BY HANK REICHMAN
Back in October when Lora Burnett, a history professor at Collin College in Texas, was hounded by internet trolls for a comment she made about Vice-President Mike Pence’s appearance during the vice-presidential debate, her administration buckled under the pressure and publicly denounced her, ignoring their own policy’s written commitment “to uphold vigorously the principles of academic freedom and to protect the faculty from harassment, censorship, or interference from outside groups and individuals.” I blogged about the incident (here) and Burnett herself wrote about it in the Chronicle of Higher Education (here). The school’s faculty council also weighed in. But now the Collin administration is at it again.
This time a previously-approved panel discussion scheduled for January was abruptly cancelled by the college’s vice-president of campus operations, Toni Jenkins. The panel, entitled “Finding Your Voice,” had been accepted as part of a spring faculty development conference on the theme “Teaching and Learning Through Change,” to be conducted via Zoom January 7-9. The director of the Center for Teaching and Learning approved the panel, but Jenkins overruled that decision, claiming the “session does not appear to be consistent with the conference’s professional development theme.”
That explanation seemed more than a little far-fetched to the session’s organizers and other Collin faculty members, as the panel’s purpose was to discuss how faculty could support each other, suggest outside resources for support, and indicate what to do when faculty feel concerns aren’t being heard. More likely, they feared, is that the panel organizers had recently been active in forming a chapter of the Texas Faculty Association, a non-collective bargaining affiliate of the National Education Association. One panelist had spoken to the press about Collin’s abysmal record with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic, no doubt thereby angering an administration that too frequently behaves vindictively. Previously, a part-time faculty member in the nursing program died, but the administration hid her identity and failed to provide faculty members with information about the extent of infection at the school and what was being done about it. Another panelist was to be a long-time leader of the AAUP’s Texas state conference, Lynn Tatum of Baylor University.
Here is an excerpt from the description submitted by the panelists:
Session objectives: 1. Address and discuss a few of the current major stressors facing faculty that are leading to widespread declining morale, feelings of detachment and cynicism, and a sense of not being valued. 2. Discuss evidence-based solutions to improve morale and burnout, in particular sharing feelings and experiences with colleagues and taking positive actions toward addressing some of the main stressors. 3. Set clear goals for improvement for all faculty, such as better institutional communication, stronger protections for free expression, and networking with both colleagues and external organizations as a way to advocate for ourselves and for others. . . . Faculty panelists will discuss the concerns about morale, the widely-held anxieties among colleagues, and how lack of communication can add to the challenge of doing one’s best work. Panelists will propose solutions aimed at connecting and communicating with colleagues, working together toward protecting free expression, achieving transparent communication, and maintaining a commitment to ongoing action on these topics.
Now, arguably, one might claim that these goals are not directly related to classroom teaching, but the presentation by the conference’s advertised keynote speaker is entitled “The Hidden Learning Disability of Anxiety, Stress, and Trauma.” Its description notes that “mental health issues are becoming a crisis in Education due to the pandemic.” If that is a theme of the conference surely the above description should fit more than comfortably. Moreover, given that one faculty member, who has taught at the school for more than fifteen years, told me that “morale has never been lower,” both keynote and session topics would seem quite timely. “We’re all still doing the job,” that faculty member said, “but for many our hearts are no longer in it. That is damaging to our students in the long run, and students should come first.” The session was designed to address that problem.
In its 1994 statement On the Relationship of Faculty Governance to Academic Freedom, the AAUP argued that the faculty’s academic freedom must encompass the right to express views “on matters having to do with their institution and its policies” because “grounds for thinking an institutional policy desirable or undesirable must be heard and assessed if the community is to have confidence that its policies are appropriate.” The censorship of this session suggests that Collin’s administration, already conducting itself in a questionable manner, is seeking to silence, or at least restrict access to, such views.
Moreover, faculty development activities should closely involve the faculty and address faculty interests and concerns. Surely, a vice-president of campus operations — whatever that position may entail, the title hardly suggests disciplinary or pedagogical responsibilities, much less competence — should never be in a position to veto a program such as this one. Indeed, I’ve been told that some faculty members at Collin have come to consider Jenkins the campus equivalent of Jared Kushner — intensely loyal to the president and hence rewarded with an omnibus portfolio of responsibilities, whether qualified to carry them out or not.
One historian at the college summed up the controversy well on Twitter:
Consistent with the eroding atmosphere of free speech & academic freedom at my college, a previously-approved panel discussion about those issues scheduled for January has been abruptly cancelled by the administration. I need not point out the oh-so-thick irony.
— (((drphillips2001))) (@drphillips2001) December 12, 2020
I am always surprised when AAUP and other bloggers do not provide a FULL accounting of the facts so that readers can make their own judgments about the issues presented. In this case, there is mention of “a comment she made about Vice-President Mike Pence’s appearance during the vice-presidential debate,”
While I can’t imagine that a professor would make an extremely untoward comment about the VP of the USA, “anything’s possible.” Suppose that she called him a “religious Nazi” (as some have done); might that not be considered offensive to Christians? What if she used a curse word? I’m usually an almost-absolute defender of Free Speech and Academic Freedom but Hank’s blog above makes it seem like the college’s actions were COMPLETELY unjustified and arbitrary. Maybe they were but without the information on what the prof said about Pence, we’re left in the dark.
