”. Rather, they are exactly what they say they are: a means for teachers to balance dogmatic, speculative aspects of any given theory with SCIENTIFIC critiques, without being persecuted by any dogmatists that might be in the administration, etc. This really would help students develop critical thinking skills. If your pet theory can’t handle that, too bad.

    — Chuck    Jun 18, 01:20 PM    #

19. Feyerabend, wherever you are, your book “Against Method” should be sent to all scientists who signed the AAUP petition. Forget about it, your opinion has already been considered “non-sense”.

    — Enezio E. de Almeida Filho    Jun 20, 10:49 AM    #

Previous: American and Canadian Faculty Groups Will Examine Overseas Campus Expansions
Next: Medical College of Georgia Terminates Relationship With Foundation