Thanks, John

Mr. Daly, thank you for showing the kind of instructional leadership that has let one political party dominate both the federal executive and legislative branches of government. What an outstanding display of thoughtful, considered thinking.

Of course, we should just triple your compensation and never check on how the money is being used, as well as hiring 50,000 fellow travelers who are just like you. That would just make the USA more like good ol’ France and Germany — teetering on economic failure.

Good luck in your next career choice. You will still be free to espouse any kind of political tripe you wish — if your audience doesn’t access to The Nation, In These Times, local AFT and NEA fliers, L.A. Times, NYTimes, et al.

Bart, Professor at Small college, at 5:22 am EST on November 21, 2005

I think it is perfectly appropriate for a professor who is opposed to the war to express his opposition to a pro-war rally and indeed to recommend to his students that they boycott the event.

It’s called freedom, sometimes even academic freedom, and it is a right all citizens of a emocratic country should have.

That there should be some chance that the professor would be fired as a result of such an action should serve as a warning that the freedoms previously taken for granted are being eroded.

This desire to punish people for their opinions, now being widely expressed against anti-war college professors (and, I might add, rather frequently in these pages) is much more dangerous than any purported liberal bias on the part of academia.

When highly-educated, professional and thoughtful people choose, of their own free will, to adopt and espouse left-wing sentiments, that’s one thing. When a gang of thugs threatens to fire them or worse for having done so, that’s quite another.

Americans should be very concerned, and should speak out against attempts to silence the critics of the war and of the government generally.

Stephen Downes, at 7:22 am EST on November 21, 2005

The issue here seems to be one of civility rather than content. It should be legitimate for both parties to share their positions of the war without fear of sensure.

Perhaps attending the speech and writing an editorial disagreeing with it; organizing a speaker with a differing view point etc... That creates the kind of debate that college campuses need to be able provide the public and to the students. Even President Bush called for more civility in debate in light of Congressman’s Murtha’s speech-defending his right to his opinion and praising him for opening up the debate. No one’s patriotism should be questioned for offering an opinion of the war. In fact providing criticism is one of the more important definitions of patriotism.

This situation appears to involve an adjunct who sent a possibly inappropriate private message to a first year student. That the adjunct is a representative of the college makes the situation complicated. It seems as if the administration has acted with haste and in a responsible way and is trying to figure out the implications of this and its affects on future dialogue at its campus.

Seth Gordon, Civility in dissent, at 7:54 am EST on November 21, 2005

My problem is when a faculty member (adjunct though he may be) says “I will continue to expose your right-wing, anti-people politics until groups like yours won’t dare show their face on a college campus” to a student at a public college.

And I’m not sure that even matters if he knew whether the person was a student. Imagine if he had to said to a representative of the NAACP or any religious group. Viewpoint discrimination is viewpoint discrimination.

Andrew, at 8:32 am EST on November 21, 2005

Mr. Daly’s Anti-War Email

It strikes me as ironic that Mr Daly seems to wish military recruiting eliminated from colleges yet, simultaneously, wants soldiers to perform some “...metaphoric” form of rebellion against their superiors. One wonders where these soldiers would turn for the motivation to do such a thing. Apparently, Mr. Daly is opposed to them turning to higher education for the motivation required.

More puzzling is the notion that there is some kind of national shame or disgrace involved with the military providing education benefits to its soldiers. It’s difficult to imagine a more appropriate way to reward young Americans for military service. If the root of that problem is money perhaps Mr. Daly should lead a study of the cost of a university education to determine how it could be made more available to lower income students.

How strange that Mr. Daly is so willing to deny his employer both the revenue and the students accompanying military education benefits simply because his personal political sensitivities are offended by military recruiting.

I would also suggest that Mr. Daly consider in detail the fact that many of his students attend community colleges exactly because money (among other reasons) inhibits their attendance at four-year institutions.

Finally, it is my opinion that no professor has any place in trying to push students to any given political stance on any subject. This is a mission too many in academia have taken on themselves ostensibly under the cover of their First Amendment rights.

