Readers have expressed a desire to learn more about Macomb Community College English professor John Bonnell's clash with the school administration for his use of profanity in the classroom. There is a detailed online archive on the subject here, and the MCC student paper recently printed a story on Bonnell's most recent suspension.

Not posted on line, but very revealing in nature, is an exchange of letters between MCC Provost Rosa Bellanca and Bonnell regarding his classroom conduct. The letters are lengthy, but they are worth reading closely to get a feel for the nature of the college's ongoing complaint against Bonnell, as well as for the means by which the college is distorting the facts in order to pillory a professor whose pedagogy does not conform to its administrative orthodoxy. Such clear windows into the interstitial machinations of misguided and manipulative academic disciplinary procedures are hard to come by, and worth quoting in full when they do become available.

Bear in mind as you read a simple and salient point: that the issue here is not whether you, or I, or the school likes Bonnell's teaching strategies, but whether those strategies are a) legal, and b) effective. All indications are that Bonnell's teaching style falls well within his rights, in no way rises to the level of harassment the school claims it does, and works well for the majority of students.

Here's Rosa Bellanca's long but revealing letter:

Office of the Provost
Memorandum

TO: John Bonnell

FROM: Rose B. Bellanca, Provost

DATE: December 11, 2001

RE: Counseling Memorandum

In my August 10, 2001 memorandum to you regarding a student complaint that had been filed against you during the summer term, I indicated that the collective bargaining agreement places the college under a legal duty to attempt to rehabilitate you as an employee, and that the only means the College has for bringing about your rehabilitation is through discipline and counseling. During the past few academic years, you have been progressively disciplined for unacceptable conduct through verbal and written warnings, a three-day suspension, and you are now serving a one-semester suspension. My August communication also indicated that you would be counseled before returning to work via a comprehensive memorandum detailing the College's expectations of you. This memorandum is intended to provide that counseling, and it sets forth the minimum standards by which your future performance and conduct will be judged. Given your progressive discipline and this counseling letter, it is expected that you will not repeat the type of unacceptable practices set forth in this memorandum.

As an institution of higher education, Macomb Community College has the legal responsibility to ensure that its employees comply with a variety of laws, both State and Federal, and to uphold the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement and the policies of the College. More specifically, the College has a strong interest in assuring:

(1) that its students have the opportunity to participate in and derive educational benefit from the College's instructional program;

(2) that the College's instructional program is provided within an environment of professionalism and mutual respect, that there will be tolerance for criticism and dissent, and that those who express contrary views or file complaints will be protected from ridicule, mocking, and/or retaliation;

(3) that teachers will, in fact, teach the subject matter of the course, strive to achieve course objectives, and issue grades that adequately reflect and certify the students' level of mastery of the subject matter and course objectives; and

(4) that teachers possess the appropriate credentials for the subject they are teaching so as not to expose their students to physical or emotional harm.

Objectionable Classroom Practices

Numerous students have reported that you regularly use profane, vulgar or obscene words in class such as "bullshit," "cunt," "cock," "dick," "pussy," "tits," "balls," "asshole," "ass," "shit," "damn," "cocksucking," "hell," "buttfucking" and "blowjob." Students report that you do not use these words in an effort to explain a concept being portrayed in an assigned text, but as part of your general vocabulary regardless of whether the language relates in any meaningful way to an assigned text, even to the point of saying in class that Smuckers Jelly was given its name because "Smuckers" rhymes with "fuckers" and that the "Busch" in Busch Beer refers to a vagina. One student has complained that you repeated the word "fuck" in class over and over in succession, raising your voice as you did so, to the point where you were yelling. Other students report that you use the word "fuck" so frequently in classroom discussions that it appears that you simply like to use the word.

The College policy on vulgar, obscene or profane speech prohibits such classroom speech unless it is germane to course content as judged by professional standards. Rather than demonstrating your adherence to this policy, you have attempted to rationalize your behavior by asserting that 1) every English word is germane to an English class regardless of the context in which the word is used; 2) everything you say in class is germane to course content; 3) your use of vulgar words is appropriate because it prevents you from being boring; 4) vulgar language reflects who you are; 5) vulgar language is acceptable because you are the campus "pervert in residence;" 6) there are no boundaries concerning what may be discussed in class; and 7) every student should have at least one "raunchy" English professor. One student related that you confessed in class that your vulgar classroom approach stems not from any legitimate academic or professionally recognized interpretative approach, but from the fact that you are a "perverted" individual with a "perverted mind."

