The House Select
Committee on Student Academic Freedom held an informational meeting
pursuant to House Resolution 177.
Members in attendance
included: Chairmen Tom Stevenson (R-Allegheny), Lawrence Curry (Montgomery) and
James Roebuck (D-Philadelphia) and Representatives Gib
Armstrong (R-Lancaster), Richard Grucela
(D-Northampton), Patrick Fleagle (R-Franklin), Thomas
Quigley (R-Montgomery), Lynn Herman (R-Centre), Dan Surra
(D-Elk) and John Pallone (D-Westmoreland)
HR
177 Armstrong, G. C.
- (PN 2553) Resolution establishing a select committee to examine the academic
atmosphere and the degree to which faculty have the opportunity to instruct and
students have the opportunity to learn in an environment conducive to the
pursuit of knowledge and truth at State-related and State-owned colleges and
universities and community colleges in this Commonwealth. (Prior Printer
Number: 1280, 2451)
Chairman Stevenson said
this meeting would be the first of at least five hearings of the Select
Committee on Student Academic Freedom. He said the purpose of this first
meeting is to educate members on the meaning of academic freedom and
intellectual diversity. He noted that the focus of their dictate under HR 177
is to look at institutions and not individual professors. Chairman Stevenson
introduced the
David
French, President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in
He continued, stating the
First Amendment applies to both students and faculty, and while colleges and
universities may not restrict the freedom of speech, many universities have
enacted speech codes that either by policy or practice prohibited speech that
would otherwise be protected. According to French, speech codes have always
been struck down when challenged in courts.
French said students are
protected fully under the First Amendment yet they do not have the right to be
taught what they want to hear or the right not to be offended. He added that
teachers
French then went through
several examples of how particular policies may or may not pass constitutional
muster and examples where certain organizations on college campuses have had
their First Amendment rights abridged by universities. He went on to state that
while he knows PA is laden with unconstitutional speech codes, he has not
received a large number of complaints on this from PA students.
He closed by recommending
that the select committee not go after individual professors but should
investigate if schools are violating the Constitution. He stressed that in
protecting the constitutional rights of students, the committee should not
violate the rights of teachers.
Rep. Grucela
asked about the relationship between the Patriot Act and free speech. French
replied that in practice, the Patriot Act should have no bearing on the
academic freedom dispute even though some have attempted to make the act apply
in certain situations where they wanted speech halted. He reminded the
committee that in the end, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
overrides the Patriot Act.
Rep. Grucela
asked if
Rep. Herman asked what
students should do if they believe their rights have been abridged. French
replied that many universities do not tell students what to do, and he feels
the universities should work harder to provide a formal complaint process. He
added that while FIRE has launched a large educational effort to educate
students about their rights, students should always contact the appropriate
officials on campus if they believe their rights have been abridged.
Rep. Fleagle
questioned if French is aware of any university in another state that has
appropriate policies and safeguards in place to protect against First Amendment
violations. French responded that he has seen good policies but is not aware of
one university that stands out above the others. He added that the 1940 AAUP
statement on academic freedom is one of the best that he has seen but that
universities often enact speech codes, which run counter to its intent.
According to French, of all the universities that FIRE has investigated, 70%
have constitutionally problematic policies in place.
Questioned by Rep. Fleagle if the complaints coming out of other states are
different from those FIRE receives from PA, French said that the complaints are
similar and tend to involve a misunderstanding of discrimination and
harassment. He added that many students believe they are harassed simply
because somebody has done something or said something that makes them upset but
that this is not true. For student-to-student harassment to occur, French said
the harassment must be so invasive than it denies a student the ability to be
educated.
Rep. Pallone asked if there
are any speech codes that have been struck down in PA. French replied that the
only speech code struck down in PA that he is aware of occurred at
Rep. Pallone questioned how
FIRE advises students. French said they ask for a complete accounting of the
event with accompanying documents, investigate the school
Rep. Pallone then asked how
FIRE is funded. French answered that they receive their funding from
individuals and private foundations and do not charge students or teachers for
their services.
Rep. Curry questioned how
many times FIRE
Rep. Curry wondered if any
institutions do not advise students on how to proceed if they believe their
rights have been abridged. French stated universities are often good at
explaining what to do in the case of harassment but are not good at explaining
what constitutes harassment. He said universities are also not good at telling
students what to do if they believe their First Amendment rights have violated.
He suggested that one thing the select committee could do is to investigate
what universities are doing to educate students on their First Amendment
rights.
Asked by Rep. Curry if most
complaints revolve around students concerned over the grades they received,
French replied that they do not often see this type of complaint. He added that
there is a widespread student perception that they often receive lower grades
based upon their personal ideology.
Rep. Armstrong wondered if
students should be responsible for themselves if their rights are violated like
any other citizen without having to rely upon the university explaining their
rights to them. French stated his belief that an education on basic civil
rights should be occurring in the university environment because it is
essential to the function of a civil society. Questioned by Rep. Armstrong if
such a topic should be part of student
Rep. Armstrong then asked
if the ideological balance of faculty presents a problem. French replied that
it is potentially a problem if it is accomplished through illegal means but
from an academic standpoint it is beneficial to have a wide range of values and
beliefs represented by the faculty of a school.
Rep. Armstrong then asked
how the select committee should try to answer the question of intellectual
diversity. French responded that he does not know if there are any PA studies
on the issue but suggested it would be beneficial to know how intellectually
diverse the state
Rep. Armstrong closed by
asking French if he has any general advice for the committee. French said it is
critically important for the committee to investigate constitutionally unlawful
acts. He quickly added that investigations into lawful behavior, especially
those revolving around politically unpopular behavior, would have a chilling
effect on academia.
Rep. Surra
made it clear that he is opposed to the select committee and he believes French
Rep. Surra
next questioned if it is true that FIRE only averages five or six cases per
year and that only one of these has been in PA. French answered that FIRE does
not receive all complaints but that they still get hundreds of complaints a
year and are very good at settling them. He added that they receive a
sufficient number of complaints every year for this to be declared a national
crisis.
Rep. Surra
then stated that as a rural representative he receives calls on all topics, but
since he has been in office he has never received a call from a student
complaining their academic freedom has been abridged. He then questioned if
French would advocate affirmative action programs for the hiring of college
professors. French quickly replied he would not suggest such a policy.
Rep. Surra
then asked if French believes people are hired as college professors because of
their ideology. French replied he believes this occurs, adding that the
question is how often it occurs.
Rep. Surra
questioned if a professor refused to instruct a gay student would that student
Rep. Quigley asked French,
if based upon the criteria of what the select committee should focus on, does
French believe that violations are occurring. French replied that from a speech
code standpoint, violations are occurring and are pervasive. He added that in
other areas it is worth researching if universities are meeting their
constitutional responsibilities. He stressed that the focus of the
investigation should remain on constitutional issues.
Rep. Curry asked if French
knows of any college or university in PA that asked for an individual
Chairman Stevenson thanked
French for his
Rep. Pallone asked if the
committee members would be meeting as a body to discuss the direction they
would be taking and to go over the types of information they will be given to
review. Chairman Stevenson told him that is one of the purposes of the meeting
scheduled for next week.
Laura Statler
Assistant Director of Governmental Relations
APSCUF
(717) 236-7486 x 3026
1-800-932-0587 x 3026