Pavela Report - College sexual harassment policies and freedom of expression. This issue contained several court decisions on school/college sexual harassment policies and freedom of expression.
What did everyone think on the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case? This is the English professor who discussed topics that focused on sexual content. Do you agree with the courts decision that his teaching style/topics did not violate the sexual harassment policy of the college? In addition, how would you handle this professor if you were an administrator at the college (i.e. would you continue to let him use a confrontational teaching style and discuss topics of a sexual nature or would you make him tone it down)?
I was also wondering what everyone thought on the Hayut v. State Univ of New York case. This is the professor who referred to one of the students as Monica Lewinsky. Do you agree with the courts decision that this was sexual harassment? In addition, what is the difference between this case and the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case (e.g. why was one found to be sexual harassment and the other was not)?
In the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case, I originally thought that this was a harsh judgment because we weren’t told exactly what the punishment was for "sexual harassment which had the effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's academic performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment." However, after further looking into this case, I found that some of the items that were now required of Cohen were things that, I thought, should have been provided up front. He was told that he now has to give the students a syllabus including the sensitive nature or the course work. I would expect/hope that when teaching a class of this nature, you would want this for your own security so a teacher could not claim they were unaware of the topics of the class. I also would have said that he needed a warning before being dismissed, but since he was not, I think the fact that they told him that any violation of this policy that he was now aware of was fair. Here is the link with the court ruling: http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/getcase/9th/case/9555936.html
In the case of Hayut v. State University of New York, I agree with this decision of the court because, unlike the Cohen case, this was directed specifically to one person, in turn making people think that she acted in the same nature and behavior of M. Lewinsky. Much like the case of Rubin v Ikenberry, I’d assume that the content was also not of relevant nature to the course that was being taught.
I agree with the decision made in Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College because of precedent. Cohen's teaching practices had never been questioned before and the college did not have a clear policy pertaining to academic freedom and sexual harassment. Even though academic freedom is not necessarily protected at state institutions, unique teaching styles in my opinion are not always grounds for sexual harassment. Where Cohen may have gotten into further trouble was when the student asked for an alternative assignment or proving the relevance of pornographic topics to Remedial English.
I agree with Sara; initially I was disturbed with the U.S. Court of Appeals decision in Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College, and with the statement that the professor had been “subject to an unlawful “legalistic ambush” by the College. However, as I read more about the case, and understood the Court’s reasoning, the decision, while sad, made “legalistic” sense… It would appear that the College had been very lax (to say the least) in supervising their professor, having allowed him extensive latitude in speech and course content. Despite the number of years he apparently had taught in a similar manner, it seems that Cohen was not warned by the College that his statements and actions were very inappropriate and unacceptable, nor does it appear that he was offered mentoring/counseling regarding the sexual nature of his language, assignments, and class discussions. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, the College’s sexual harassment policy wasn’t clear and precise enough to support the College’s decision to terminate. One caveat which we are seeing made clear in so many of our case readings is the regard for following our own institutional processes. In this case, while Cohen clearly was inappropriate at the very least, it did not seem that the College’s written policy on sexual harassment provided substantial teeth to warrant Cohen’s termination.
Matthew, you asked how we would handle this professor if we were the administrator at his college. This situation would clearly require extensive research and thought; on the one hand is a female student who has advised the College that she feels offended by the sexual nature of a remedial English course and on the other hand is a tenured professor who has taught in a similar manner for a number of years without censure. I would start by reviewing the applicable college rules and procedures to see if we had a policy that addressed this type of situation. I would then follow that rule/procedure, and would verify my plan of action with Human Resources and our College attorney. Having read this case, I would certainly review and question this rule/procedure. If the policy seemed weak and/or unclear, I would look for any relevant state or federal statute/rule that addresses this type of situation, and would work with the appropriate administrator to revise our college rule before moving forward to terminate this professor.
My next step would be to speak with those who supervised this teacher, asking if this type of issue had surfaced previously and, if so, how it had been handled and by whom. I would speak with the student and others in her class, and then speak with the professor to hear his side of the story, including the department chair and/or academic dean in these meetings as well. If this professor had never been warned about his inappropriate language and actions, I would likely start with a written warning to him of the importance of teaching his remedial English course in such a manner that his students are not felling uncomfortable, and would require him to participate in some type of mentoring/counseling with his department chair to revise his teaching style to one which focuses more appropriately on remedial English rather than the topic of sex. Above all, I would try to avoid a “knee-jerk reaction” since this situation is one that clearly needs much consideration and review before a final decision to terminate the professor might be made.
My questions would be – how far can an administrator go in “forcing” the tenured professor to change his teaching “style”? Especially, in this case when the professor apparently had taught in this manner for a number of years without sanction? When does this encroach on academic freedom and when is it within the College’s rights and responsibilities to insure that students’ professors are appropriate in both what and how they teach the course’s topic? Over the years, it seems that Cohen’s course changed from remedial English to a course with a more sexual nature; a course that perhaps did not provide students with the course for which they were paying. Does this change anything in the way we would handle this professor?
