College professors and administrators are supposed to be dedicated to liberty to challenge ideas, to argue, to dissent. They often say that they are. But when they have the power to punish someone for deviating from one of their cherished notions, do they stick to the principles of academic freedom, or do they fall into Lord Acton’s famous statement about the corrupting nature of power?
A recent case involving a respected history professor shows that some academics love academic freedom, but only for those who agree with them.
Slowly gathering momentum within the education establishment is the idea that students and faculty members should not just be evaluated on the basis of their objective performance – their knowledge of the subject matter and their ability to teach it – but also on their acceptance of certain philosophical views having nothing to do with that subject matter.
One institution where this idea has reared its ugly head recently is Brooklyn College. The School of Education there has adopted a policy requiring that professors evaluate students in part on the basis of their “dispositions.” No, that doesn’t mean whether they’re friendly or grouchy. We are talking about the student’s disposition toward liberal beliefs concerning “social justice.” If a student agrees, for example, that educators should try to act as “change agents” to rectify “illegitimate power imbalances” in society, then he should receive a better grade than a student who doesn’t.
It’s disturbing enough that educators would think it appropriate to waste class time on inculcating any particular political philosophy in their students, but even more so to realize that some believe it appropriate to take the next step, namely rewarding or penalizing students depending on whether they agree. And we now find that Brooklyn College is so adamant about “disposition” grading that it’s threatening one professor who has had the nerve to criticize it.
Robert Johnson, generally known as KC, is a brilliant young history professor who neither very liberal nor very conservative politically. His interest is in writing about and teaching history. He sticks to his subject and thinks that other professors ought to do the same. When Brooklyn’s Education School came out with its “disposition” guidelines earlier this year, Johnson sharply criticized them in an article published in Inside Higher Education.
Unfortunately, someone who questions an outgrowth of “progressive” education theory is apt to meet with the same sort of reception that religious heretics faced in 17th century Spain.
Incensed at Professor Johnson’s criticisms, on June 7, the faculty union’s Professional Staff Congress held an “emergency meeting.” That’s how seriously the open minded academics take ….deviant views. The Faculty Council’s “Integrity Committee” was assigned the task of investigating Johnson and the result was a letter sent to the Board of Trustees, the college’s president, and everyone else of any importance. The letter demanded that Johnson stop his “attacks” on the School of Education and its beloved “dispositions” policy.
Johnson responded to that letter on July 29, defending his right to speak his mind. Only recently has he heard from the Brooklyn College administration. President Christopher Kimmich has informed Johnson that he will face no investigation or disciplinary action for having offended those who would like to see ideological purity among the faculty.
Will the college inquisitors finally get it? Or will they keep trying to oust their free thinking colleague? Petty tyrants don’t usually give up easily.
As Professor Donald Downs, who will be speaking this week in Raleigh, writes in his recent book Restoring Free Speech and Liberty on Campus, “Rather than improving the campus climate, the new policies often provided tools for moral bullies to enforce an ideological orthodoxy that undermines the intellectual freedom and intellectual diversity that are the hallmarks of great universities.” Alas, the treatment of Professor KC Johnson shows that we still have quite a way to go before we can say that free speech and liberty have in fact been restored on American campuses.
No matter what happens to KC Johnson at the hands of those whom he has offended by his criticism, the instructive point is clear: Educators can be just as intolerant as are zealots for any other belief. They shouldn’t be entrusted with power to stifle dissent.
George Leef is the executive director of the John W. Pope Center for Higher Education Policy in Raleigh.