This situation is fairly reminiscent of Ward Churchill here at EWU.
(q) Harvard University: Harvard rescinded an invitation for a poetry reading to poet Tom Paulin because he was quoted in April 2002 in Al-Ahram Weekly saying about Jewish settlers on the West Bank: “They should be shot dead. I think they are Nazis, racists. I feel nothing but hatred for them.” In a 2001 poem, Paulin referred to the Israeli army as "the Zionist SS." He also said, "I never believed that Israel had the right to exist at all." Paulin declared, "My quoted remarks completely misrepresent my real views. For that, I apologise."
After consulting with Harvard president Lawrence Summers (who on Sept. 17, 2002 had denounced anyone urging divestment from Israel as “anti-Semitic in their effect if not their intent”), the English department and Paulin mutually agreed to cancel the Dec. 14, 2002 lecture, to which Summers proclaimed, “I believe the department has come to the appropriate decision."
Harvard Law School professors Charles Fried, Alan Dershowitz, and Laurence Tribe wrote a letter declaring, “What is truly dangerous is the precedent of withdrawing an invitation because a speaker would cause, in the words of English department chair Lawrence Buell, 'consternation and divisiveness.'” Harvard’s English department voted on Nov. 19, 2002 to reinstate the poetry reading.
(Harvard Crimson, Nov. 13, 2002; Boston Globe, Nov. 18, 2002; New York Times, Nov. 21, 2002; Nov. 23, 2002; Guardian, Nov. 22, 2002; New Yorker, Jan. 27, 2003; Chronicle of Higher Education, Nov. 21, 2002)
COMMENT: Although urging death upon certain people in foreign countries is deplorable, it is neither unusual nor illegal. Should a speaker be banned for having urging the death of Saddam Hussein?
http://collegefreedom.org/03speak.htm
Wednesday, August 1, 2007
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
quotes from People of free speech
Last time I was down South I walked into this restaurant and this white waitress came up to me and said, "We don't serve colored people here." I said, "That's all right. I don't eat colored people. Bring me a whole fried chicken."
Then these three white boys came up to me and said, "Boy, we're givin' you fair warnin'. Anything you do to that chicken, we're gonna do to you." So I put down my knife and fork, I picked up that chicken and I kissed it. Then I said, "Line up, boys!"
Dick Gregory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Gregory
Then these three white boys came up to me and said, "Boy, we're givin' you fair warnin'. Anything you do to that chicken, we're gonna do to you." So I put down my knife and fork, I picked up that chicken and I kissed it. Then I said, "Line up, boys!"
Dick Gregory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Gregory
Thursday, June 21, 2007
A filming possibility
I have currently discussed working with the Morningstar Boys Ranch to do a film project that will be entered into a national campaign to Congress to convice them to make changes to the current foster care systems across the nation. The title of this campaign is called "Kids are Waiting my Story." I mention this because I think this idea could also be a theme for one of our difficult dialogues.
This film project would interview a group of student and would create a story of their coming to EWU. What was their community like? What was socially challenging for them in their environment? Who encouraged them? Who or what helped them to become a college student? We want this to be a story of our climate. We would find a way to travel to thier hometown (out of state can be a challenge) and be introduced to the elements of their development. We could title it something like, "The Stories We Tell: Life as an EWU student/Faculty etc.."
This film project would interview a group of student and would create a story of their coming to EWU. What was their community like? What was socially challenging for them in their environment? Who encouraged them? Who or what helped them to become a college student? We want this to be a story of our climate. We would find a way to travel to thier hometown (out of state can be a challenge) and be introduced to the elements of their development. We could title it something like, "The Stories We Tell: Life as an EWU student/Faculty etc.."
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Thoughts on a Difficult Dialogues Film Project
I was impressed by the interviews Romeal Watson did on camera of various local citizens, asking them what equality meant to them. Talking to Romeal today we agreed that some kind of film project would be a useful ingredient in the project, leaving a permanent archive, possibly for classroom use.... The challenge(s) will be to find good questions, settings, and interviewees.
Monday, June 18, 2007
NYT Articles on Academic Freedom
A helpful source for current information on academic freedom is www.nyt.com. I recommend a search on "academic freedom."