Universities should draw a clear, bright line between educating students in their chosen disciplines and indoctrinating them in some favored political ideology or cause. Professors willing to harangue students with their political views or even penalize them for arguing opposing positions have made themselves nothing more than a highly educated political cadre for the party of their personal choice.

Stanley N. Cornett, at 8:33 am EST on November 21, 2005

Mr. Daly Should know that his protest gives every veteran pride in that we did a good job in preserving our freedom, that of free speech.I thank you.You may not like what I say but I have the right to say it.We must not forget that your rights end when thay interfear with the right of others. Jesse, Vietnam Veteran

Jesse Garcia, at 9:02 am EST on November 21, 2005

Email Realities

We all need to remember that emails can be copied and or forwarded. It has led to embarassing moments for businessmen and politicians, and now Mr. Daly can join the club. It is unfortunate that someone teaching our students is lacking basic common sense.

Ed Meehan, Partner at Rittenhouse Capital, at 9:39 am EST on November 21, 2005

Mr. Daly’s judgment

Even though the student in question was not Mr. Daly’s, the email raises legitimate questions about his ability to fairly grade assignments in class that do not reflect his own viewpoint.

“Free speech” in the academy was intended to cover professors exercising their professional activities and teaching. Not all subjects are intended for all classes, and professors’ personal viewpoints are not a legitimate part of education. Although I raise all viewpoints in my classes in a “devil’s advocate” mode, I am proud that very few of my students can “figure out” where I stand, and thus cannot tailor their papers and answers to what they might think I want to hear. “Free speech” is not a blanket immunity covering any kind of ranting rantiing and personal displays. Professors who engage in such conduct are indulging themselves, not teaching.

David A. Murray, at 10:19 am EST on November 21, 2005

More Hypocrisy

“Thursday’s statement also specifically noted Constitutional protections on controversial statements, quoting William Austin, Warren’s president, as saying: “I firmly believe every employee and student has First Amendment rights, no matter how repugnant I personally find Mr. Daly’s statements.”

What would the college’s position have been if a student had said, “Real academic freedom will come when students turn their guns on their instructors”? I suspect there would have been great wailing and gnashing of teeth and the student would have been expelled. In fact, students have been expelled for much less threatening language.

Hypocrisy like this is one of the many reasons public support for higher education is waning. It is also one of the things that keeps David Horwitz in business.

James, at 10:48 am EST on November 21, 2005

Rich Godfrey

Fragging is not the same as armed rebellion against the nation. It is the killing of an officer — not the nation.

What is forgotten here is the judgment at Nuernberg. Those who participate in an illegal war (such as Hitler’s invasion of Poland, and Bush’s invasion of Afghanistan) are guilty of crimes against humanity. Those who support such war efforts are equally guilty, as was the judgment against the German people who thought they were free.

The Constitution allows, and endorses, freedom of speech—no matter how distasteful or wrongheaded. It is for that reason the televangelist Pat Robertson can continue to call for political assassinations of heads of nations, or that Dick Cheney can lament that US senators openly speak out against the most evil war in US history.

Arthur Ide, PhD, at 11:28 am EST on November 21, 2005

Politics, Power, and Pedagogy

If we on the left begin to employ or endorse Daly’s actions (e.g., obstructing open dialogue; using our power to coerce students, etc.), we become as guilty as those on the right whom we criticize for endorsing thoughtless obedience to government. The issue of Daly’s audience aside (i.e., the fact that the email was not intended for a student), the message nevertheless suggests that the professor sees his teaching role, not as one that encourages critical thinking and exploration of issues, but as one that persuades students to see his point of view (through suggesting a boycott, for example). It is not the politics of this individual that should come into question, nor his right to espouse his point of view. Rather, it is his pedagogy and misuse of power with his students that should be the focus here. The same criticism would be leveled, whether he were coming from the left or from the right.

Juliet Davis, Assistant Professor of Communication at The University of Tampa, at 12:06 pm EST on November 21, 2005

Freedom from forced taxation?

IHE, thanks for your advertising-supported bandwidth, to examine this issue.

