BCT Editorial – 1/19/06

This page was last updated on January 26, 2006.

It’s academic; Editorial; Beaver County Times; January 19, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“The Legislature appears to be poised once more to take off in hot pursuit of a solution for which there isn’t much of a problem.

“The Associated Press reports a state legislative panel is investigating whether Pennsylvania’s public colleges and universities are hospitable to divergent intellectual and political views and whether the state needs to adopt an ‘academic bill of rights’ to protect them.

“The Pennsylvania inquiry is part of a national debate fueled by allegations that liberal professors are infringing on conservative students’ right to free speech at taxpayer-funded colleges and universities.

“Pennsylvania is not alone. Academic bills of rights have been introduced in at least 15 states in the last year.

“Significantly, no state has adopted one, and Pennsylvania should swell their ranks to 16. The academic bill of rights movement is as silly as the ridiculous speech codes that many schools have adopted - and should repeal.”

[RWC] Take the speech code comment with a grain of salt; I believe it is gratuitous. Why? A search of Times editorials from 2002 to present found no editorials condemning speech codes.

The editorial forgot to note speech codes by taxpayer-funded institutions are an unconstitutional denial of free speech. What would be legal on a private school’s campus – but still reprehensible – is illegal on a public college campus, that is if you accept the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Here’s an example of the speech code at Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Section B2 of the Sign and Poster Policy states, “IUP is an equal opportunity/affirmative action institution. The posting of material that is insensitive to affirmative action issues (racism, sexism, etc.) is prohibited, and alleged violations should be referred to the Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs.” In other words, posters opposing so-called affirmative action – a.k.a. institutional discrimination – are prohibited.

“On top of that, it takes real chutzpah for members of the Legislature to talk about writing rules covering academic freedom when our state-owned and state-related universities could sue them for financial nonsupport.”

[RWC] What on Earth is the author writing about?

“A comment by state Rep. Dan Surra, a committee member who has questioned the need for the investigation, summed it up fairly concisely.”

[RWC] Note the author didn’t tell us the party affiliation of Mr. Surra. You’ll find out why in the following paragraphs. Mr. Surra is a Democrat representative from Clearfield and Elk counties.

“The AP reported Surra said nothing he has heard so far has swayed him and that college students in his rural district complained about issues such as tuition, but not about professors being biased.”

[RWC] The “college students in his rural district” is a clever dodge. Why? As a member of the Select Committee on Student Academic Freedom, Mr. Surra has heard hours of testimony about academic bias. Of course, I don’t know if any of the students who testified were from his district.

“‘I’ve said it’s the educational equivalent of the hunt for Bigfoot,’ he said.”

[RWC] What a hoot! A liberal newspaper and a liberal politician claim there’s no liberal bias on college campuses and we’re supposed to accept it.

I believe the facts show liberal bias on college campuses. How many reports do we need of instructors requiring students to write papers condemning one conservative position or another? How many times must we read of conservative speakers being shouted down or physically attacked during a speech? Does all of this mean students need an academic bill of rights? I’m not sure. I tend to believe the less government involvement, the better. Of course, the same people who implement speech codes and oppose an academic bill of rights are the same people who readily stick out their hands for taxpayer dollars.