Donna, when I was reading further into this I noticed that the college had just implemented a new sexual harassment policy. I agree with you in questioning how far an administrator can go when a tenured faculty has been teaching this subject so I am wondering if they were using him as their first example of enforcing the policy.
I agree that the college might have somewhat "blindsided" the professor by imposing the harsh penalty when they had turned their heads to it for the many years prior the he had been acting this way in the classroom. I think there is always a fine line between teaching students to think by being a bit provocative but one can overstep the bounds when the nature is constantly sexual to the point of making students consistently uncomfortable...I think, in the bounds of academic freedom, making students uncomfortable at time for learning sake might be acceptable but, in my opinion, if this is achieved primarily with sexually charged comments the problem most likely lies with the professor not the students!
Yes, universities need to make sure they have the appropriate policies in place to handle these situations and they must follow their procedures when dealing with these types of issues. Sara and Donna I think you are both on the right track in regards to the university making an example out of him. My gut feeling is that the university probably didn’t agree with his methods for some time and they reacted quickly when they saw the opportunity. Overall, Rick is correct that there is a fine line between academic freedom and making students discuss raunchy topics; especially when the students don’t have a choice. Hopefully this professor is doing some good! If he wants to discuss topics of sexual content maybe he should discuss sexual harassment, so that people learn how to behave appropriately.
The Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case is a great one to focus on as it rides the fine line of sexual harassment and academic freedom for course content. I think people today refer to sexual harassment too liberally if they find anything to be objectionable. What constitutes an uncomfortable work environment versus a piece of academic content (or art for example) that was accepted as relevant content in its field?
One of our academic English textbooks this term covers the content topic of Art. In it is a picture of Michelagelo's David sculpture. Several students from Saudi Arabia told their teachers they objected to the photo in the text because their religion does not permit them to see such images. But does this constitute a "hostile work environment"?
If it's just a matter of using a disclaimer on the syllabus ahead of time, we may all have to start doing that regardless of our content. As an instructor, it's hard to guess everything a student may be offended by these days.
Another timely article (The Chronicle) following up today's class discussion and this Pavela report -
June 23, 2010, 07:00 AM ET
In Lawsuit, Allen U. Vice President Accuses President of Sexual Harassment
An admissions official at Allen University has filed a lawsuit alleging that the university's president, Charles Young, coerced her into a sexual relationship and choked and shoved her, according to The State, a newspaper in Columbia, S.C. Sonya Melton, who is on leave from her job as the university's associate vice president for enrollment management, also named the university and the African Methodist Episcopal Church in the suit, which she filed in federal court. The church operates the university.
Ms. Melton's suit says that Mr. Young coerced her into having sex from 2006 to 2008, and that he later demoted her when she attempted to complain about the situation. A spokesman for the university said its policy is not to comment on personnel matters.
Pavela Report - College sexual harassment policies and freedom of expression. This issue contained several court decisions on school/college sexual harassment policies and freedom of expression.
ReplyDeleteWhat did everyone think on the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case? This is the English professor who discussed topics that focused on sexual content. Do you agree with the courts decision that his teaching style/topics did not violate the sexual harassment policy of the college? In addition, how would you handle this professor if you were an administrator at the college (i.e. would you continue to let him use a confrontational teaching style and discuss topics of a sexual nature or would you make him tone it down)?
I was also wondering what everyone thought on the Hayut v. State Univ of New York case. This is the professor who referred to one of the students as Monica Lewinsky. Do you agree with the courts decision that this was sexual harassment? In addition, what is the difference between this case and the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case (e.g. why was one found to be sexual harassment and the other was not)?
In the Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case, I originally thought that this was a harsh judgment because we weren’t told exactly what the punishment was for "sexual harassment which had the effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's academic performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment." However, after further looking into this case, I found that some of the items that were now required of Cohen were things that, I thought, should have been provided up front. He was told that he now has to give the students a syllabus including the sensitive nature or the course work. I would expect/hope that when teaching a class of this nature, you would want this for your own security so a teacher could not claim they were unaware of the topics of the class. I also would have said that he needed a warning before being dismissed, but since he was not, I think the fact that they told him that any violation of this policy that he was now aware of was fair. Here is the link with the court ruling: http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/getcase/9th/case/9555936.html
ReplyDeleteIn the case of Hayut v. State University of New York, I agree with this decision of the court because, unlike the Cohen case, this was directed specifically to one person, in turn making people think that she acted in the same nature and behavior of M. Lewinsky. Much like the case of Rubin v Ikenberry, I’d assume that the content was also not of relevant nature to the course that was being taught.
