News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
June 7, 2007
As a committed member of the American Association of University Professors, the editor of its Illinois Academe newspaper, and a member of the AAUP’s Committee on Graduate and Professional Students, I have deep concerns about the future of the organization. When a very small proportion of the AAUP membership gathers today for the start of the AAUP annual meeting, we have an opportunity to demand a new direction for the AAUP. Unfortunately, I am pessimistic about whether AAUP members understand why the AAUP is fading in importance, or are willing to break from the AAUP’s calcified traditions in order to save the organization.
To survive and grow at a critical moment for higher education, the AAUP needs to become more of an activist organization, decentralize its top-heavy structure, and join the scholarly world.
Some critics claim that the AAUP’s problems are due to its decision in the early 1970s to add collective bargaining units to its role. This is all wrong. About half of the AAUP members are part of unionized chapters, and they ¼ve been the only thing keeping the AAUP alive financially. The AAUP needs to expand its union efforts, and the plans to restructure the AAUP by dividing the organization into its unionized and advocacy halves are little more than rearranging deck chairs. The unionized and advocacy parts of the AAUP share common goals of defending academic freedom, fighting the corporatization of higher education, and expanding the organization. We don ¼t need to create two AAUPs; we need to make the one we have better.
Nor is poor leadership the fundamental problem at the AAUP, although in the recent past, mismanagement has been a serious barrier to improving the AAUP. However, there ¼s every indication that President Cary Nelson and Executive Director Ernie Benjamin have stabilized the AAUP, although much depends on the selection of the next general secretary.
Before 9/11, there were 275,000 American Civil Liberties Union members; today, in response to the attacks on civil liberties in America, the ACLU has more than 500,000 members. There has been a similar attack on academic freedom since 2001, and yet the AAUP ¼s membership has remained virtually unchanged at around 40,000.
The AAUP’s policy of addressing only a small portion of academic freedom cases, and then only after a lengthy investigation, was always flawed. But today, its public inactivity on academic freedom violations threatens the future of the organization. Usually, only obscure colleges run by intransigent or idiotic administrators ever get censured, and many of the worst violations of academic freedom are never condemned by the AAUP; despite a devastating 2004 AAUP report about the attack on academic freedom by Medaille College, Committee A refused to recommend censure in vain hope of negotiating a settlement.
Administrators have learned that the AAUP probably will never do anything, and a simple payout usually solves the problem quietly. When the University of Southern Mississippi then-president Shelby Thames fired two tenured AAUP leaders in 2004 for investigating an administrator ¼s credentials, the AAUP never took any formal action because the university simply paid off the faculty.
Today, administrators are much more fearful of condemnation by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) than the AAUP. FIRE, unlike the AAUP, acts quickly rather than glacially. FIRE, unlike the AAUP, acts publicly rather than quietly. The AAUP is still the unparalleled leader at developing policy statements on academic freedom. But unless those policies are backed by an activist group, they may not matter much.
I often find myself, when dealing with an incident of academic freedom, in the uncomfortable position of advising the victim to contact the AAUP, but telling them to understand that the AAUP will not act until all appeals are finished, and even then censure is rare and takes a long time. If they really want to get something done, I tell them, they should contact FIRE. I wish the AAUP would be the leading defender of academic freedom in America, but wishing it won’t help someone get their job back.
FIRE is a relatively obscure organization with a small staff, less than a decade old, funded by conservative foundations, with no membership that it represents. Yet it has managed by its example to embarrass the AAUP at every turn, simply by virtue of speaking out loudly and forcefully against violations of academic freedom. The AAUP should have learned how to be more effective without needing this competition, but at least FIRE has proven once and for all that an activist group defending academic freedom can be far more effective than an academic organization.
I believe that the AAUP, with its resources and its nationwide membership and its strong reputation, can address individual cases of academic freedom far better than FIRE does. This will require expanding the AAUP’s focus beyond faculty members, to make it an organization that works for the rights of staff and students as well as professors because the rights of all of us are threatened by the censorship of anyone on campus.
Activism in Defense of Academic Freedom
Activism is the fundamental change necessary to save the AAUP and help protect academic freedom. In 1930, the AAUP recognized that its system of investigations was inadequate to protect academic freedom, and so the association leaders developed the censure list. In more than 75 years since then, the AAUP’s approach to academic freedom has remained frozen in time, oblivious to the radical shifts in higher education. Astonishingly, despite rapid transportation and internet communication, the AAUP today often takes far longer to investigate and censure an institution than it did in the 1930s.