Gosh darn it — so much teeth-grinding over “academic freedom.”

Does “freedom” include being forced to pay for intellectual crap like Shortell, Crystall, Churchill, CUNY ethnic studies, et al?

Solution? What about student vouchers like those in Colorado, where students point where the money goes and where it is just not handed to colleges. Start to detach funding from Big Education to schools that actually teach from a wide-angle vs. the left-side. What a concept!

In such a system, if a Jane Fonda Fan Club (JFFC) wants to advertise that its “gut” courses are available — great! They are free to do so — that’s freedom!

What is the JFFC afraid of? That the JFFC might not attract enough students to support itself? Isn’t that “freedom” — freedom to succeed or not to succeed?

Look at it this way — when Mr. Michael Moore bet all HIS cash on “Roger & Me,” did he think he was going to become a multi-millionaire? Think about it — JFFC members could become millionaires like Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky!

Have a nice day — you stay classy.

Bart, Professor at Small College, at 1:35 pm EST on November 21, 2005

Don’t confuse first admendment rights with academic freedom. One keeps you from jail the other from being fired.

Max, at 1:58 pm EST on November 21, 2005

Whiplash

Personal email to personal email seems rather, well, personal? Daly’s views about the war and about the organization sponsoring the speaker are fine and should not stand as grounds for his termination. Indeed, his promise to expose the lies of a right-wing organization is fine, presuming he sticks to what lies they put out there (and both sides lie, people...get over it).

Daly’s vow to encourage students to boycott the lecture is indefensible, however. It is one thing to express one’s views in class under certain circumstances, but advocating a position while encoraging students to toe the same line is beyond the pale.

Andrew Purvis, at 2:55 pm EST on November 21, 2005

John Daly e-mail

Such are the pitfalls of this electronic age — once you click the “send” button, your words, whether hastily or thoughtfully crafted, often become public record, and may come back to haunt you. As an instructor of English, I caution my students to be critical proofreaders of their words. We could all learn from Mr. Daly’s experience —use the “save as draft” button, reflect, revise, then send.

Tammy Allen, instructor at Delta College (Michigan), at 4:05 pm EST on November 21, 2005

Dear Professor Daly,Academic Freedom means that you can express yourself on campus, and that those who hold a different opinion than your’s can also express themselves. Academic Freedom is not defined as your unfettered ability to drive others from the campus.

Mike, at 4:07 pm EST on November 21, 2005

True Freedom

I have serious concerns about professors who abuse their authority and position by forcing their political positions on their students. I favor academic debate and freedom of speech and it transcends being liberal or conservative. I do see a real problem in our nation that we have a difficult time promoting genuine debate about social and political issues.

The idea of freedom is a powerful one and Christenson (2001) outlines six strategies to increase our freedom: 1.We may increase our freedom by becoming more aware of the means other people use to control us. 2.We may increase our freedom when we begin to realize where our own ideas and assumptions have come from. 3.We increase our freedom when we know or can imagine viable alternatives to the ways things are presented to us. 4.We increase our freedom when we are able to question effectively and critique reliably those assumptions and ideas that most thoroughly ‘pull our strings.’ 5.We may increase our freedom when we can plan and prioritize our lives for the long term and can actualize the skills and self-discipline necessary to act on such plans.6.We increase our freedom when we start to shape the things we are shaped by (pp. 77-82).

ReferenceChristenson, T. (2001). Wonder and critical reflection: An invitation to philosophy. Upper Saddle Creek, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Brent Muirhead D.Min., Ph.D., at 4:35 am EST on November 22, 2005

Stay on point

Why are people discussing what Daly said rather than what he did? The content is irrelevant; the action is what matters. In my years as a community college students, I took classes from many instuctors who shared their views on issues, but only one ever tried to tell us we were wrong if we did not adopt his. He happened to be conservative. The act was the problem, not the ideology.

