January 12, 2009
Building bridges
Good news in the making common cause department:
Washington--Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors, generally does not see eye-to-eye with critics of college campuses as hotbeds of political correctness and liberal indoctrination. When he debated Peter Wood, executive director of the National Association of Scholars, over the meaning of academic freedom, on Friday at the group's annual conference, both predictably came out swinging.Mr. Nelson repeatedly characterized the scholars' association as threatening professors' freedom to teach, while Mr. Wood accused the faculty group of showing far too little concern for the plight of students who get bad grades or face disciplinary proceedings based on their political views.
So primed was he for a fight that Mr. Nelson, a professor of English at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, even took jabs at a few opponents who were not even in the ring, including the tradition-minded American Council of Trustees and Alumni and David Horowitz, the conservative activist who has made a crusade of urging state governments and colleges to discourage indoctrination in the classroom.
In the subsequent question-and-answer session, however, Mr. Nelson seemed downright sympathetic with those present when it came to the subject of campus speech codes. Anne D. Neal, president of the trustees-and-alumni group, asked him whether the AAUP could move beyond its disagreements with organizations like hers and work together on areas of common ground. Mr. Nelson replied that his group would be willing to work with hers to fight speech codes, which it has long opposed.
In a later interview, Mr. Nelson said he saw speech codes as such an affront to academic freedom and freedom of speech that offering to join others in fighting them was an easy call.
"One of the reasons you collaborate is to win," he said. "I want to knock out speech codes."
Here's to coalitions replacing culture wars. That won't mean the end of disagreement--but it could go a long way toward replacing dysfunctional stalemates with constructive action that benefits all.
Interestingly, Nelson's own home institution, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, receives a red light rating from FIRE for its policies on speech. Check out UIUC's problematic policies here.
Trackback Pings:
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.erinoconnor.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1575
Comments:
Is this really that surprising? As far as I can tell, most prominent academic commentators on both the right *and* left are pretty critical of speech codes these days, and have been for some time. The real problem, it seems, is *administrators* (think Purdue).
guez..."The real problem, it seems, is *administrators*"...I suspect that the typical administrative position, in higher education and in the k-12 world, is a "promotion job" in the sense defined by a Royal Navy officer. Search "promiton jobs" (with the quotes) at my blog for this officer's thoughts.
...surely, they must have been doing something right, given the Royal Navy's performance in the war. Well, sometimes all that's needed for one side to win is not for it to do anything particularly well, but for the other side to do even worse.
ES...'tis true...in war as in business and politics, sometimes you can win due entirely to the other side's stupidity. Not wise to *count* on it, though. (And the assumption that people sometimes make about the superior efficiency of dictatorships is not borne out by the military decision-making of the Nazi regime.)
My sense is that the RN, at least since Samuel Pepys, has been a pretty high-performance organization--for one thing, it was relatively meritocratic, never requiring officers to purchase their commissions as did the British Army.
There's an interesting analysis of the organization/cultural reasons for RN performance written by a Spanish enemy in 1797. Search "1797" at my blog.
![[Critical Mass]](/archives/cmlogo.gif)