The College does not consider these rationalizations to be sufficient to satisfy its germaneness policy or its requirement that you teach class in a professionally appropriate manner. Nor do your colleagues in the Macomb Community College Faculty Organization (MCCFO) consider your conduct to be professional. As the Faculty Organization president, James Yizze, informed you in a letter dated February 12, 1999:

"The [faculty] Senate does not-agree that words are just words. MCCFO concludes that academic professionals may be expected to fit within a certain standard of conduct and deportment. Your regular use of what most people believe to be profane words is below the standard that the Union believes applicable to MCC faculty."

Beyond the use of vulgar, obscene or profane speech per se, it has been reported to the College that you routinely combine your non-germane vulgar, obscene or profane speech with non-germane sexual topics, including your own personal sexual experiences and fantasies. While there may be sexual themes in literature that warrant class discussion, students report that instead of simply explaining the sexual meaning and how it was derived, you frequently use your interpretation of a sexual meaning as an opportunity, or as an excuse, to digress into a full discussion of the sexual topic itself. These digressions often take on a life of their own, since you spend class time discussing the sexual theme in a way that bears no apparent relationship to the literature that allegedly raised the topic in the first place. They are reportedly filled with graphic examples of sexual practices and/or descriptions of your own personal sexual experiences and fantasies. Student reports, as well as statements you have made to College personnel, indicate you tend to take these sexual discussions to an extreme - pushing your stories to a point where students become so squeamish that you feel the need to digress, yet again, with some kind of joke "for comic relief."

Examples of these non-germane digressions include reports that:

* You told your students in class about how your wife once expressed a desire to perform oral sex on her infant son, whose diaper she was changing;

* You told your students in class about how, while performing volunteer work at a hospital, you developed an erection while giving an elderly man a bath and that you dealt with this situation by "mounting" the man;

* You told your class that you used to masturbate to Playboy-style magazines;

* You told your class a story about how you once threw away your Playboy-style magazines due to something a priest told you during confession and that you began using Biblical passages as your substitute masturbatory stimulus;

* You told your class a story about how you once tried to become an "urban legend" by putting Vaseline inside a toilet paper roll and attempting to masturbate by placing your "cock" in the lubricated toilet paper roll, which you tried to connect somehow to a washing machine, but that you failed to accomplish this feat because your "cock" lost interest;

* You described an incident where your wife "held your balls" as you were laying naked in bed;

* You told your class about a man in Detroit who killed his girlfriend, buried her, and then later dug up and "fucked the corpse;"

* You discussed the Clinton/Lewinski affair in class, using the phrase "blow job" while doing so;

* You retold a Sam Kinison joke about a morgue employee who sodomized corpses;

* You told your class that your "soldier wouldn't stand at attention" when you first attempted to have sexual intercourse;

* You told your class every slang term you know for the word penis;

* You told your class that before you were married, you and your wife-to-be would engage in heavy petting and then immediately go to a priest for absolution;

As a teacher, you share with the Board of Trustees the responsibility for the academic quality of College programs. The College has concluded that the conduct discussed above is devoid of academic merit, detracts from the overall educational experience and creates a barrier to learning. As evidenced by the complaints students have filed against you, such behavior has a clear tendency to distract, offend and upset students. Students who are upset, offended or distracted by offensive utterances tend to detach intellectually, avoid class, dislike their educational experience at the College and participate less often. The emotional distress caused by offensive classroom behavior can remain with the student and affect his or her ability to fully engage in other classes. Even you have noted that students tend to "go blank" when you begin using vulgar language or digress to discuss sexual issues. These consequences have an adverse impact on students' academic experience, progress and ultimate success. The College further believes that vulgarity and irrelevant sexual discussions in class harms its academic reputation, reduces the quality of the students' education, decreases student enrollment, wastes class time, materially detracts from the students' educational experience and is unprofessional.

According to the American Association of University Professors, professionalism in the collegiate setting requires you to teach in a non-offensive manner, adhere to your role as an academic guide, "demonstrate respect for students as individuals..." and exercise "critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge." AAUP Statement on Professional Ethics. It has long been the position of the AAUP that professionalism also requires that you consider how the public will view your utterances, "exercise appropriate restraint ...... .. show respect for the opinions of others..." and take care not to introduce controversial matters in class which have no relation to your subject. 1940 Statement of principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure Professionalism. These principles were reaffirmed and extended in 1994, when the AAUP stated that "the intrusion into classroom instruction of sexual references or sexual jokes, even if relatively inoffensive ones ... clearly contribute to an unprofessional academic environment and are not protected by any of the standards or codes of professional responsibility governing academe." Report of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, 1994.