Richard Jensen has a point about quieting dissenting viewpoints, but it is not germane to a discussion of Daly’s action. Daly did not let loose on one of his students, he let loose on someone who had sent a message to his private email account. This does not excuse the content of that email, namely his pledge to fight organizers of events he finds politically bothersome, but it does explain why he felt he could be harsh to the recipient.

He was in the wrong, but if he is to be burned at the stake, let him at least be burned for what he did and not for some variation on the theme.

Andrew Purvis, at 4:36 am EST on November 22, 2005

Daly

As a student I want knowledge, not opinion. I do not want to be indoctrinated by right or left, religious or athiest, pro or anti. As an instructor, you should teach me ENGLISH, not your opinion of our fighting forces or our nation or politics in general. Yes, you have a right to your opinion, but not when you are PAID to TEACH. Express yourself on your own time and teach me ENGLISH in the classroom.Tacky, tacky, tacky. Your grandmother would be ashamed. Just do your job and keep your opinions to yourself.

Jethro Hilligan, Stoodint at June-yerr Kollege, at 7:53 am EST on November 22, 2005

Correction

“Daly did not let loose on one of his students, he let loose on someone who had sent a message to his private email account.”

I believe this is incorrect. Prof. Daly sent an unsolicited email to this student after seeing some flyers the student had posted on campus. The flyers were for an event sponsored by a conservative group, featuring an officer in the military who had served in Iraq. Ms. Beach, the student, has stated in interviews that she never knew Prof. Daly before getting his email.

M. Johnson, Small Liberal Arts College, at 11:03 am EST on November 22, 2005

READ — HE DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A STUDENT

Go and Re-read the article. Professor Daly had no idea he was emailing a student. Because the student chose to use a personal email address she then herself became a blank face with a blank age, and blank race. Not that race has anything to do with it, but you understand. He understood who he was emailing as MERELY an individual supporting ideas different than his. It is not the intent of any professor, regardless how dedicated he or she may be to a certain belief, to use scare-tactic or offensive context (which I do not believe he was intending anyways) towards students. C’mon people, stop using the ideas associated with what happened to gain support for your right or left wing values/beliefs. It remained a faceless interaction of freedom of speech. Nothing more.

Jeff Daddario, READ — HE DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A STUDENT at UCONN, at 12:56 pm EST on November 22, 2005

Blow up teachers — Huh?

To GGW who claims a “top member of the Bush administration” called for the blowing up of teachers because they were terrorists — um, HUH? I’m pretty much of a news/political junkie, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Do you have a cite for this quote?

M. Johnson, Small Liberal Arts College, at 2:28 pm EST on November 22, 2005

It Takes All Kinds

I think I can answer M. Johnson’s challenge to GGW regarding members of the Bush administration (1) mischaracterizing professional education organizations and (2) suggesting we may be better off without them.

First, on November 18, 2002, Reid Lyon, Chief Child Development and Behavior Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, stated, “If there was any piece of legislation that I could pass it would be to blow up colleges of education” (see http://www.substancenews.com/Jan03/threats.htm)

Lyon’s credentials at that time included responsibility for transmitting the research findings and scientific discoveries of the National Institutes of Health relevant to the health and education of children to the White House, the United States Congress, and other governmental agencies.

The “Substance Archive” noted, in response to Lyon’s credentials and statement, “One can only speculate how many times he’s told [the White House and Congress] to blow up the colleges of education.”

Second, on February 23, 2004, then Secretary of Education Rod Paige called the National Education Association a “terrorist organization” because the union would not endorse President Bush’s No Child Left Behind initiative He later admitted it was a poor choice of words, but refused to retract his assessment of NEA (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Education_Association)

It takes all kinds ...

RWH, at 3:58 pm EST on November 22, 2005

Two wrongs make a right?

“First, on November 18, 2002, Reid Lyon, Chief Child Development and Behavior Branch, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development ..”

First, congrats on finding that data from the previous sloppy and incompetent reference.

Two, what does Reid Lyon have to do with John Daly’s e-mail blunder? Like — two wrongs make a right? Like — we’re going to show the other side is stupider than ours? Good luck — that’ll take some time.

