Professors Subject To Student Beefs;

PSC Slams CUNY Move
Professors Subject To Student Beefs


The City University's Board of Trustees approved a resolution Jan. 29 that will allow students to file complaints against Professors' classroom conduct, despite the intense objection of the faculty.

BENNO C. SCHMIDT: No cause for alarm. Dozens of Professors testified against the policy at the CUNY Board of Trustees public hearing on Jan. 22, concerned primarily about its infringement on academic freedom and its potentially chilling effect on classroom discussion. Many Professors also noted that untenured faculty could be hit hardest by the policy. The Professional Staff Congress and the University Faculty Senate both opposed the resolution.

Response to Disrespect

A number of administrators and students testified in favor of the policy, saying that it would bring clarity to a currently chaotic system. Board members said the new policy was needed for the handful of cases each year in which students are disrespected and treated unfairly in academic settings by CUNY professors.

"This policy opens the door to politicizing the classroom and infringes on the core concept of academic freedom," said PSC President Barbara Bowen in a phone interview Jan. 25. "The students spoke eloquently about genuine concerns, but this is not the way to address them."

"NOT THE WAY TO ADDRESS GRIEVANCES': Professional Staff Congress President Barbara Bowen contends the City University of New York's desire to give students redress against Professors who try to impose their political views will 'infringe on the core concept of academic freedom.' CUNY officials said that bringing uniformity to the system would benefit both students and faculty. "This policy will clarify the process," said Board Chairman Benno C. Schmidt Jr. "Academic freedom will remain protected."

Currently, each campus has its own procedures to address a variety of student complaints, from harassment to discrimination. The new policy will be university-wide and specifically addresses unprofessional or abusive behavior by a Professor inside a classroom.

Seek Informal Remedy

The process will encourage students to first pursue an informal resolution to the problem. If a student is not satisfied, she or he can file a formal written complaint with the chair of the department, who will act as the fact-finder for the process and make a recommendation.

Either party can appeal the results to a panel composed of the chief student affairs officer, two faculty members and one student. If found guilty, the faculty member could have a report placed in his or her folder or the school president could decide to bring formal disciplinary charges.

Several faculty members said that the department chair should not be the only fact-finder, to shield both students and faculty from bias. They also said that the appeals panel should be made up of a majority of faculty members so that the Professor on trial could be judged by a panel of peers.

University officials said that there was not a specific incident that led to the new policy. "The Vice Chancellor had been made aware of a handful of incidents," said CUNY spokesman Michael Arena. "This was an effort to address the problem in a way that would bring clarity to the process."

One Ornery Professor

Students who testified said that they wanted a policy so that they would know where to go if they encountered a problem.

Carlos Cruz, who spent six years in the Army and is now taking classes at Bronx Community College, said that 15 out of 36 registered students had dropped out of one of his classes because of the Professor.

"I'd rather have a drill sergeant than the woman teaching my class," Mr. Cruz testified at the hearing. "I don't know if this is the best way, but something needs to be done."

The United Student Senate endorsed the policy. "The student voice should be counted; it is a question of equal rights," said Ashis Gupta, president of student government at LaGuardia Community College and USS vice-chair. "It is not against the faculty. The faculty is like our second parents because they give us knowledge."

But faculty members said regardless of students' intentions, the policy as written will damage vibrant academic debate.

'A Chilling Effect'

"This will have a chilling effect on faculty who do not have job security," said Susan O'Malley, a tenured Professor at Kingsborough Community College. "It will change my idea of a classroom as a safe space, curtail class discussion and thus have a negative impact on student learning."

Much of the concern comes from what PSC members say is a political context rife with attacks on academic freedom. "In the last decade," said Ms. Bowen in her testimony, "a number of ultra-conservative groups have emerged that openly call on students to monitor faculty's political views in the classroom."

Indeed, one of those groups, Campus Watch, features a quote from a Queens College student on the "Keep Us Informed" page of its national Web site. It reads: "[One Professor] suggested that I take classes in the political science department to 'open my mind' - in other words, to change my views ... No thanks."

Other colleges, such as New York University, have decided not to write specific policies to address faculty conduct inside the classroom, preferring instead a broad complaint policy to deal with any problems.

Columbia University, which was the focus of many complaints from Campus Watch and its student affiliate Students for Academic Freedom (SAF), dealt with a massive debate about its Middle Eastern studies department two years ago.

Baiting for Lefties?

The university asked each college to submit its policies for review by the Provost's office, based on the recommendations of an ad hoc committee set up to review the complaints. The university also placed all of its policies about student complaint procedures on one Web site to make it easier for students to obtain information, but stopped short of creating a university-wide policy.

Sara Dogan, SAF's national campus director, said that her group supported policies like CUNY's. SAF pushed for legislative hearings in Pennsylvania recently that led to the adoption of similar policies at Pennsylvania State University and Temple University. She said SAF is active at Brooklyn College, but the students had not been part of crafting the new policy.

Ms. Dogan says SAF is non-partisan but that most of the complaints she hears are from politically conservative students who are having problems in the classroom with politically liberal professors.

"The vast majority of Professors are left-wingers," said Ms. Dogan. "I think it can be very difficult to be a conservative student right now, depending on what you're trying to major in."

A Growing Trend

Jonathan Knight, the director of academic freedom and tenure for the American Association of University Professors, said that his group was aware of about two dozen state legislatures where there were efforts to monitor the political tone of college classrooms.

He said that often the concern over "what is taught in the classroom and who is hired giving respect to political diversity, is being translated into the idea that the faculty is too liberal. We think that entire thrust raises very serious problems for academic freedom."

CUNY officials said that its new policy was not connected to SAF's efforts and that it would in fact promote freedom of discussion. "The proposed policy underscores the importance of academic freedom," said Mr. Arena.

PSC's Doubts

The resolution's appendix reads: "The University respects the academic freedom of the faculty and will not interfere with the exercise of appropriate discretion concerning content of style of teaching activities. Indeed, academic freedom is and should be of paramount importance."

Ms. Bowen said that faculty members are concerned that the political context in which the policy will be carried out will overcome even the best intentions about preserving academic freedom.

"We're not adverse to having policies on individual campuses," she said. "It's the sudden appearance of an open-ended procedure that has caused concern. We could imagine a good policy, but this isn't a good policy."