In November.

In November, AAUP leaders testified in public hearings of the Pennsylvania House chosen Committee on Student Academic Freedom upon the University of Pittsburgh campus. The committee was charged at the state legislature with examining the academic atmosphere in Pennsylvania and the order to which faculty have the opportunity to instruct and scholars have the opportunity to learn in an environment conducive to the pursuit of knowledge and truth

Joan Wallach Scott Harold F Linder Professor of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced studious mood and former chair of the AAUP's Committee A in succession Academic Freedom and Tenure, and Robert Moore, professor of sociology at Saint Joseph's University in Philadelphia and presidentelect of the Pennsylvania conversation of the AAUP, testified at the hearings. They outlined basic academic freedom transactions as well as clarifying that existing AAUP and institutional policies already cover student rights in the classroom. Scott pointed gone out to the committee that "it is the same thing to insist (as we do) that there be prize for differences of opinion; another to argue that all opinions have the same weight." She also reminded the committee of the difference between freedom of expression and academic freedom. "Academic freedom pertains to scholars as professionals, not individuals. . . It carries responsibilities enforced by the agency of one's peers. Students do not have this kind of academic freedom and they ought not to be l to believe that they do."

The committee also heard from Stephen Balch, president of the National Association of Scholars; James Maher, provost of the University of Pittsburgh; Burrell Brown professor of labor and human resources at California University of Pennsylvania; and Grant Hackley, a second-year law observer and editor of the law review at the University of Pittsburgh.

With the exception of Balch, who combated that a widespread ideological imbalance among faculty has substituted advocacy and activism for education, the witnesses all oppos any attempt by the agency of the committee to develop further guidelines for academic institutions. In varying ways, all inclemencyed the principles of academic freedom, faculty governance, and the autonomy of the academy based upon the professional standards of the disciplines. They also emphasized that existing policies and practices at institutions across the commonwealth already shield students' legitimate concerns.

The committee plans to detain additional hearings in January and March and to issue a report by means of November 2006.

-G.B.

...

Home