Three, Dr. Lyon is NOT the only academic who has said something like that. Try this Democrat, Arthur Levine of Columbia University:

http://www.ucop.edu/acadinit/mastplan/edd/sacbee_schrag04202005.htm

John Daly is a typically-aggrieved soft-side academic who thinks “academic freedom” allows him to behave rudely and boorishly without consequence. He is wrong, and he is about to get the lesson of his life.

Art, at 5:14 pm EST on November 22, 2005

Art, Accepting one wrong while decrying another that is actually less severe is blatant hyprocrisy. If you don’t get that, then civil, rational discourse is impossible.

Like I said, until those of you taking Daly’s comments literally also take literally the calls to violence by those who share your political tendencies, then your posts will rightly be viewed as partisan grandstanding. Let us know when you protest Mr. Lyon’s comments as vigorously as you rail against Mr. Daly’s. That position has nothing to do with your simplistic, misapplied aphorism of “two wrongs don’t make a right", that has to do with intellectual honesty.

By the way, “sloppy” (or perhaps just conversational) or not, I was CORRECT in substance, and M. Johnson was WRONG.

Still waiting for you to cc us on those outraged emails to the White House.

GGW, Two wrongs demonstrate hypocrisy, at 8:24 pm EST on November 22, 2005

Enough critical thinking for you?

This has been an irony-rich experience. For months in IHE, pleas for “the need for students to think critically” were heard frequently.

Hmm .. it would appear to me, some students are doing exceptionally well, in their critical thinking skills. It might not be the “right” type of criticism for some — but that is their problem to deal with.

Homer, at 10:15 pm EST on November 22, 2005

Mr Daly

Mr Daly so adequately calls upon his right to academic freedom, are not students entitled to that same freedom. Ms Beach, the student who advertised and received the email in question, was exercising her academic freedom. Because Mr Daly is a professor his freedom should be protected more than hers???? I think not.

Freedom of Speech, Mr Daly has had that, he was able to say what he felt he needed to say. However, that freedom does not guarantee that the consequences of what one says will not come back to bite them. Furthermore, Mr Daly made it quite clear in his email that his goal was to make students like Ms Beach afraid to show their faces on campus. What about Ms Beach’s free speech. Once again because MR Daly is a professor is his freedom to be more important than hers???

Hiding behind academic freedom or free speech is not an adequate defense. You cannot protect one’s freedom over that of another, the very rights that Mr Daly proclaims to be utilizing are the same rights that Ms Beach is utilizing. It seems that the professor needs to take a few lessons from the student. And in such he should lose his job, especially when one looks at this objectively and sees that he still has a lot of learning to do and is in no position to be responsible for the educating of our youth.

David, at 4:59 am EST on November 23, 2005

!@#$%^!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow, this comment board seems to be a good example of what can happen to to people’s communication when they think they are anonymous and feel they have no responsibility to have productive or even humane exchanges. Those of you who have such derogatory things to say about liberals might find yourself shocked as well if your posting, along with your name, were sent to your Dean.

On one level, Daly’s case is simply about a SNAFU. We often say things we don’t really mean when we’re railing/purging. But as public figures, we have to live with the consequences of that. In terms of the actual content of Daly’s SNAFU, his abuse of power in the classroom (coercing students to agree with his political standpoints) would be a separate and more disappointing issue. I confess I am most shocked, though, by the responses on this discussion board that suggest professors should somehow be objects of dominant culture, like any corporate worker, and that they should make their speech and beliefs conform in the same ways and pass them on as good programmers of society. Perhaps we have failed to develop in our students the kinds of critical thinking skills that would enable them to detangle a complex situation such as this one and to value thoughtful discourse.

