Letter to campus from President Scholz and his PR flacks here:
Daily Emerald report on what happened when people pushed him on what he meant here:
The protestors marched to Johnson Hall where Smith, Urbancic, O’Neal and Tuten attempted to make the delivery to President Scholz, but Mark Schmelz, chief human resources and vice president, “intercepted,” according to O’Neal.
… “These measures include but are not limited to the University’s requests that students report their instructors’ political course content and targeting peaceful student protests using video recordings from the Board of Trustees public meetings. The CLC interprets these measures as threats to free speech on campus and the practice of academic freedom for educators at UO,” the media advisory said.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education gives UO a yellow rating for Free Speech, noting:
University of Oregon has been given the speech code rating Yellow. Yellow light colleges and universities are those institutions with at least one ambiguous policy that too easily encourages administrative abuse and arbitrary application.
What is this stuff about supposedly soliciting reporting on political course content? I smell a rat.
Here is the rat Uncle Bernie smells:
Posted on UO matters on 05/06/2024:
Pres Scholz asks students to narc on faculty who try and use their academic freedom
By UO Matters on 05/06/2024
Actually, he got VP Kris Winter to do his dirty work with this email to students:
… In short, no student should be encouraged or compelled by UO employees to be exposed to the protest or encampment. This includes visiting the encampment for any academic or instructional purpose including class or office hours. I encourage students to reach out to report concerns through the links in this message, to practice self-care and mutual support, and to make use of the following resources as we navigate this challenging time. …
As it happens, UO has a policy on academic freedom that addresses this, and does so far more liberally (in the classical sense) than what UO is telling its students:
b. TEACHING. The University’s responsibility to help students to think critically and independently requires that members of the university community have the right to investigate and discuss matters, including those that are controversial, inside and outside of class, without fear of institutional restraint. Matters brought up in class should be related to the subject of courses or otherwise be educationally relevant, as determined primarily by the faculty member in charge of the class.
No trigger warnings? I wonder what the reaction would be if students were forced to attend a Klan rally or a Nazi demonstration in the name of some professor’s “academic freedom.” I have a feeling that would not go down so well with the rest of the faculty. Amy Wax at U. Penn?
Imagine the wonderful publicity for UO if Jewish or Israeli students or their supporters were forced to attend what transparently were pro-Hamas rallies.
What sort of “pro-Hamas rallies” have you seen on campus?
All of them. “From the river to the sea.” I know exactly what that means. Don’t give me that stuff. Everyone understands.
**eyeroll** I’ll tell all my Jewish friends, who are clearly “self-loathing,” to stop being so pro-Hamas.
“River to the Sea” — Uncle Bernie?
“Netanyahu’s cartography, as Thomas L. Friedman noted in the Times, does not show a border between the river and the sea. The entire land, in Netanyahu’s view, is Israel.”
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-lede/why-netanyahu-wont-cease-fire
This blog is an unlikely place for a fruitful discussion on peace in the Middle East, but whatever.
Am I mistaken? You are the one who wants for professors to be able to compel students
to attend the “encampments” against their conscience?
I think the student conduct charges brought against some of the Gaza protesters raise serious concerns about the administration’s response to student protest. At some point, I would urge that its irresponsible, heavy-handed response be a focus of inquiry by those concerned with student’s right to free speech
I have now advised four students, based on both my knowledge of the student conduct code and my legal background. The students were all charged with “damaging university property” by (allegedly) writing a slogan on the Johnson Hall steps in washable chalk. The proposed sanction was expulsion. In one case, there was absolutely no evidence that the student charged was even on campus when the action occurred; the charges were dropped, but the question remains of why the Office of Student Affairs –which brought the charges–and the General Counsel’s office, which approved their doing so–would bring charges without a shred of evidence against the student in question. Other cases the raised further problems. One student was halfway through writing the first letter (“T”) of their statement when they were stopped by campus security, told to kneel on the ground, their name taken, and subsequently charged with expulsion (for basically drawing a five inch line in washable chalk). To my knowledge, this case and others are still dragging on, months later, wasting the time of everyone involved.
Why doesn’t the Office of Student Affairs find more useful things to do with its time, like sponsoring some discussion/fora on the crisis in the Middle East? This would serve to promote dialogue/debate, rather than chill it. Why doesn’t the General Counsel’s office devote its time to matters of concern to the whole community, instead of being overpaid academic ambulance-chasers for administration?
And where is the faculty leadership on this issue? We should thank Cheyney Ryan for his support for students engaging in world affairs rather than planning what beer they will drink during “game day” on Saturday.