Skip to main content

FIRE launches new database for tracking attacks on speech

Image: 

The number of scholars targeted for their speech has risen dramatically since 2015, and undergraduates increasingly are to blame, according to a database of these incidents released today by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

Undergraduates aren’t the only ones seeking to censor graduate students, instructors, professors and other researchers, FIRE’s database and an accompanying report make clear. But undergraduates’ prevalence within FIRE’s new database concerns the pro-speech group nonetheless.

Komi German, a research fellow at FIRE, said Monday that it’s unclear whether there are more students than ever seeking to “punish” scholars for their speech, or if there are an “emboldened” but relative few. Either way, German said, “it’s a huge red flag for those concerned about students’ tolerance of dissenting views.”

Other would-be censors include politicians and the general public. But threats to scholars’ free speech increasingly originate from within the campus community, not limited to but especially students, according to the report. (The chart below shows incidents over time, by who is initiating them on campus.)

number of incidents by year chartThis is far from the first time that FIRE has warned that students represent an increasing threat to free speech on campus. FIRE’s president, Greg Lukianoff, has written or co-written a series of books to this effect, most recently The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure, in 2018. But FIRE’s report says the database is “the most comprehensive documentation to date on targeting incidents” at U.S. institutions, from 2015 through July of this year.

Increasing Over Time

FIRE, which plans to continue adding to the database, so far logs 426 incidents since 2015. Some 74 percent of incidents thus far resulted in some kind of sanction -- including an investigation alone or voluntary resignation -- against the scholar. Suspensions, terminations and other obvious sanctions count, too, of course.

Whereas there were just 24 such incidents in 2015, according to the database, there were 113 in 2020. The first half of 2021 saw 61.

Of the 426 incidents total, 63 percent involved a scholar expressing what FIRE determined to be a personal view or opinion on a controversial social issue. More than 100 incidents involved scholars’ social media.

Half of the incidents involved a scholar’s research or teaching practices, or both.

In 107 cases, scholars were presenting what FIRE describes as “sensitive, controversial and/or difficult content,” such as text containing a racial slur or portraying violence against women, for “purposes of encouraging discussion and learning.” In 106 cases, scholars were discussing scholarship, doing research or offering a "testable hypothesis."

The pedagogical climate is changing and some scholars no longer believe it’s acceptable to require students to read or view triggering content, especially without a warning. But FIRE takes the view that targeting scholars for what they say or do in the classroom or in their research has “the effect of undermining the primary function of academic freedom: to ensure the furtherance of knowledge in American institutions of higher education.”

Scholars most often targeted for views on race -- chartScholars were most often targeted for their speech on race, according to FIRE’s analysis. Other hot-button issues were partisanship, gender and campus policies. Targeted scholars tended to study law, political science, English, history and philosophy -- fields that are, alarmingly, to FIRE, “at the core of a liberal arts education” and “routinely discuss and debate what it means to live in a free and open society.”

FIRE defines a targeting incident as a campus controversy involving “efforts to investigate, penalize or otherwise professionally sanction a scholar for engaging in constitutionally protected forms of speech.” A scholar who is harassed for their speech but who didn’t face a professional sanction -- as serious and as real as these cases are -- wouldn’t qualify as a target.

Similarly, a professor who faced professional sanctions for unprotected speech or actions wouldn’t be a target, in FIRE’s view. In one example, FIRE excluded from its database Melissa Click, the former assistant professor of communication studies at the University of Missouri at Columbia who was fired in 2016 for attempting to block student journalists from covering a student protest. Because Click physically obstructed members of the news media from covering a protest, FIRE says, her speech was not protected.

Here, and elsewhere in the report, FIRE differs from groups less focused on First Amendment fundamentals than academic freedom, namely the American Association of University Professors. The AAUP defended Click, if not her actions, to Mizzou and eventually censured the university for not following established disciplinary procedures in her case.

More From the Left

Unsurprisingly, in this increasingly polarized political environment, FIRE determined that many targeting incidents are political in nature. FIRE also found that targeted incidents “come from individuals and groups to the political left of the scholar more often than the political right.”

Sometimes this is something of a guessing game, as in the case of Teresa Buchanan, whom Louisiana State University fired in 2015 for cursing and talking to students about sex in her education classes. The FIRE database says that Buchanan was targeted from the political left, relative to her. She publicly attributed her termination to “political correctness run amok,” but it’s otherwise unclear where this opposition originated. The university said she’d created a hostile learning environment.

Top three sources of targeting incidents, from right or left, with undergraduates leading from leftGerman, of FIRE, said that in each case, “we look at the totality of evidence. And it's important to note that we characterize incidents as coming from the right or the left of the scholar.” A scholar on the political left can still be targeted from the left, she said, “and a scholar from the right can be targeted from the right.”

In any case, Buchanan, as a woman, wasn’t the typical target. According to FIRE, censorship attempts are more often aimed as “scholars who are tenured, white and male.”

Bruce Gilley, a white, tenured male professor of political science at Portland State University, for instance, has been targeted multiple times for his teaching and research, including over a 2017 paper defending aspects of colonialism. These incidents have led to serious professional consequences for Gilley, including the withdrawal of his book on imperialist Sir Alan Burns by its original publisher.