JD, University Professor, at 11:26 am EST on November 23, 2005

Art,

Talk about Sloppy, you use the words “clearly” and “obviously” a whole lot without proffering one iota of evidence to support what is clear and obvious. Such lack of evidence would earn you an “F” in basic comp at the big, tier 1 research university that I work at. Your rant is full of non-sequiturs and bluster aimed at deflection, not elucidation. And, not surpsitingly, you unwittingly make a point at odds with your position. You write, “Dr. Lyon is many things... but he has NEVER been publicly ridiculed like Mr. Daly.” That’s just the point that you can’t seem to grasp. He did what Daly did in a position of great power and influence in a public way and he was NOT called to account by you, or any of your ilk. Why is it that a risible statement was not met with derision by those claiming Daly is treasonous? Politicial partisanship, ideological blinders, intellectual dishonesty? Take your pick, or perhaps all three. Y

ou have become an apologist for someone whose highest policy goal is to blow up schools of education. If you are going to give Lyon a pass on his calls to “blow up” schools of education, it is totally hypocritical to ridicule Daly for his call to soldiers to turn their guns on their superiors. I think both statements were metaphorical and in bad taste, but Lyon’s particularly so when linking “blowing up” things and terrorism as he did so soon after 9-11.

But, more importantly, you have the PERTINENT facts wrong about Lyon. He was speaking to a conference of educators when he made these comments—on at least one occasion. It wasn’t misstep, either. Apparently, he made similar statements on numerous occasions.

Lastly, I don’t know what your relationship is to Ted Kennedy, and you surely don’t know mine (talk about a non-sequitur!), but I do know based on your posts that you have absolutely nothing of worth to add to this discussion. What’s more, I suspect that is your aim. I believe you wish not to promote critical thinking, open dialogue and rational discourse but to curb it. I believe this because (you see, I actually provide REASONS for my claims) that is precisely the effect your rants have had on me and, I suspect, many others. In short, you win! Your shrill, bombastic blathering has silenced my attempt to point out a logical contradiction in the position of those posters reading Daly’s comments literally and thus, variously, as treason, fellonious, capital, etc.

So, I will not longer engage you, but, I WILL BE WAITING FOR YOU TO CC THE MESSAGE BOARD YOUR OUTRAGED EMAIILS TO THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE CALLING FOR LYON TO BE PROSECUTED ALONG WITH THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION UNDER INDICTMENT.

GGW, Blowing up schools and spouting horse apples, at 2:02 pm EST on November 23, 2005

Dr. Lyon’s unfortunate remarks

GGW, would it help if Dr. Lyon had apologized for his “blow up” remark on a number of occasions? According to Kathleen Manzo, of Education Week, he “...has repeatedly apologized for the remarks, saying he could have found a more diplomatic way to express his frustration over teacher-educators who, in his opinion, refuse to abandon approaches that have been discredited.” Link: www.readingrecovery.org/sections/home/news/Group_Ushers_Policy.asp

Steven Drexler, LCDR at US Navy, at 8:48 am EST on November 27, 2005

To Mr. Wilson

“There is absolutely nothing in the email that reveals any professional misconduct, no matter how offensive it might be.”

I suppose all of us tend read our own thoughts into Mr. Daly’s original email. However, I think Mr. Wilson misses the point altogether. Seems to me “academic freedom” isn’t the issue at all.

A professor who tells anyone, much less a student, that he will do all he can to prevent views distasteful to him from being expressed on campus and will work to push an organization off campus for the same reason is displaying behavior that clearly rises to the level of misconduct.

Why is it not enough for Mr. Daly to attempt to persuade those who disagree with him ? His insistence on squelching all but anti-war sentiments suggests his motives are no more pure than those of the radical right who also brook no deviance from their ideologies.

Personally, I would have expected more objectivity and a much higher tone than Mr. Daly exhibited.

Bad Buddha, Instructional Developer at University of Virginia, at 9:32 pm EST on November 28, 2005

This guy is crazy

I am appaled that this man would insult the thousands of men and woman who died for their country, furthermore the young lady should recieve a medal for her bravery. For ane ducated man he should know better than to attacka student. No one wants to be endoctinated if you dont like their beliefs then do not go to the meeting and leave ti at that. Rebecca Kudos to you forstanding your ground. Mr. Daly The Chronicle of Higher Education has a wonderful job search section get use dto reading it.

Jon, Counselor at Small North Eastern College, at 10:42 am EST on December 30, 2005