A teaching method that includes non-germane vulgarity, obscenity or profanity or digresses into non-germane sexual topics is both offensive and academically unjustified. The College and the teaching community, both nationally and at Macomb, reject any teaching methods that are offensive to a reasonable person and academically unjustifiable as measured by professional standards. In addition to being offensive and academically unjustified, such methods can harm students. Some students have had extremely adverse reactions to your classroom behavior. Students have reported, for example, that your behavior in class caused them to suffer nightmares, fear for their safety, and feel "degraded," "humiliated," "sexually violated" and "verbally raped." You reportedly told one class that you once traumatized a student so severely that she bit her hand hard enough to draw blood. You have suggested that students may have difficulty with your classroom discussions because they have difficulty with their own sexuality. You are not professionally qualified to render such judgment and the College cannot permit you to take it upon yourself to teach sensitive subjects concerning which you have no professional credentials.

You have stated that the College's concerns are illusory because students can avoid your classroom vulgarity and sexual comments and discussions simply by dropping your classes. This is completely unacceptable to the College. Your exclusionary approach harms students by forcing them to drop your class and disrupt their educational timetable, or transfer late into another section and buy different books. Many of the classes you teach are required for graduation and often there are no other similar classes offered at that time. Students whose only option is to drop must postpone enrolling in advanced courses and push back their date for transfer or graduation. Your preferred approach of forcing students out of your classes is an unacceptable, self-centered and autocratic approach to teaching that disregards student needs and interests. Students should not be forced to choose between interrupting their educational plans and subjecting themselves to your vulgar, obscene or profane speech or digressions into sexual matters.

You are warned that the persistent and pervasive use of vulgar, obscene or profane language and discussion of sex and personal sexual experiences have been found, in both federal and state courts, to be sufficient to constitute sexual harassment. Your actions may form the basis of a viable sexual harassment claim that you have created a hostile learning environment and thus unlawfully discriminated against students. This holds true even if the speech is not targeted at any one person or does not directly refer to the individual's protected characteristic.

As the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals stated in your case, "Speech that rises to the level of harassment -- whether based on sex, race, ethnicity, or other invidious premise -- and which creates a hostile learning environment that ultimately thwarts the academic process, is speech that a learning institution has a strong interest i preventing." The Court of Appeals also stated that even "Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") and the American Association of University Professors ("AAUP") recognize that limitations must exist on college professors' speech in order to provide a learning environment free of
harassment;..."

You are not the judge of what does or does not constitute sexual harassment and/or the creation of a hostile learning environment, and your interest in using non-germane vulgar, obscene or profane speech or digressing into non-germane sexual topics does not outweigh the College's interest in= preventing such speech. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in your own case recognized the College's legal obligation to maintain a learning environment free of hostility and to create policies that serve that purpose:

"While a professor's rights to academic freedom and freedom of expression are paramount in the academic setting, they are not absolute to the point of compromising a student's right to learn in a hostile-free environment. To hold otherwise under these circumstances would send a message that the First Amendment may be used as a shield by teachers who choose to use their unique and superior position to sexually harass students secure in the knowledge that whatever they say or do will be protected. Such a result is one that a state college or university is legally obligated to prevent, and such a result would fail to consider the countervailing interests. See 18 Berkeley J. Emp. & Lab. L. at 320 (['The First Amendment and) [a]cademic freedom must not be used to shield the abuse of a captive audience by racially or sexually derogatory epithets.')."

The College intends to fulfill its legal duty to foster a learning environment that is neither hostile nor discriminatory. The College is also interested in protecting itself from expensive and embarrassing lawsuits filed by students who claim that they were harassed. Consequently, the College will continue to enforce its anti- discrimination and sexual harassment policies. You are further advised that due to your past conduct and outspoken refusals to comply with College policy, the College may not defend you in a sexual harassment or retaliation suit filed against you.

Discouragement of Complaints

The College has received information that you actively discourage students from complaining about your classroom behavior and that you have ridiculed and retaliated against students who have complained. One student, for example, reported that you use your position "as a platform for authority to intimidate [your] students not to complain about" you and that you "repeatedly made fun of students who had expressed offense or disgust and [you] also laughed at them." Moreover, in an effort to send a message to "any possible student who complains ..." to the College about your behavior, you drafted and publicly circulated a caustic attack on a student complainant that mocked and ridiculed the student, made baseless accusations against the student and demeaned the student for complaining about your conduct.

