Amanda Coletta, The Washington Post; After abuse revelations, professors grapple with how to teach Munro
"Professors are wrestling with how to teach Munro’s work. Bookstores are debating whether to feature it on their shelves. And Canadians are grappling with the age-old question: Is it possible to divorce the art from the artist?"
Autumn Barnes, Kristin Wong, NPR; 'Real MVP': A professor gives a shout out to the student who nods along in class
"The moment also gave her an idea about how she could pass the kindness along.
"We sit in meetings for work all the time. We can now think about what little gestures like nodding may mean to someone presenting material to us," Middlewood said...
Later that semester, Middlewood thanked her unsung hero in a tweet by saying, "To the student in my Monday morning class, who nods as I talk, please know that you are the backbone of this class. You're the one keeping us going. Real MVP.""
Frank Bruni, The New York Times; With War Raging, Colleges Confront a Crisis of Their Own Making
"Remember the student complaints about and the subsequent dismissal of an art history lecturer at Hamline University in Minnesota who — after giving students a trigger warning, so they could opt out of class — showed a historically important painting of the Prophet Muhammad? Hamline’s president, Fayneese Miller, defended that sequence of events by saying that to not weigh academic freedom against a “debt to the traditions, beliefs and views of students” is a “privileged reaction.”
That’s a troubling assertion, as Tom Nichols wrote in The Atlantic: “If you don’t want your traditions, beliefs or views challenged, then don’t come to a university, at least not to study anything in the humanities or the social sciences.”"
Rylee Wilson, The Daily Iowan; UI professors violated ethics policy, free speech, investigation finds
"An investigation found that three University of Iowa professors violated the university’s ethics policy after threatening a graduate student with discipline because of remarks he made that fellow students found to be homophobic.
Jacob Johnson, a second-year graduate student in the Occupational and Environmental Health department, lodged a formal complaint against the university in November, assisted by the Kirkwood Institute, a conservative public-interest law firm.
The complaint, written by attorney Alan R. Ostergren, alleges that Johnson’s due process rights were violated, and that the professors involved violated UI policies about academic freedom, and free speech rights provided by the Iowa and U.S. constitutions."
"The good news: Both the left and the right have reached consensus that free speech is important. The bad news: “Free speech” has apparently been redefined to mean “speech with which I agree.”"
"...[W]e also need to listen and respect those students and professors who support Trump. That 19-year-old supporter just starting his sophomore year shouldn’t be dismissed automatically as a racist for supporting Trump. He’s a stand-in for our next-door neighbor, your child’s softball coach and my cousin’s spouse. Keeping the classroom open for discussion slows a student retreat to the anonymous online world of Yik Yak, where college-aged Trump supporters troll hate without ever directly engaging their classmates. That means that the possibility of ever broadening their perspectives organically will be lost. There will be tense points and tempers may well flare. Why are Trump’s most ardent supporters rural whites without a college degree? Why does he belittle those he disagrees with? Where does his worldview and his preoccupation with Vladimir Putin come from? But there is a way to have these discussions in the classroom with respect. It will be up to our professors to defend the right to hold an unpopular position, even one that we strongly disagree with. Because if colleges and universities want to remain a training ground for future leaders, an incubator for new ideas or a place where a future political consensus is forged, civil discourse is a fundamental part of that higher calling. This will not be an easy task, but it is a crucial one. While professors and administrators need to do everything they can to make sure that their campuses promote free speech, they also need to maintain civility and basic decency. And that’s tricky. Beyond higher education, how the nation wrestles with this same conundrum is important — and not just in the run-up to the election. In the weeks and months after Nov. 8, the country is going to have to understand what Donald Trump and Trumpism means going forward. Win or lose, it is critical that we study and interpret what his candidacy signifies beyond American politics. How the nation’s teachers integrate understanding Trumpism into their classrooms this fall, regardless of discipline, will go a long way toward finding some common ground with the 40-something percent of the voting population that supports him."
"Fair use is apparently the last refuge of a scofflaw. Following on the heels of a Sony rep's assertion that people could avail themselves of fair use for the right price, here comes the New York Times implying fair use not only does not exist, but that it runs more than $6/word. Obtaining formal permission to use three quotations from New York Times articles in a book ultimately cost two professors $1,884. They’re outraged, and have taken to Kickstarter — in part to recoup the charges, but primarily, they say, to “protest the Times’ and publishers’ lack of respect for Fair Use.” These professors used quotes from other sources in their book about press coverage of health issues, but only the Gray Lady stood there with her hand out, expecting nearly $2,000 in exchange for three quotes totalling less than 300 words. The professors paid, but the New York Times "policy" just ensures it will be avoided by others looking to source quotes for their publications. The high rate it charges (which it claims is a "20% discount") for fair use of its work will be viewed by others as proxy censorship. And when censorship of this sort rears its head, most people just route around it. Other sources will be sought and the New York Times won't be padding its bottom line with ridiculous fees for de minimis use of its articles. The authors' Kickstarter isn't so much to pay off the Times, but more to raise awareness of the publication's unwillingness to respect fair use."
"What the conversation has lacked is any sort of solid information about how common trigger warnings, or debates about trigger warnings, really are on campuses. No one really knows whether the few anecdotal reports about truly ridiculous trigger-warning requests (a student in a class on rape law saying the term violate triggers her, for instance) are indicative of a bigger problem, or merely isolated instances that shouldn’t be spun into grand arguments about the decline of higher education, or the fragility of millennials, or whatever else. Now we at last have some numbers. Last week, the National Coalition Against Censorship released the results of a survey about trigger warnings. The organization teamed up with the Modern Language Association and the College Art Association to ask those groups’ members to fill out a survey about their experiences with trigger warnings. The survey included both standard multiple-choice response items and chances for the respondents to write in their own responses. It’s important to note that, as the NCAL itself acknowledges, this wasn’t a scientific survey — the organization didn’t conduct the usual, rigorous (and oftentimes expensive) procedure one would need to get a sample of respondents that’s approximately representative of the national population of college professors. (For one thing, the sample consisted, by definition, entirely of professors who study the subjects covered by the MLA and CAA."