There may be some who imagine that the AAUP preserves its credibility and neutrality by this current slow-motion system of silence; nothing could be further from the truth. When the AAUP fails to speak publicly about violations of academic freedom (in order to preserve its objectivity for a future investigation that rarely happens), the AAUP invites accusations of bias and irrelevance. When the AAUP fails to be the leading voice for academic freedom, its silence is interpreted as incompetence, not scholarly detachment.
An activist stance in no way will impede the AAUP’s current process of investigating and censuring institutions that violate academic freedom. If anything, the activist approach will improve the current censure system by providing institutions with greater warning earlier in the process that their actions endanger academic freedom. Instead of a slap on the hand long after a violation has occurred, the AAUP can deliver a slap in the face before a final decision is made.
Decentralized Structure
The national office of the AAUP has sometimes been in disarray. Expanding the work of the AAUP will require changes in how the AAUP operates. The AAUP is far too centralized and hierarchical. Nearly everything the AAUP does goes through the national office for permission, a bureaucracy that makes rapid responses rare. The primary underutilized resource of the AAUP is the army of volunteers available through its state and campus chapters.
Instead of merely passing on cases to the national office and getting permission before commenting or working on them, state AAUP divisions should be the leaders in initiating activism for each state, and speaking out about potential violations of academic freedom. In addition, AAUP committees should be encouraged to speak out on cases relevant to their missions, instead of making Committee A the sole (and usually silent) voice of the AAUP. The danger of decentralization is that state or campus chapters might take positions contrary to the national office; but an institution devoted to academic freedom should not be afraid of internal dissent.
The Scholarship of Higher Education and Academic Freedom
One key reason why the AAUP has faded in influence among faculty (especially at research universities) is that the AAUP is disconnected from the scholarly world. The AAUP can greatly increase its credibility in academia by providing leadership for the interdisciplinary study of higher education in general, and academic freedom in particular. By adding a scholarly conference to its annual meeting, the AAUP can bring in more members and contribute to the scholarly study of academic freedom. The AAUP should also develop a scholarly online journal about academic freedom, and a scholarly book series on academic freedom and higher education.
The AAUP must restructure its ridiculously high membership fees (which range from $39 to $188), by bringing the fee levels for non-union members down to what most scholarly associations charge, with graduated fees based on income, no state fees, and a discounted rate for new members.
The AAUP also needs to bring its message to scholarly conferences. The AAUP should target all of the leading academic conferences, and seek to have issues of academic freedom and other topics of concern to the AAUP made a part of these conferences (as it is doing at this year ¼s Modern Language Association conference). By working with its members who are part of these scholarly associations, the AAUP can raise its profile among faculty and make professional issues a greater part of disciplinary conferences.
The AAUP will not disappear or cease doing its good work, despite its current troubles. The main question is, why can’t the AAUP do more, and do it better? Fundamentally, it is not money nor resources standing in our way. It is not the bias against unions nor the flaws of past management that prevent the AAUP from rising to its past prominence. It is our failure to imagine a better, bigger AAUP, and to act to make this change happen. The AAUP can greatly expand its membership, its credibility, and its influence, if only it is willing to give up this fear of change and become a decentralized, activist organization with a new devotion to scholarship.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
As a faculty member at one large state university in the midwest where tenured faculty were fired in the most outrageous manner with the full knowledge of the AAUP Committee on Academic Freedom, I could not agree more. The AAUP did nothing to stop this most flagrant violation of academic freedom. Long time members of the AAUP on this campus have a difficult time defending the AAUP when they try to recruit new membership. One does not have to work too hard to imagine why.
Long Time AAUP Member, at 8:40 am EDT on June 7, 2007
http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/02/02/boycott
Kevin, at 10:40 am EDT on June 7, 2007
A few observations, if I may, at a time when the AAUP is considering its future.
First, let me acknowledge that I have never been a member of the AAUP, though I was a tenured professor for forty-two years. At a point in my career when I began thinking I really ought to join, the Association decided to become a collective bargaining organization, and I decided that was not for me. Nevertheless, I admire much that the AAUP represents and I wish it well.
As I read accounts of its current deliberations about its future, I can’t help but wonder if the AAUP shouldn’t consider moving beyond its traditional focus on faculty “conditions of employment,” including academic freedom, and grapple with some of the major issues now confronting academe from the faculty perspective. Here are several examples:
The invention and widespread use of printing had revolutionary effects on the world of learning. Arguably, we are now in the early stages of a technological revolution of comparable importance. What effects will that have on our profession?