FIRE’s accounting may nevertheless obscure the racial dynamics at play here. Many scholars of color report that they have been targeted for harassment online and even faced death threats for their speech. A recent survey by the AAUP, for instance, found that scholars who were profiled by a conservative website for their “liberal bias” in 2020 were disproportionately Black, and that 40 percent of all those profiled had faced harassment leading up to threats of violence or death. FIRE mentions this survey in its report, and its database includes numerous scholars of color, including sociologist Saida Grundy, whose tweets about race proved controversial when she was an incoming professor at Boston University in 2015. But if the incident FIRE investigated didn’t involve some explicitly professional consequence for the scholar, it was not included in the database.

FIRE is a proponent of the Chicago Principles ensuring campus speech protections. The group found that campuses where the most targeting incidents occurred had “speech-restrictive” policies and were unlikely to have adopted the Chicago Principles, which originated at the University of Chicago. The foundation also recently launched a legal defense fund for targeted scholars.

Questions About Methodology -- and Shared Concerns

To fill the database, FIRE gathered data from news reports and other tracking projects, including the Free Speech Tracker from Georgetown University’s Free Speech Project, the National Association of Scholars’ “Tracking ‘Cancel Culture’ in Higher Education” list and Retraction Watch.

Joerg Tiede, director of research for the AAUP, expressed some concerns about FIRE’s left-right threat methodology. Erlene Grise-Owens, whom Spalding University told to resign in 2016, for instance, had criticized the university for allegedly failing to notify Black faculty members in particular that a student in their department had brought a gun to class. FIRE determined that she’d been targeted from the political right, relative to her. But Tiede called this “bizarre reasoning.” In the same vein, he said, if Buchanan’s left-threat determination is based on the idea that the political left is the “language police,” that’s also suspect.

Tiede said that the AAUP tends to think of scholars as being “targeted” on social media. He also noted that the AAUP doesn’t consider investigations, which make up the biggest share of FIRE’s logged sanctions, to be sanctions on their own. Summary suspensions pending investigations are sanctions, however, he said.

Crucially, according to widely followed AAUP principles, serious sanctions shouldn’t be contemplated without the involvement of a faculty body, Tiede said.

Despite these criticisms, the AAUP, among other pro-speech groups, has expressed general concern about the climate for scholars’ speech, including for those who discuss race on social media, and with respect to trigger warnings and even Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which makes gender discrimination illegal.

The AAUP’s 2016 report on Title IX, for instance, cited a “frenzy of cases in which administrators’ apparent fears” have overridden faculty academic freedom, along with student free speech rights.

Academic Freedom
Faculty
Image Source: 
Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Newsletter Order: 
0
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 
Magazine treatment: 
Display Promo Box: 
Live Updates: 
liveupdates0
Most Popular: 
3
Ad slot: 
8
In-Article related stories: 
12


Udimi - Buy Solo Ads from Inside Higher Ed https://ift.tt/38y2HCt
via IFTTT

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Author discusses book on grad school

Graduate school is a great mystery to students, and to some faculty members, says Jessica McCrory Calarco, the author of A Field Guide to Grad School: Uncovering the Hidden Curriculum (Princeton University Press). Calarco is an associate professor of sociology at Indiana University. She believes many faculty members (as well as graduate students, of course) will benefit from her book. She responded to questions via email. Q: How did you get the idea to write this book? Why did the issue speak to you? A: This book started as a tweet . Or, rather, as a series of tweets about the hidden curriculum of higher ed. Ph.D. student Kristen K. Smith had tweeted about the need to better educate undergrads about grad school opportunities, and it made me think about how opportunities in academe are often hidden from grad students, as well. Reflecting on my own experiences in grad school, I thought about the many times I'd found myself embarrassed because of what I didn't know -- the

Guest Blog: Where Does the Bizarre Hysteria About “Critical Race Theory” Come From?—Follow the Money!

Blog:  Just Visiting Guest Blog: Where Does the Bizarre Hysteria About “Critical Race Theory” Come From?—Follow the Money! By Isaac Kamola Trinity College Hartford, CT There are now numerous well-documented examples of wealthy right-wing and libertarian donors using that wealth to transform higher education in their own image. Between 2005 and 2019, for example, the Charles Koch Foundation has spent over  $485 million  at more than 550 universities. As demonstrated by Douglas Beets and others, many of these grants include considerable  donor influence  over what gets taught, researched, and even who gets hired. It should therefore come as no surprise that conservative megadonor, Walter Hussman Jr.,  lobbied hard  to deny the Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones a tenured professorship at the UNC journalism school that bears his name. Nor that her offer of tenure, awarded through the normal channels of faculty governance, was ultimately  revoked   by a far-

Live Updates: Latest News on COVID-19 and Higher Education

Image:  Woman Charged With Faking Positive COVID-19 Test From U of Iowa   Nov. 5, 6:14 a.m. A lawyer in Colorado has been charged with faking a positive COVID-19 test from the University of Iowa to get out of a court appearance, The Gazette reported.   Emily Elizabeth Cohen was booked Tuesday on a detainer from the Boulder County Sheriff’s Office, shortly after she tweeted that the Colorado court system “just had me arrested alleging I lied about having COVID. Tweeting from cop car.”   The Boulder Daily Camera reported that Cohen is scheduled for a 10-day trial in Boulder County in Colorado starting Dec. 6 for 11 felony counts stemming from allegations she collected fees from immigrant families before losing contact with them without producing visas or work permits.   -- Scott Jaschik Judge Permits Suit Against Montana State to Go to Trial Nov. 3, 6:18 a.m. A Montana judge has ruled that a suit against Montana State University over the shift to online education