Of course, if her comment was an innocent reference to the fly that landed on Pence’s face during the debate, then maybe the college’s actions were overblown. 🙂
I am never surprised that Mr. Tomasulo seems not to recognize that blog posts are more like op-eds than reportorial “full accountings.” That said, I am somewhat surprised that he apparently does not know how to use hyperlinks. Mr. Tomasulo demands a full accounting of what I’ll call the Burnett-Pence incident, but seems to miss that this post informs its readers that not only did I already cover this at length on this blog (here’s the full URL: https://academeblog.org/2020/10/13/demon-vs-monster-the-vice-presidential-debate-and-an-historians-harassment/) but that Prof. Burnett wrote about it in the Chronicle of Higher Education as well (here: https://www.chronicle.com/article/right-wing-trolls-attacked-me-my-administration-buckled).
I am, however, truly surprised — and a bit concerned — that Mr. Tomasulo’s memory may be failing him. For not only did he read my earlier blog post, which answered all the questions raised in this latest comment, he actually commented on that one too, exactly two months ago today! Indeed, it’s the first comment. Moreover, his comment at the time did not call for a “full accounting” of the facts in that incident.
There’s no need to be surprised by DR. Tomasulo’s failure to remember an earlier blog. DR. Tomasulo is 73.8 years old and occasionally has a “senior moment.” Just as important, I have repeatedly called to bundle ALL posts on the same subject together, rather than having to depend on one’s memory of a specific fact or opinion on a long-ago (two months ago) issue.
I apologize for not noticing that Dr. Barnett’s side of the story was linked (under “here”) and contained her exact words (I hope) about VP Pence. But when I clicked the link, it sent me to yet another link. Out of sheer laziness, I opted not to get involved with filling out all my biographical information to get to that information — especially since I had hoped that Hank would have provided that material in THIS blog.
Hank IS right, though, that I do expect these blogs to be more than op-eds, filled with unsubstantiated opinion, especially if the blogger expects to change MY opinion, enlist me in a cause, or even just share a bit of reportage. As one who has taught and published on various aspects of Communication — including graduate courses in journalism — I am ever-skeptical of things I read, unless accompanied by relevant facts and details. Even op-ed columns use evidence to support their claims, no? And they don’t require to look back two months to find those details.
I’m always more than happy to reiterate what I said about soon-to-be-former Vice President Mike Pence. After he repeatedly continued talking even after the debate moderator repeatedly said, “your time is up, your time is up, Mr. Vice President,” I said that he should “shut his little demon mouth.”
I wrote that on my own time, on my own twitter feed, in my capacity as a private citizen commenting on a political matter. In that context, far outside the purview of my job duties, I can call the Vice President anything I please, and I will continue to do so.
For my college to discipline me for protected First Amendment speech is a violation of my civil rights, for which the college could be found liable. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education learned of my college’s illegal behavior, and began asking the college some questions and requesting information under public records acts. Because of that, though I have brought no suit against my employer, my employer has lawyered up and hired a very expensive white-shoe law firm in Dallas, spending God only knows how many taxpayer dollars, to defend their bad habit of seeking to quell protected speech of faculty members.
Beginning last summer, the college had resisted efforts to disclose COVID numbers, even after repeated faculty requests, arguing that disclosing that information wouldn’t be of any benefit to the college. Some COVID data was finally obtained through a FOIA, and now, after the DEATH of one of our colleagues, our school finally has a COVID dashboard. Still, the college has continued its pattern of suppressing free discussion with this affront to the academic freedom of my colleagues, canceling a panel that had already been approved because administrators are trying to control what faculty can and can’t discuss with one another.
The college administration believes that it can behave with impunity because a majority of the college board is indifferent to issues of academic freedom and is apparently happy to violate the first amendment rights of citizens with whom they or their constituents may disagree politically.
I can’t imagine the trustees are happy with the fact that Collin College professors are so tired of this long-running, outrageous pattern of behavior that we are now freely discussing it with journalists. If they don’t care for all this bad publicity, then they should find some way to end this high-handed and abusive behavior of the college’s administrators.
Thank you, Prof. Burnett, for providing the information and specific wording that my blogging friend Hank Reitman did not. Now I can make up my mind about your statement, which i believe to be well-protected by the First Amendment and Academic Freedom (if you are entitled to it, since MANY instructors, esp. adjuncts, do not have that sinecure).
Saying that someone had a “demon mouth” is hardly the equivalent of the n-word or anything that might offend most sensibilities. I’m sure that most people, even religious folks, would notice that you were using exaggeration, humor, and analogy to MILDLY castigate the VP’s manners during the debate.
As a victim of the pseudo-“P.C.” police myself (perhaps the opposite of your situation), I am sorry that this happened to you. ALL academics need to be wary of such encroachments on Free Speech rights, no matter which side of the political divide they may be on.
My case is summarized here:
https://www.academia.edu/23593134/A_Leftist_Critique_of_Political_Correctness_Gone_Amok_Revised_and_Updated
Pingback: Collin College Accused of Giving Up Academic Freedom - Again | Inside the Higher Ed - Florida Daily Chronicle
Pingback: Collin College Accused of Abandoning Academic Freedom — Again – HigherEdJournal
Pingback: Collin College Accused of Abandoning Academic Freedom -- Again | Inside Higher Ed – THE USA EXPRESS
Pingback: Collin College Accused of Abandoning Academic Freedom -- Again | Studently
What seems to be missing from the comments and concerns is the best education and educators for the students. If the faculty is stressed out and needing a seminar to help address that and the issues they face in teaching and engaging with students during this strange time in our world then they should have seminars to address that. The students need healthy teachers. While I may not agree with what the professor said on her own time on tweet, it is her right, but it should not keep a faculty of an entire college system from obtaining needed information and educational and emotional support. Put the students first, they are our future. Collin has always been respected as a college with good educators don’t let that slip away.