An example of a recent story is: "Students' Right to Free Speech--March 20, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70A10FC3C540C738EDDAA0894DF404482&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fA%2fAcademic%20Freedom
Note: You need to be a NYT Select subscriber to access the article. You can access this for free by attaining a membership number from the ASEWU office, PUB 303.
An example of a recent story is: "Students' Right to Free Speech--March 20, 2007
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F70A10FC3C540C738EDDAA0894DF404482&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fSubjects%2fA%2fAcademic%20Freedom
Note: You need to be a NYT Select subscriber to access the article. You can access this for free by attaining a membership number from the ASEWU office, PUB 303.
Thoughts on an Academic Freedom Reader
One facet of the Eastern Washington University difficult dialogues project is to create an Academic Freedom Reader. Here are some preliminary thoughts on the content of the reader.
Academic Freedom Reader – Possible Elements
From the Faculty Values Statement, adopted January 2004
“We the faculty of Eastern Washington University agree that the following values make university life meaningful and possible:
“Academic Freedom: Faculty members should enjoy the right to express views, teach, and conduct research without fear of retribution of censure….”
Introduction: Overview of Difficult Dialogues, Faculty Values Statement and Committee, Purpose for the Reader
Table of Contents
1. Commentary at KEWU – Renaissance Florence analogy
-- history of the program
-- a sampler of faculty stories, poetry, and opinions from the show
2. Recent Events
a. Savage Bricks Controversy
b. A Brief History of the Ward Churchill Crisis
-- overview
-- newspaper articles, Easterner and Spokesman Review
-- position papers, Faculty Values resolution
-- a primer on academic freedom and outside threats
- separate topic?
- include Eastern’s own rules about threats to academic freedom
3. An Overview of Academic Freedom and Threats on Campuses Today
4. Bibliography of Great Films, Plays, and Books on Freedom of Speech
-- Inherit the Wind, The Crucible
-- The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail
-- Walden Pond
5. Anthology of Important Statements from the Past on Free Speech
6. Articles by Faculty, Staff, and Students – and Campus Talks by Others
-- Rik Orndorf essay
-- Bill Youngs on Alien and Sedition Acts
-- Commencement Speakers
-- Lani Guinier
Academic Freedom Reader – Possible Elements
From the Faculty Values Statement, adopted January 2004
“We the faculty of Eastern Washington University agree that the following values make university life meaningful and possible:
“Academic Freedom: Faculty members should enjoy the right to express views, teach, and conduct research without fear of retribution of censure….”
Introduction: Overview of Difficult Dialogues, Faculty Values Statement and Committee, Purpose for the Reader
Table of Contents
1. Commentary at KEWU – Renaissance Florence analogy
-- history of the program
-- a sampler of faculty stories, poetry, and opinions from the show
2. Recent Events
a. Savage Bricks Controversy
b. A Brief History of the Ward Churchill Crisis
-- overview
-- newspaper articles, Easterner and Spokesman Review
-- position papers, Faculty Values resolution
-- a primer on academic freedom and outside threats
- separate topic?
- include Eastern’s own rules about threats to academic freedom
3. An Overview of Academic Freedom and Threats on Campuses Today
4. Bibliography of Great Films, Plays, and Books on Freedom of Speech
-- Inherit the Wind, The Crucible
-- The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail
-- Walden Pond
5. Anthology of Important Statements from the Past on Free Speech
6. Articles by Faculty, Staff, and Students – and Campus Talks by Others
-- Rik Orndorf essay
-- Bill Youngs on Alien and Sedition Acts
-- Commencement Speakers
-- Lani Guinier
NYT and Spokesman Review Project
Breakfast with the New York Times and Spokesman Review
In June of 2007 the ASEWU agreed to a year-long trial project between the New York Times and the Spokesman Review. Utilizing the student lounge in the Pence Union Building, the ASEWU hopes to have faculty members lead monthly discussions on current news stories and topics of interest. The NYT and Spokesman Review have agreed to providing publicity and free coffee, pastries, and bagels for the morning discussions. The project seems to tie in nicely with the Difficult Dialogues project proposed by the faculty organization. Perhaps it can lead to some contributions to the Academic Freedom Reader or another campus keynote speaker.
