Academe Blog of the American Association of University Professors Steven Salaita, denied academic freedom
CONTACT COMMITTEE CHAIR PETER N KIRSTEIN email@example.com
Illinois AAUP Committee A Statement on Steven Salaita andÂ UIUC
The following is a statement by the Illinois AAUP Committee A on the case of Steven Salaita at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:
The Illinois Conference Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors supports the honoring of the appointment of Steven G. Salaita in the American Indian Studies program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Reports that the university has voided a job offer, if accurate, due to tweets on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict would be a clear violation of Professor Salaitaâ€™s academic freedom and an affront to free speech that we enjoy in this country.
Professor Salaita resigned his position at Virginia Tech and was about to assume his Â new appointment at the University of Illinois. We stand by the appointment and by Professor Salaita and defend his right to engage in extramural utterances.
The AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and TenureÂ states in reference to extramural utterances: â€œWhen they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline.â€ It affirms that â€œThe common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition.â€ While Professorâ€™s Salaitaâ€™s tweets are construed as controversial, theÂ 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and TenureÂ affirms the virtue of controversial speech. While theÂ StatementÂ refers to classroom teaching, the virtual classroom today has no limits. In 1970 theÂ 1940 Statementwas revised with new â€œInterpretive Comments.â€ Â The second Interpretive Comment would encompass Professor Salaitaâ€™s right to be controversial: â€œThe intent of this statement is not to discourage what is â€œcontroversial.â€ Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire statement is designed to foster.â€
Professor Salaitaâ€™s words while strident and vulgar were an impassioned plea to end the violence currently taking place in the Middle East. Issues of life and death during bombardment educes significant emotions and expressions of concern that reflect the tragedy that armed conflict confers on its victims. Speech that is deemed controversial should be challenged with further speech that may abhor and challenge a statement. Yet the University of Illinois cannot cancel an appointment based upon Twitter statements that are protected speech in the United States of America.
TheÂ AAUP 1940 StatementÂ does require a professor to be â€œaccurate, to exercise appropriate restraint, to show respect for the opinions of othersâ€¦.â€ However in the AAUPCommittee A Statement on Extramural UtterancesÂ it states in reference to theÂ 1940 Statement:
[An] administration may file chargesÂ in accordance with procedures outlined in the Statement if it feels that a faculty member hasÂ failed to observe the above admonitions and believes that the professorâ€™s extramural utterancesÂ raise grave doubts concerning the professorâ€™s fitness for continuing service.
We are unaware that the university has afforded Professor Salaita any due process. In the absence of due process, particularly if a contract was signed, any institutional action to reverse an offer of appointment would be a grave violation of academic due process. Furthermore, there is nothing in the Salaita statements about Israel or Zionism that would raise questions about his fitness to teach. These statements were not made in front of students, are not related to a course that is being taught, and do not reflect in any manner his quality of teaching. What one says out of class rarely, in the absence of peer review of teaching, confirms how one teaches. Passion about a topic even if emotionally expressed through social network does not allow one to draw inferences about teaching that could possibly rise to the voiding or reversal of a job appointment.
One must not conjecture about a link between extramural statements and the quality of classroom teaching, absent an unmistakableÂ link that would raise issues of competence. None exist here. Indeed, we affirm that fitness to teach can be enhanced with conviction, commitment and an engagement with the outside world. As a professor who was proffered an appointment in American Indian Studies, we are particularly concerned if a university would void a contract of a professor exercising a right of citizenship in protesting actions of another country that much of the global community including the U.N. Secretary General and even the U.S. State Department have found â€œdisgraceful.â€
Peter N. Kirstein, Chair of Illinois Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Saint Xavier University contact at firstname.lastname@example.org
Iymen Chehade, Columbia College
Loretta Capeheart, Northeastern Illinois University
J. Walter Kendall III, John Marshall School of Law
John Wilson, Illinois State University