Colleagues,

I, too, am alarmed by Bill 432. In fact, I find it to be monkey business of
the highest order. Here's why:

1. The impetus for the bill clearly comes from outside of the State of
Tennessee (a number of other state legislatures have considered or are
considering bills that use remarkably similar language to promote remarkably
similar interests). It is thus not primarily a response to concerns
expressed by citizens of this state. Rather, as Richard Rice and others have
noted, the bill originates with "Students for Academic Freedom," a national
group founded by conservative ideologue David Horowitz. At age 66, Horowitz
is far from being a college student. The bill is not what its sponsors
represent it to be, but part of an unusually effective national lobbying
effort - it is pre-packaged legislation by subscription.

2. By its very existence, the bill assumes that institutions of higher
education have established no grievance processes, and are unwilling to do
so on their own. As President Peterson has noted, however, the UT system
does already have very clear policies and processes in place to address the
issues outlined in the bill. (Richard Rice points specifically to the UTC
Handbook, Section 5.3.1.) That's what happens when one puts forward
pre-packaged, ideological legislation: reality gets ignored in favor of
political grandstanding. Should students be able to file complaints when
they are treated unfairly? Of course, and they can. Should a particular wing
of the government create the appearance of wrongdoing and then take credit
for fixing it? Of course not. That's just political Munchausen by Proxy.

3. As Gavin Townsend points out, like the most recent draft of the THEC
"Master Plan," the bill assumes that the goal of higher education is limited
to training a work force. Like Gavin, I would argue that we are also charged
with educating citizens. It's a vital distinction, though these activities
are not mutually exclusive. It's important that our future engineers are
trained in fluid dynamics and electrical circuit design; it's important that
our future nurses know their facts about physiology and best clinical
practices. But many of us (like me) were hired to teach in what Jillian
Klean Zwilling has called the "gray areas" of interpretation, argument, and
debate. We raise controversial subjects, not to indoctrinate students in any
particular ideology, but to expose them to a range of ideas and to help them
sort through the complexities of what has been said and how it has been
said - all with the aim of equipping them to enter into important debates
effectively and intelligently, and to move understanding forward. This is
difficult territory to navigate in the classroom, but it is necessary for
every educated citizen to traverse that territory. Jim Hiestand has said
that Bill 432 is intended to "keep us focused," that he was hired to teach
engineering, not interpretation. I was hired to teach interpretation. This
is a problem, apparently, for the bill's authors.


Greg O'Dea

--
Dr. Gregory O'Dea
UC Foundation Associate Professor of English
Director, University Honors Program
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Chattanooga, TN USA



----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Rice" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: [UTCSTAFF] House Bill 432 not monkey business


> Jim and I have discussed (via email) this issue and I respect his view,
> but
> I do not think it will enhance the quality of education or critical
> thinking on this or any campus. The bill itself, as you can read, makes
> perfectly good sense in its use of academic freedom rhetoric, as it
> reflects what every UT campus handbook already includes: rules for in
> class
> and out of class faculty behavior and opportunities for redress for
> students who feel threatened or offended.
>
> But I do not accept the premise that many faculty grade according to
> religious or other beliefs of their students. Most of us have so many
> students we do not know all their names, let alone their theology. And it
> calls for unreasonable disclosure of student values and beliefs: how can
> we
> teachers avoid "controversy" if we do not survey on the first day of class
> the beliefs of our students to discover the no-go areas of discourse? If
> we
> do not, then we face a religious-political mine field. This is totally
> unworkable.
>
> I think if we look beyond the fine inspiring rhetoric of the bill and
> examine closely the website of the action group behind this, and read the
> 72 page student handbook used for campus organization, and especially the
> Appendix D (p.62 of the handbook), "Academic Freedom Violations Complaint
> Form," which will be required in our UTC student materials, then you may
> get a truer picture of how this legislation will play out. Remember, it
> would take only one student to file a grievance, and that can be done
> anonymously. So much for the individual standing up for his or her rights!
>
> There are eight leading questions at the top of the complaint form:
>
>         a. required readings or texts covering only one side of issues
>         b. gratuitously singled out political or religious beliefs for
> ridicule
>         c. introduced controversial material that has no relation to the
> subject
>         d. forced students to express a certain point of view in
> assignments
>         e. mocked national political or religious figures
>         f.  conducted political activities in class (ex: recruiting for
> demonstrations)
>         g. allowed students political or religious beliefs to influence
> grading
>         h. used university funds to hold one-sided partisan teach-ins or
> conferences
>         i.  other: _________________________________________________
>
> Finally, at the bottom of the form is a phone number, fax, and web site
> for
> the student to report the complaint to the National Office of Students for
> Academic Freedom.
>
> If you have time and interest, the handbook itself provides valuable
> information on organization, tactics, using the media, and so on:
> available
> at http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
> At 06:08 PM 3/29/2005 -0500, Jim Hiestand wrote:
>>             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.