In June of 2007 the ASEWU agreed to a year-long trial project between the New York Times and the Spokesman Review. Utilizing the student lounge in the Pence Union Building, the ASEWU hopes to have faculty members lead monthly discussions on current news stories and topics of interest. The NYT and Spokesman Review have agreed to providing publicity and free coffee, pastries, and bagels for the morning discussions. The project seems to tie in nicely with the Difficult Dialogues project proposed by the faculty organization. Perhaps it can lead to some contributions to the Academic Freedom Reader or another campus keynote speaker.
Difficult Dialogues Project Overview
Project Title: “Difficult Dialogues”—Academic Freedom and Diversity at Eastern Washington University
Narrative:
In 2005 EWU became a focal point of Difficult Dialogues, both locally and nationally. The Academic Senate and Faculty Organization played key roles in responding to the difficult issues of academic freedom and freedom of speech, and relied on the Senate-approved Faculty Values Statement to form their response. Additionally, the Senate voted for and the faculty as a whole confirmed the creation of a permanent faculty values committee to serve as a watchdog for these values and to issue an annual report on the state of the campus in respect to fundamental values, including diversity and academic freedom. What we learned last year is that the issues surrounding academic freedom and diversity on our campus are very complex; we have not so much “solved” the problem of engaging constructively in “difficult dialogues” as we have developed a deeper appreciation for the nature of the problem.
Our recent experience with important issues involving academic freedom and diversity as well as our campus culture lays the groundwork—and underscores the need—for ongoing dialogue and policy-implementation at EWU. Our Faculty Organization has collaborated with administrative, student, and faculty groups to develop a variety of activities aimed at facilitating such progress.
In early October, the leadership of the Faculty Organization submitted a grant proposal for a Ford Foundation Difficult Dialogues grant, which would begin in January 2006. We are applying for this Strategic Planning Resource grant to supplement the activities proposed in our Difficult Dialogues project and to initiate preliminary activities to prepare for more activities later. At the same time, if we are not awarded a Difficult Dialogues grant, the project proposed here will be able to stand on its own and will contribute to changing our campus climate.
We are including in this Difficult Dialogues project an examination of the distinction between individuals as citizens and as consumers. If we want to enhance the education of our students, encourage student civic engagement, and help them contribute to a diverse democracy, as articulated in the Phase I Priorities under Student Success, one major issue to examine would be our roles in society as citizens and as consumers. These roles are evident throughout our society, no less than at the university. For example, on the one hand, our Strategic Goals statement suggests that we are trying to “prepare students to be thoughtful competent citizens able to contribute to the common good.” On the other hand, students are often referred to as “our customers,” and told that our goal is to provide them with a superior “educational product.” Commentators as diverse as Former U.S. Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader argue that these two views are inconsistent and incompatible. Each view defines our particular “campus culture,” and that culture to a great extent defines the University and the larger society.
Consumers only have the “right” to passively choose from a menu of products that someone else has placed before them, but bear no “responsibilities” for their choices. Citizens have both “rights” and “responsibilities.” They are explicitly members of some larger community and they are vitally interested in the health of that community. For the larger community to survive and thrive, citizens must be active participants. Students as consumers passively receive information; students as citizens actively seek knowledge and challenge accepted “truths.” As more and more aspects of our lives are taking on the characteristics of the consumer role, we are drifting farther and farther away from the civic view of our role in society. In order to overcome this drift, the first step is to recognize that two different roles exist, and that we must make a conscious choice as to which role we want to play. A careful examination of the distinction between individuals as citizens and as consumers is fundamental to our proposal.
The activities proposed for our Difficult Dialogues Project and in this grant application satisfy Goals I & II of the Academic Strategic Plan, since they promote “a rigorous and engaged student learning experience” and contribute to “an academic community culture that supports and engages faculty and staff throughout their careers.” These explorations of the issues of academic freedom, civic responsibility, and diversity will contribute to our “campus culture,” by encouraging extensive collaboration between departments and among students and faculty members. Students will be involved with faculty in the project as developers and presenters.
Goals and Objectives:
1. We will devise programs that explicitly address the issue of “campus culture,” as it affects both faculty and students.
2. We will nurture a campus atmosphere at Eastern Washington University where students, faculty, and administrators respond to problems cooperatively and in a spirit of mutual respect. We aim to nurture on our campus a capacity in all groups to say, in effect, “Yes this is a difficult issue. Let’s commit ourselves to having a mutually respectful dialogue about it.”
3. We will undertake to accomplish the following specific objectives:
• Students and others who participate in project activities will be more likely to communicate respectfully with people of different cultures and perspectives.