You have combined your public retaliation against a student complainant with statements designed to establish that complaining about your classroom conduct is futile. You have repeatedly announced in public that you will not alter your classroom style or otherwise follow the College's policy prohibiting regular use of vulgar, obscene, or profane language that is not germane to course content. Students report that you announce at the beginning of each semester that you plan to use vulgar language and discuss sex in class, state that there is nothing anybody can do about that, and tell students who dislike or disapprove of your behavior to drop the class. You respond callously when students try to protest your behavior, such as when you responded "fuck it, that's who I am; that's what I am going to do" to a student who objected to your vulgar classroom speech. You have also responded to an associate dean, who was asking you how to handle a student complaint regarding your vulgar speech, to urge the student to "seek therapy" and "kiss your ass."

These behaviors clearly dissuade students from complaining or otherwise advancing their rights. The releasing of confidential student complaints or records, mocking or laughing at students who protest or complain about your classroom behavior, telling students that you will never change your behavior in class, making accusations against students who protest or complain- about your classroom behavior, and suggesting that students who disapprove of vulgar language and non-germane talk about sex are childish or somehow not adult is not acceptable to the College. In short, this "Fuck it, that's who I am,"' and "urge him or her to seek therapy" and "tell 'em to kiss your ass" behavior will not be tolerated by the College. Students have the right to complain or otherwise advance their rights and the College wishes to foster an atmosphere where students feel free to advocate their positions and/or complain about perceived misconduct or harassment and can do so without intimidation or fear of retaliation.

Employment Of A Grading Practice That Does Not Adequately Reflect And Certify The Students' Mastery Of Course -Related Material

The College has acquired information that gives it cause to question whether you are fulfilling your contractual obligation to grade students in a manner that fairly evaluates their academic progress. One of your former students has stated that, despite receiving nothing but "C's" in high school English, she had secured an "A" in a fall semester class by October. The student said that, by the end of the semester, she had enough "A's" for three people. You gave another student a passing grade even though she stopped attending class less than half way through a semester. One student stated that you are regarded as an easy "A" and that you use your lenient grading policy as a way to entice students to tolerate your vulgar classroom behavior. Indeed, your first day handouts imply that students can earn a passing grade simply by participating frequently in classroom discussion and that students in your composition classes can receive a passing grade without ever submitting written work.

You are reminded of Article VI of the governing Collective Bargaining Agreement, which provides that "[t]he teacher shares with the Board responsibility for the academic quality of the College programs." You are also reminded of your obligation to issue grades to students in a manner that actually reflects and certifies the students' level of mastery of the subject matter and the related course objectives.

Performance Monitoring

This counseling memorandum identifies certain conduct that the college finds unacceptable. Because of your frequent public statements about refusing to change your classroom behavior, the College believes it is necessary to monitor your performance when you return to work in January. Therefore, you are hereby notified that an instructional administrator will be present in each of your classes during the first week of the Spring 2002 semester in order to verify that your performance fulfills your contractual responsibilities as a teacher, and complies with the requirements of this counseling memorandum.

Summary

Through this memorandum, the College is providing direction to guide your future teaching practices and behaviors. You are cautioned, however, that violation of any of the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement or the policies of the College or the repetition of the unacceptable practices set forth herein will subject you to further discipline up to and including discharge.

Granted, it's hard to read the letter in the way I have described it, precisely because it goes to such great lengths to demonize Bonnell--to represent him as an uncontrolled pervert who has no professional standards and who cannot control his obscene outbursts. But the image of John Bonnell as a serial sexual harasser whose preferred medium of attack is his classroom is a tactical creation of a college that would rather violate his rights and ruin his career than tell the occasional complaining student (who is also a paying customer) to grow up. Students do not have the right not to be offended, and a bad word or dirty anecdote does not harassment make. But Macomb Community College would rather fire John Bonnell than further offend an offended student by telling her the truth.

Tomorrow, I'll post Bonnell's reply to Provost Bellanca's missive. Among other things, it reveals an individual of eloquence, intelligence, and large learning--one whose sound judgement and evident ability to teach comes through loud and clear.

UPDATE: Kimberly Swygert has more.