Jeremy Fugleberg
A political move by the South Dakota Board of Regents landed them in hot water with some faculty at an SDSU Faculty Senate meeting Oct. 10.
At back-to-back afternoon meetings, Jim Shekleton, the BOR’s lawyer, spoke with students then the Faculty Senate about a new required addition to every class’ syllabus. The addition lets students know how they can protest if they feel an instructor is biased against them because of different beliefs.
The faculty said at the meeting that what bothered them the most wasn’t what the statement said. What seemed to offend some faculty was what they saw as unfair, heavy-handed action by the BOR without any discussion with faculty before making a decision.
“When we’re told to do these things, sir, soon our contempt will show for the system,” said Brady Phelps, a professor of philosophy.
Instructors were told of the required change to their syllabi during the last part of August – after many had already printed their fall semester course programs.
“What’s the first thing we see when we come back from the fall is another mandate for our syllabus, without any consultation,” said Gary Aguiar, a political science professor. “It flies completely in the face of faculty government.”
Shekleton said the BOR was simply keeping a promise made to legislators earlier in the year. For days, he said, a debate raged on the floors of the state capitol on whether students were under attack by liberal professors.
With the help of student government leaders and friendly legislators, the BOR was able to assure other legislators that something would be done. Shekleton said the statement was also meant to fend off any political action during the next legislative session.
“It’s unfortunate we couldn’t have meetings like this on the front end, but the timetable isn’t always ours,” he said. “I can understand why people would say ‘Well, here (the BOR) go again.’ But the next step is to say, ‘Wait a minute, what’s going on here?’”
The BOR should’ve discussed the move with faculty, said Meredith Redlin, a sociology professor. She said a statement of academic freedom for students should be joined by a statement saying instructors have the same protection.
“It’s not mandated like the (students’) was. It seems that would be a way to change the entire discussion politically,” she said. “You haven’t changed the tenor at all – you’ve simply addressed (the legislators’) concerns.”
Redlin said she and other professors have already added a section on the academic freedom of professors to their syllabi in reaction to the required statement. Shekleton said such a move was up to each instructor, but the BOR wouldn’t mandate adding such a section – fearing the political backlash.
“If we go in and try to emphasize faculty rights, we muddle the message,” he said.
Aguiar said students may take advantage of the policy to persecute him or other professors.
“(If) the students don’t respect me in my class, now you’ve given them more power,” he said. “You’re explicitly telling them – you’re raising every alarm. They want power, everybody wants power. So if they can find any means to rake anyone over the coals, they will.”
But Shekleton said only five complaints were reported to the BOR from all the public universities across the state last year.
“The reality is that students have not abused the rights given to them under student policy,” he said. “Students have been responsible citizens of the university.”
Related posts:
Follow Us!