• The project will help faculty and students better recognize how their actions fit into the categories of citizen or consumer as described above, and will allow them to understand the role they are playing in the larger society.
• The project will help students, faculty, and staff make connections between the broad range of activities taking place on this campus that encourage them to address the themes of academic freedom, consumerism, and diversity.
• By the end of the project, EWU will the double the number of public events per year dealing with controversial issues that offer a “dialogue” component involving student-faculty-cross-disciplinary collaboration.
The activities proposed to meet the goals of this project promote strategies 1, 3 and 4 of Goal I in the Academic Strategic Plan, by fostering “engaged student learning,” by integrating diversity into students’ learning experience, and by providing “an environment supportive of learning and teaching excellence.” (ASP, pages 6 and 12) The project goals and objectives are also aimed at encouraging “integrated learning opportunities inside and outside the classroom,” as articulated in the Academic Strategic Plan, page 12. One of the major goals of the Academic Strategic Plan is to create an integrated academic experience with engaged students and faculty. The goals and objectives of this project support this type of academic experience and the attention to our campus culture that it entails.
Project Activities:
1) The Faculty Organization leadership will select a nationally recognized authority on issues related to academic freedom and diversity, such as Lani Guinier, Bill Moyers or Howard Zinn to bring to the Cheney campus in late winter or spring. The presentation by a keynote speaker will be coordinated with at least one of the public forums described below.
2) Faculty Organization officers Doug Orr, Bill Youngs, and Sally Winkle (in consultation with the Faculty Values Committee, as well as various academic units and student organizations) will organize at least two public forums to focus on some of the Difficult Dialogues facing the campus, the nation, and the world today. Topics of the open forums will include: (a) Citizenship vs. Consumerism — How can we better educate our students on the distinction between these roles? (b) Free Speech and Hate Speech —Where is the Dividing Line? (c) Academic Freedom — What are the Challenges and Responsibilities?
These forums will include participation of faculty and students and will be co-sponsored by departments, academic units, and student groups across campus. The multi-department campus forums preceding the annual Presidential Lecture provide a good model for these forums.
3) In addition to these forums, which we ourselves would initiate, we intend to work with existing programs and lectures helping to develop: (a) discussion components for events sponsored by other organizations on campus and (b) an intellectual “road map” indicating relationships between different cultural activities on campus. (For an example see discussion below on the cross-disciplinary facet of the project.)
4) Under the direction of Bill Youngs and the Faculty Values Committee, the Faculty Organization will prepare a series of essays by students, faculty, staff and administrators from across disciplines and colleges addressing these issues. In some instances, these will be published originally in the Easterner and on the Faculty Organization Web page, then republished as an Academic Freedom Reader in a single volume for wider distribution.
Project relationship to EWU 2006 Phase I priorities:
This project addresses Phase I priorities by supporting our goals for student success and our commitment to “enable all our students to lead productive, fulfilling lives.” A public forum devoted to the topic of our roles in society as citizen or consumer directly addresses the need for our students to be educated as citizens who are active participants in their education and in society. The activities proposed for this grant link disciplines, units, and organizations across campus and encourage students to make connections between what they are learning in the classroom and in on-campus events, such as public forums, and in the political and social environment in which they live.
Potential for successful outcomes:
We are optimistic about our ability to achieve the goals described for this project for two reasons: (1) The program, while extensive, is based on substantial pre-proposal discussion with other faculty members and students at Eastern. Our team for this project is, in effect, “good to go.” (2) Our goals, while ambitious, are constructed with an eye to practicality as well as utility. The Academic Freedom Reader, for example, will draw on the extensive experience of project leaders and participants in writing and editing and a reservoir of pertinent articles already written. The “editorial assistant” (as listed in the budget below) will provide help gathering and editing articles, making the work on this facet of the project practicable.
Cross-Disciplinary Component:
The project is cross-disciplinary to its core. Each facet—ranging from the personnel in the forums to the content of the reader—will draw on the knowledge of faculty members from a wide variety of disciplines. Moreover, the “road map” mentioned in the activities section above (item 3) will draw together information about a wide variety of campus activities. As an illustration, the Drama Department recently produced “The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail,” a play that raises many important points about freedom of thought. Several faculty members, from different departments, led post-play discussions. Our “road map” would build on these activities with a pamphlet and a calendar of events suggesting the connection between, say, a particular play, a campus film, and a lecture.
