Dr. Hiestand:

For your discipline it is perhaps clear and easy to limit yourself to
matters that are not open to controversy, but for teachers of freshman
composition (and many other subjects), it is obligatory to discuss issues
about which there is disagreement so that students can learn to craft
arguments.  I cannot teach ways to make effective written arguments without
something to argue about.

I have often had students who could not (or would not) understand the
distinction between a criticism of the effectiveness of their arguments for
a particular belief and a criticism/attack on the belief itself.  It's much,
much easier for a student to convince himself that a particular paper earned
a D or an F because I disagreed with the ideas than because it was poorly
written.  I have often awarded poor grades to badly-written papers that
agreed with my own beliefs, and vice versa, but probably most of the
students interpret these grades as "she liked (or disliked) my paper," and,
by extension, that I agreed with or disagreed with their positions on the
issue at hand.  I'm sure, for example, that many of them believe me to be an
atheist and a heathen because I tell them that "proving" something by
quoting the Bible as an authority is not an effective argument if their
audience extends beyond their own Sunday school classes.

I expect this legislation to become a nightmare for teachers whose
disciplines demand dealing with controversial issues.  Professors of
rhetoric, political science, philosophy, religion, and many other
disciplines have good cause to be alarmed.

Melissa Burchfield



----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Hiestand" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 6:08 PM
Subject: [UTCSTAFF] House Bill 432 not monkey business


>            I don't regard House Bill 432 (below) as a threat to academic
> freedom.  Rather I see it as calling for faculty responsibility and as a
> small step towards Quality Enhancement for our students who may feel
> aggrieved.
>
>
>
>            Its purpose is to keep us focused.  I have been hired to teach
> engineering and not to expound my opinions on conservative Constitutional
> interpretation, for example.  Perhaps it will be abused but so can other
> avenues of student redress such as the grade appeals process.  As current
> Chair of the Grade Appeals Committee I do not think this procedure has
> been
> abused.
>
>
>
>            Jim Hiestand
>
>
>
> Filed for intro on 02/03/2005
>
> HOUSE BILL 432
>
> By Campfield
>
> AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49,
>
> Chapter 7, relative to higher education.
>
> WHEREAS, the General assembly of the state of Tennessee recognizes
> students'
> rights
>
> to academic freedom and rights to freedom from discrimination on the basis
> of political or
>
> religious beliefs; and
>
> WHEREAS, students enrolled in state postsecondary educational institutions
> have the
>
> right to information concerning grievance procedures for the protection of
> their academic
>
> freedoms; and
>
> WHEREAS, it is determined to be in the best interests of the state to
> direct
> the governing
>
> board of state postsecondary educational institutions to adopt a grievance
> procedure for use in
>
> enforcing students' rights; now, therefore,
>
> BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
>
> SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 7, Part 1, is
> amended
> by
>
> adding the following as a new appropriately designated section:
>
> 49-7-1(__).
>
> (a) Students enrolled in state postsecondary educational institutions
> shall
>
> have the following rights:
>
> (1) The right to expect that their academic freedom will not be
>
> infringed upon by instructors who create a hostile environment toward
>
> their political or religious beliefs or who introduce controversial matter
> into
>
> the classroom or course work that is substantially unrelated to the
> subject
>
> of study;
>
> - 2 - 00347113
>
> (2) The right to expect that they will be graded solely on the basis
>
> of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects
>
> they study and that they shall not be discriminated against on the basis
> of
>
> their political or religious beliefs;
>
> (3) The right to expect that their academic institutions shall
>
> distribute student fee funds on a viewpoint neutral basis and shall
>
> maintain a posture of neutrality with respect to substantive political or
>
> religious disagreements, differences, and opinions; and
>
> (4) The right to be fully informed of their institutions' grievance
>
> procedures for violations of academic freedom by means of notices
>
> prominently displayed in course catalogues, student handbooks, and on
>
> the institutional web site.
>
> (b) State postsecondary educational institutions shall publicize the
>
> statewide institutional grievance procedure by which a student may seek
> redress
>
> for an alleged violation of any of the rights specified in this section in
> course
>
> catalogues, student handbooks, and on the institutional website.
>
> SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-7-202(c), is amended by
> adding
>
> the following as a new appropriately designated subdivision:
>
> (__) Develop, monitor, and enforce a statewide institutional grievance
> procedure
>
> by which a student may seek a redress of grievance for an alleged
> violation
> of any of the
>
> rights specified in this act.
>
> SECTION 3. The commissioner of the Tennessee higher education commission
> is
>
> authorized to promulgate rules and regulations to effectuate the purposes
> of
> this act. All such
>
> rules and regulations shall be promulgated in accordance with the
> provisions
> of Tennessee
>
> Code Annotated, title 4, chapter 5.
>
> - 3 - 00347113
>
> SECTION 4. This act shall take effect upon becoming law, the public
> welfare
> requiring
>
> it.