A fellow physicist once remarked to me that “the Universe is not organized like a university.” He meant the physical universe, but I think his remark applies equally well to the intellectual universe. What will be the effects of what appears to be growing “interdisciplinarity” and “multi-disciplinarity?”
Approaching half of all university students are 25 years of age or older, and “life-long education” is becoming the norm. What does that mean for the professorial profession and its institutions?
I think most of us could agree that the primary product of a university is “learning,” learning by students in their classrooms and laboratories and libraries, and learning by professors in their research and scholarship. There are growing demands from many quarters that universities must demonstrate that this primary product actually exists. These demands are accompanied by words like “assessment” and “accountability.” What are the implications for the professoriate?
There are many more such examples. Let me suggest that the AAUP might give some thought to including them in its work plan.
Don Langenberg, Chancellor Emeritus at University System of Maryland, at 10:40 am EDT on June 7, 2007
I find it ironic that an organization dedicated to academic freedom and the autonomy of the academy would even think about taking the radical step of unionizing. The university is supposed to be protected from the pressures of groups outside the academy. Why would the AAUP seek to become an external pressure group intent in imposing its will, through a union,upon institutions of higher learning. Moreover, I don’t even need to mention the devastating financial effect unionizing America’s professorate would have on individual institutions of higher learning.
In addition, such a radical step would simply widen the divide that already exists between the academy and the American public. Whether we are willing to admit it or not, the idea of the university as an autonomous institution, an island of safety, protected and immune to the whims of public opinion is a myth. We are dependent upon the public for tax dollars, students, and research dollars. To take the money of these groups on the one hand acn claim no accountability to them on the other is supreme arrogance. The last thing American colleges and universities need is an activist, unionized faculty.
Sorry, this is a terrible idea!
Robin West, I Absolutely Disagree, at 10:30 am EDT on June 8, 2007
Although the AAUP censure process may be slow and deliberative, it is incorrect to assume that censure by the national AAUP is the only response made by the AAUP to violations of its principles. AAUP member activists in the state conferences and local chapters — and, yes, the union chapters, too — provide local support for faculty whose rights have been violated. While they do not have the authority to censure an institution they can and do provide support and mediation for faculty. And, as for the union chapters, it is through their contracts and contractual grievance procedures that they can effectively provide protection for thier faculty. AAUP union chapters uniformly have provisions supporting academic freedom, shared governance and due process in their contracts and, unlike many other unions, they are not outsiders. AAUP union chapters are run by faculty at the institution elected by their colleagues and working to defend the AAUP principles. They provide contractual support for the provisions of their faculty handbooks and the actions of their faculty and/or university senate and personnel committees. In these times when the academy is being coproratized, it is the power of a union contract that is often the most effective means of protecting academic freedom, shared governance and due process and of resolving violations before a situation gets so bad that censure is appropriate.
Estelle Gellman, President, Hofstra Chapter AAUP at Hofstra University, at 11:10 pm EDT on June 8, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job
Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job
Posting Description: University of Colorado Denver School of Medicine, Department of Pediatrics Section of ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Posting Description: The Division of Pediatric Surgery in the Department of Surgery at the University of ... see job
Assistant/Associate Professor of Educational Research Department of Educational Leadership & Foundations Western Carolina ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Join the Pack! A community with nearly 8,000 faculty and staff, and 30,000 students. NC State is one of the largest employers ... see job
Saint Louis University is a Jesuit Catholic University. Through teaching, research, health care and community service, Saint ... see job
Not always so glacial
The AAUP’s investigations were not always so “glacial.” Many of the early investigations took place within weeks or months of an incident, often while the coals were still hot. For example, for its very first investigation at the U. of Utah caused by the firing of four professors and the resignation of 17 in protest, Arthur Lovejoy arrived in Salt Lake City in April, while the controversy was still swirling. He met with the Regents and president while they were still dealing with the issues and the committee filed its report in July. (The AAUP was founded in January 1915.)
In the Ralph Turner case at the University of Pittsburgh in 1934, Turner was fired on June 30th and Ralph Himstead and his investigative committee arrived in Pittsburgh in August—before Turner had even left town. Many other early cases follow a similar pattern of acting quickly once misconduct by an administration was alleged.
Christian Anderson, Graduate Student at Penn State University, at 8:00 am EDT on June 7, 2007