We have begun discussing with our colleagues our interest in developing forums, lectures, the “road map,” and the reader. Those with whom we have begun these discussions are: Gene Engene, Theater; Mimi Marinucci, Women’s Studies and Philosophy; Deirdre Almeida, American Indian Studies; and Nancy Nelson, African African American Studies. In addition, earlier this fall Bill Youngs and Sally Winkle spoke with a large number of faculty and students from a wide variety of academic units and student groups about participating in the Difficult Dialogues Project as outlined in the Ford Foundation Grant Proposal that was submitted in October. We expect that these faculty and students will want to participate as campus partners in the related activities articulated in this Strategic Planning Grant proposal, which will make this a truly interdisciplinary, integrated campus project. That group includes student leaders such as Alicia Kinne, president of the student body, as well as members of other student organizations and many faculty members. Women’s Studies, Economics, History, and the Faculty Organization are a few of the many programs that will be involved.
Assessment plan:
1. What were our specific accomplishments? We will produce a report on our tangible accomplishments in the course of this grant, answering such questions as these: Was a nationally recognized speaker brought to campus? Were the forums organized and presented as anticipated in the grant application? Was the “road map” of related activities produced? Was an academic freedom reader assembled and published?
2. What was the numerical impact of these activities? This is the bean-counting part of the assessment. We will keep track of the number of persons who took part in the lectures and forums as presenters and audience-members; we will list the number of articles in the reader and the number of copies published.
3. What was the qualitative impact of this project? We will develop and distribute evaluation forms at the lecture and forums asking such questions as, what was the most important thing you learned at this gathering? Similarly, we will ask people to evaluate the usefulness of the events “road map” and the academic freedom reader.
Plan for Sustainability:
We do anticipate that this project will have a life beyond the grant period. Each of the activities listed above can take on “a life of its own.” The Faculty Organization, which would sponsor a nationally recognized speaker during the course of this grant, will continue as an important organization in campus life. The use of the FO’s cross-disciplinary character as an agent in the cultural life of the campus would establish a precedent for organizing speakers and supporting public forums in the future. Additionally, the Faculty Values Committee, which will play a key role in this grant, has already begun discussing future campus publishing projects beyond the Academic Freedom Reader, concentrating on other faculty values such as diversity and teaching.
Narrative:
In 2005 EWU became a focal point of Difficult Dialogues, both locally and nationally. The Academic Senate and Faculty Organization played key roles in responding to the difficult issues of academic freedom and freedom of speech, and relied on the Senate-approved Faculty Values Statement to form their response. Additionally, the Senate voted for and the faculty as a whole confirmed the creation of a permanent faculty values committee to serve as a watchdog for these values and to issue an annual report on the state of the campus in respect to fundamental values, including diversity and academic freedom. What we learned last year is that the issues surrounding academic freedom and diversity on our campus are very complex; we have not so much “solved” the problem of engaging constructively in “difficult dialogues” as we have developed a deeper appreciation for the nature of the problem.
Our recent experience with important issues involving academic freedom and diversity as well as our campus culture lays the groundwork—and underscores the need—for ongoing dialogue and policy-implementation at EWU. Our Faculty Organization has collaborated with administrative, student, and faculty groups to develop a variety of activities aimed at facilitating such progress.
In early October, the leadership of the Faculty Organization submitted a grant proposal for a Ford Foundation Difficult Dialogues grant, which would begin in January 2006. We are applying for this Strategic Planning Resource grant to supplement the activities proposed in our Difficult Dialogues project and to initiate preliminary activities to prepare for more activities later. At the same time, if we are not awarded a Difficult Dialogues grant, the project proposed here will be able to stand on its own and will contribute to changing our campus climate.
We are including in this Difficult Dialogues project an examination of the distinction between individuals as citizens and as consumers. If we want to enhance the education of our students, encourage student civic engagement, and help them contribute to a diverse democracy, as articulated in the Phase I Priorities under Student Success, one major issue to examine would be our roles in society as citizens and as consumers. These roles are evident throughout our society, no less than at the university. For example, on the one hand, our Strategic Goals statement suggests that we are trying to “prepare students to be thoughtful competent citizens able to contribute to the common good.” On the other hand, students are often referred to as “our customers,” and told that our goal is to provide them with a superior “educational product.” Commentators as diverse as Former U.S. Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader argue that these two views are inconsistent and incompatible. Each view defines our particular “campus culture,” and that culture to a great extent defines the University and the larger society.
