Spring 2009 Newsletter of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Number 2 / Volume 7 In This Issue: FIRE Calls on Virginia Tech to Abandon 2 From the Board of Directors New Political Litmus Test for Faculty; 3 Michigan State Drops ‘Spamming’ Complaint Board of Visitors Agrees to Review Requirements Against Student Critic of Administration FIRE has called on Charles W. Steger, President of 4 Victory for Individual Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Rights at Pomona College to abandon proposed new guidelines for faculty assessment that would seriously violate 5 FIRE Cautions University faculty members’ academic freedom and their of North Carolina System constitutional right to freedom of conscience. Against Implementing Hate Speech Policy The proposal would force faculty members in Virginia 6 From the Campus Tech’s College of Liberal Arts and Human Sciences Charles W. Steger, President of Virginia Tech Freedom Network to adhere to an ideological loyalty oath to an entirely 8 FIRE Pens Open Letter abstract concept—“diversity”—that can represent In short, universities must not tell their professors what to President Obama vastly different things to different people. Faculty they must believe, or even what they should believe, lest are to be evaluated with “special attention” to the the whole process of intellectual inquiry and innovation 8 FIRE’s Adam Kissel candidate’s “involvement in diversity initiatives.” end before it even starts. By requiring candidates Wins Education Writers This includes “demonstrating accomplishments and for promotion and tenure to demonstrate an active Association Award significant contributions pertinent to the candidate’s involvement in “diversity initiatives,” Virginia Tech 9 Wright State University field” in areas such as “Publications,” “Courses impermissibly forces faculty members to confess both by Bans Christian Group taught,” “Competitive grants,” and other areas of word and by act their faith in the opinion that “diversity” from Campus professional contribution. is essential to their teaching and academic life. 10 From the Director of Development The use of such evaluative criteria is an unacceptable UPDATE: After FIRE and the American Council hindrance to faculty members’ moral and intellectual of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) wrote the school’s 11 Fanning the Flames agency. Although expecting candidates to entire Board of Visitors, requesting a full review of 12 The Last Word demonstrate such an involvement in every area of the proposed guidelines, the Board’s Rector, John R. their work may seem admirable and innocuous, it has Lawson, II, notified ACTA on April 1 that the Board the practical effect of imposing on them an ideological would fully review Virginia Tech’s diversity and tenure loyalty oath to adhere to Virginia Tech’s current policies university-wide. perspectives on bias, race, gender, and culture. “Virginia Tech is forcing faculty members to agree with FIRE’s letter reminds Virginia Tech that it is fully specific political views in order to succeed in their bound by the First Amendment as a public university. profession,” Adam Kissel, Director of FIRE’s Individual 601 Walnut Street • Suite 510 We also point out that dictating political beliefs by Rights Defense Program, said. “Virginia Tech is free to requiring that faculty demonstrate a commitment to promote diversity, but not to mandate ideological Philadelphia, PA 19106 “diversity initiatives” opposes the principles and commitments in faculty review dossiers. It is a shame 215.717.3473 tel statements of the American Association of University that the Board of Visitors must step in to protect the 215.717.3440 fax Professors (AAUP). faculty from these violations of their rights.” www.thefire.org 1 From the Board of Directors Harvey A. Silverglate While FIRE’s hallmark has from its inception been to stick to its Joining me in this venture is Harvard alumnus Robert Freedman, a principles regardless of whose ox is gored, its strategies and tactics Philadelphia lawyer and long-time FIRE supporter. Together, we have evolved. Thus, as FIRE nears its tenth anniversary, one can list have collected several hundred signatures on our nominating the various approaches it has developed to support procedural petitions and actually done the unthinkable—run a campaign! fairness, academic freedom, and related values in higher education: We have set up websites (www.HarveySilverglate.com and the Torch blog that regularly updates readers (providing sunlight, that www.FreedmanForOverseer.com), written op-eds (“Meanwhile, at most effective disinfectant); the burgeoning Campus Freedom Harvard…” March 23, 2009, Forbes.com), and granted press Network (CFN), which guides students and faculty in campus interviews (“Free Speech at Harvard,” February 25, 2009, The Boston activism to change illiberal policies; and the Robert H. Jackson Globe; “Silverglate seeks spot as university overseer,” February 19, fellowships, which grant recent law school graduates an opportunity 2009, The Harvard Law Record). If successful, we hope to convince to explore higher education law and First Amendment other reform-minded Harvard grads to run next year, and the year jurisprudence. And the list goes on. after. Within three years, we can have a critical mass of new board members to join with any current members who are serious about improving the university in all of the ways that really matter. Another strategy is now in the early stages of formulation: The exercise of alumni power in gaining seats on university governing boards and injecting real-life experience into the often Even if we don’t succeed on this first attempt, a major initiative to isolated world of the university. As of publication, I’m in the midst encourage and systematically guide alumni of other universities that of a real- life test run. I have been campaigning, as an alumni petition have powerful alumni-elected bodies is a potentially important candidate, for a seat on Harvard’s Board of Overseers, the university’s direction for FIRE and its allies. We can thus begin to restore liberty second most powerful (and oldest) governing body. Traditionally, the and fairness on our campuses from the inside, supplementing FIRE’s mainstream Harvard Alumni Association selects eight candidates campaigns from the outside. Other organizations, such as the each year to run for five open seats on the thirty-member Board. The American Council of Trustees and Alumni, have for years been victors are always assumed to oversee without upsetting the apple emphasizing the important role that alumni can play in restoring the cart too much. The apple cart, of course, is a university run primarily campus culture, and now a national, organized effort to enlist alumni by administrators (a burgeoning class of increasingly insulated voting power may at last be on the horizon. bureaucrats) and by the most politically ambitious elements of the faculty. FIRE knows the tools by which these persons govern the lives of students and teachers—speech codes, kangaroo courts, and other Harvard’s balloting continues until May 29th, with the winners such ideologically-driven tyrannies. announced at Commencement on June 4th. Stay tuned. Harvey A. Silverglate Chairman 2 Spring 2009 Michigan State Drops ‘Spamming’ Complaint Against Student Critic of Administration In a significant victory for freedom of expression on campus, Michigan State University has withdrawn “spamming” charges against a student government leader who criticized administration plans in an e-mail to professors. MSU junior Kara Spencer had carefully selected and e-mailed eight percent of MSU’s 5,000 faculty members, encouraging them to express their views about proposed changes to the academic calendar. Spencer’s cause has been supported by FIRE and a dozen other civil liberties organizations. “Michigan State did the right thing by withdrawing its bogus Foundation (EFF), wrote ‘spam’ charges against a student leader who was simply exercising an open letter to President her rights,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. “Now MSU Simon challenging both the needs to suspend its unconstitutional spam policy so that policy and its application students like Kara cannot be punished for responsibly engaging against Spencer. the MSU community. Of course, FIRE would be happy to advise MSU about pitfalls to avoid while crafting an effective spam policy, but the existing policy must go as soon as possible.” In the wake of Spencer’s submission of her appeal and the open letter, Spencer told the University Committee on Student Affairs Spencer learned Thursday (UCSA), a committee comprised of students, faculty, and that the charges had administrators, that she would send individual faculty been “withdrawn by Lou Anna K. Simon members a letter outlining her concerns about the changes to the Complainant(s).” An President of Michigan State University the academic calendar. Spencer carefully selected 391 faculty attorney for Michigan members and e-mailed them, arguing that the proposed State told FIRE that Spencer’s warning will be removed from changes “will greatly affect both faculty and students alike” and her file and that students in Spencer’s position will not be calling for “an inclusive dialogue among members of the referred for disciplinary action while the university is reviewing University community.” the policy. However, Michigan State has so far refused to suspend or revoke the unconstitutional policy, leaving students under the impression that it is still