Consumers only have the “right” to passively choose from a menu of products that someone else has placed before them, but bear no “responsibilities” for their choices. Citizens have both “rights” and “responsibilities.” They are explicitly members of some larger community and they are vitally interested in the health of that community. For the larger community to survive and thrive, citizens must be active participants. Students as consumers passively receive information; students as citizens actively seek knowledge and challenge accepted “truths.” As more and more aspects of our lives are taking on the characteristics of the consumer role, we are drifting farther and farther away from the civic view of our role in society. In order to overcome this drift, the first step is to recognize that two different roles exist, and that we must make a conscious choice as to which role we want to play. A careful examination of the distinction between individuals as citizens and as consumers is fundamental to our proposal.
The activities proposed for our Difficult Dialogues Project and in this grant application satisfy Goals I & II of the Academic Strategic Plan, since they promote “a rigorous and engaged student learning experience” and contribute to “an academic community culture that supports and engages faculty and staff throughout their careers.” These explorations of the issues of academic freedom, civic responsibility, and diversity will contribute to our “campus culture,” by encouraging extensive collaboration between departments and among students and faculty members. Students will be involved with faculty in the project as developers and presenters.
Goals and Objectives:
1. We will devise programs that explicitly address the issue of “campus culture,” as it affects both faculty and students.
2. We will nurture a campus atmosphere at Eastern Washington University where students, faculty, and administrators respond to problems cooperatively and in a spirit of mutual respect. We aim to nurture on our campus a capacity in all groups to say, in effect, “Yes this is a difficult issue. Let’s commit ourselves to having a mutually respectful dialogue about it.”
3. We will undertake to accomplish the following specific objectives:
• Students and others who participate in project activities will be more likely to communicate respectfully with people of different cultures and perspectives.
• The project will help faculty and students better recognize how their actions fit into the categories of citizen or consumer as described above, and will allow them to understand the role they are playing in the larger society.
• The project will help students, faculty, and staff make connections between the broad range of activities taking place on this campus that encourage them to address the themes of academic freedom, consumerism, and diversity.
• By the end of the project, EWU will the double the number of public events per year dealing with controversial issues that offer a “dialogue” component involving student-faculty-cross-disciplinary collaboration.
The activities proposed to meet the goals of this project promote strategies 1, 3 and 4 of Goal I in the Academic Strategic Plan, by fostering “engaged student learning,” by integrating diversity into students’ learning experience, and by providing “an environment supportive of learning and teaching excellence.” (ASP, pages 6 and 12) The project goals and objectives are also aimed at encouraging “integrated learning opportunities inside and outside the classroom,” as articulated in the Academic Strategic Plan, page 12. One of the major goals of the Academic Strategic Plan is to create an integrated academic experience with engaged students and faculty. The goals and objectives of this project support this type of academic experience and the attention to our campus culture that it entails.
Project Activities:
1) The Faculty Organization leadership will select a nationally recognized authority on issues related to academic freedom and diversity, such as Lani Guinier, Bill Moyers or Howard Zinn to bring to the Cheney campus in late winter or spring. The presentation by a keynote speaker will be coordinated with at least one of the public forums described below.
2) Faculty Organization officers Doug Orr, Bill Youngs, and Sally Winkle (in consultation with the Faculty Values Committee, as well as various academic units and student organizations) will organize at least two public forums to focus on some of the Difficult Dialogues facing the campus, the nation, and the world today. Topics of the open forums will include: (a) Citizenship vs. Consumerism — How can we better educate our students on the distinction between these roles? (b) Free Speech and Hate Speech —Where is the Dividing Line? (c) Academic Freedom — What are the Challenges and Responsibilities?
These forums will include participation of faculty and students and will be co-sponsored by departments, academic units, and student groups across campus. The multi-department campus forums preceding the annual Presidential Lecture provide a good model for these forums.
3) In addition to these forums, which we ourselves would initiate, we intend to work with existing programs and lectures helping to develop: (a) discussion components for events sponsored by other organizations on campus and (b) an intellectual “road map” indicating relationships between different cultural activities on campus. (For an example see discussion below on the cross-disciplinary facet of the project.)
4) Under the direction of Bill Youngs and the Faculty Values Committee, the Faculty Organization will prepare a series of essays by students, faculty, staff and administrators from across disciplines and colleges addressing these issues. In some instances, these will be published originally in the Easterner and on the Faculty Organization Web page, then republished as an Academic Freedom Reader in a single volume for wider distribution.
Project relationship to EWU 2006 Phase I priorities:
This project addresses Phase I priorities by supporting our goals for student success and our commitment to “enable all our students to lead productive, fulfilling lives.” A public forum devoted to the topic of our roles in society as citizen or consumer directly addresses the need for our students to be educated as citizens who are active participants in their education and in society. The activities proposed for this grant link disciplines, units, and organizations across campus and encourage students to make connections between what they are learning in the classroom and in on-campus events, such as public forums, and in the political and social environment in which they live.
Potential for successful outcomes:
We are optimistic about our ability to achieve the goals described for this project for two reasons: (1) The program, while extensive, is based on substantial pre-proposal discussion with other faculty members and students at Eastern. Our team for this project is, in effect, “good to go.” (2) Our goals, while ambitious, are constructed with an eye to practicality as well as utility. The Academic Freedom Reader, for example, will draw on the extensive experience of project leaders and participants in writing and editing and a reservoir of pertinent articles already written. The “editorial assistant” (as listed in the budget below) will provide help gathering and editing articles, making the work on this facet of the project practicable.
Cross-Disciplinary Component:
The project is cross-disciplinary to its core. Each facet—ranging from the personnel in the forums to the content of the reader—will draw on the knowledge of faculty members from a wide variety of disciplines. Moreover, the “road map” mentioned in the activities section above (item 3) will draw together information about a wide variety of campus activities. As an illustration, the Drama Department recently produced “The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail,” a play that raises many important points about freedom of thought. Several faculty members, from different departments, led post-play discussions. Our “road map” would build on these activities with a pamphlet and a calendar of events suggesting the connection between, say, a particular play, a campus film, and a lecture.
We have begun discussing with our colleagues our interest in developing forums, lectures, the “road map,” and the reader. Those with whom we have begun these discussions are: Gene Engene, Theater; Mimi Marinucci, Women’s Studies and Philosophy; Deirdre Almeida, American Indian Studies; and Nancy Nelson, African African American Studies. In addition, earlier this fall Bill Youngs and Sally Winkle spoke with a large number of faculty and students from a wide variety of academic units and student groups about participating in the Difficult Dialogues Project as outlined in the Ford Foundation Grant Proposal that was submitted in October. We expect that these faculty and students will want to participate as campus partners in the related activities articulated in this Strategic Planning Grant proposal, which will make this a truly interdisciplinary, integrated campus project. That group includes student leaders such as Alicia Kinne, president of the student body, as well as members of other student organizations and many faculty members. Women’s Studies, Economics, History, and the Faculty Organization are a few of the many programs that will be involved.
Assessment plan:
1. What were our specific accomplishments? We will produce a report on our tangible accomplishments in the course of this grant, answering such questions as these: Was a nationally recognized speaker brought to campus? Were the forums organized and presented as anticipated in the grant application? Was the “road map” of related activities produced? Was an academic freedom reader assembled and published?
2. What was the numerical impact of these activities? This is the bean-counting part of the assessment. We will keep track of the number of persons who took part in the lectures and forums as presenters and audience-members; we will list the number of articles in the reader and the number of copies published.
3. What was the qualitative impact of this project? We will develop and distribute evaluation forms at the lecture and forums asking such questions as, what was the most important thing you learned at this gathering? Similarly, we will ask people to evaluate the usefulness of the events “road map” and the academic freedom reader.
Plan for Sustainability:
We do anticipate that this project will have a life beyond the grant period. Each of the activities listed above can take on “a life of its own.” The Faculty Organization, which would sponsor a nationally recognized speaker during the course of this grant, will continue as an important organization in campus life. The use of the FO’s cross-disciplinary character as an agent in the cultural life of the campus would establish a precedent for organizing speakers and supporting public forums in the future. Additionally, the Faculty Values Committee, which will play a key role in this grant, has already begun discussing future campus publishing projects beyond the Academic Freedom Reader, concentrating on other faculty values such as diversity and teaching.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)