I agree with the decision made in Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College because of precedent. Cohen's teaching practices had never been questioned before and the college did not have a clear policy pertaining to academic freedom and sexual harassment. Even though academic freedom is not necessarily protected at state institutions, unique teaching styles in my opinion are not always grounds for sexual harassment. Where Cohen may have gotten into further trouble was when the student asked for an alternative assignment or proving the relevance of pornographic topics to Remedial English.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sara; initially I was disturbed with the U.S. Court of Appeals decision in Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College, and with the statement that the professor had been “subject to an unlawful “legalistic ambush” by the College. However, as I read more about the case, and understood the Court’s reasoning, the decision, while sad, made “legalistic” sense… It would appear that the College had been very lax (to say the least) in supervising their professor, having allowed him extensive latitude in speech and course content. Despite the number of years he apparently had taught in a similar manner, it seems that Cohen was not warned by the College that his statements and actions were very inappropriate and unacceptable, nor does it appear that he was offered mentoring/counseling regarding the sexual nature of his language, assignments, and class discussions. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, the College’s sexual harassment policy wasn’t clear and precise enough to support the College’s decision to terminate. One caveat which we are seeing made clear in so many of our case readings is the regard for following our own institutional processes. In this case, while Cohen clearly was inappropriate at the very least, it did not seem that the College’s written policy on sexual harassment provided substantial teeth to warrant Cohen’s termination.
ReplyDeleteMatthew, you asked how we would handle this professor if we were the administrator at his college. This situation would clearly require extensive research and thought; on the one hand is a female student who has advised the College that she feels offended by the sexual nature of a remedial English course and on the other hand is a tenured professor who has taught in a similar manner for a number of years without censure. I would start by reviewing the applicable college rules and procedures to see if we had a policy that addressed this type of situation. I would then follow that rule/procedure, and would verify my plan of action with Human Resources and our College attorney. Having read this case, I would certainly review and question this rule/procedure. If the policy seemed weak and/or unclear, I would look for any relevant state or federal statute/rule that addresses this type of situation, and would work with the appropriate administrator to revise our college rule before moving forward to terminate this professor.
My next step would be to speak with those who supervised this teacher, asking if this type of issue had surfaced previously and, if so, how it had been handled and by whom. I would speak with the student and others in her class, and then speak with the professor to hear his side of the story, including the department chair and/or academic dean in these meetings as well. If this professor had never been warned about his inappropriate language and actions, I would likely start with a written warning to him of the importance of teaching his remedial English course in such a manner that his students are not felling uncomfortable, and would require him to participate in some type of mentoring/counseling with his department chair to revise his teaching style to one which focuses more appropriately on remedial English rather than the topic of sex. Above all, I would try to avoid a “knee-jerk reaction” since this situation is one that clearly needs much consideration and review before a final decision to terminate the professor might be made.
My questions would be – how far can an administrator go in “forcing” the tenured professor to change his teaching “style”? Especially, in this case when the professor apparently had taught in this manner for a number of years without sanction? When does this encroach on academic freedom and when is it within the College’s rights and responsibilities to insure that students’ professors are appropriate in both what and how they teach the course’s topic? Over the years, it seems that Cohen’s course changed from remedial English to a course with a more sexual nature; a course that perhaps did not provide students with the course for which they were paying. Does this change anything in the way we would handle this professor?
ReplyDeleteDonna, when I was reading further into this I noticed that the college had just implemented a new sexual harassment policy. I agree with you in questioning how far an administrator can go when a tenured faculty has been teaching this subject so I am wondering if they were using him as their first example of enforcing the policy.
ReplyDeleteSara, I had the same thought; or whether the new sexual harassment policy had been written to directly address this particular professor...
ReplyDeleteI agree that the college might have somewhat "blindsided" the professor by imposing the harsh penalty when they had turned their heads to it for the many years prior the he had been acting this way in the classroom. I think there is always a fine line between teaching students to think by being a bit provocative but one can overstep the bounds when the nature is constantly sexual to the point of making students consistently uncomfortable...I think, in the bounds of academic freedom, making students uncomfortable at time for learning sake might be acceptable but, in my opinion, if this is achieved primarily with sexually charged comments the problem most likely lies with the professor not the students!
ReplyDeleteYes, universities need to make sure they have the appropriate policies in place to handle these situations and they must follow their procedures when dealing with these types of issues. Sara and Donna I think you are both on the right track in regards to the university making an example out of him. My gut feeling is that the university probably didn’t agree with his methods for some time and they reacted quickly when they saw the opportunity. Overall, Rick is correct that there is a fine line between academic freedom and making students discuss raunchy topics; especially when the students don’t have a choice. Hopefully this professor is doing some good! If he wants to discuss topics of sexual content maybe he should discuss sexual harassment, so that people learn how to behave appropriately.
ReplyDeleteThe Cohen v. San Bernardino Valley College case is a great one to focus on as it rides the fine line of sexual harassment and academic freedom for course content. I think people today refer to sexual harassment too liberally if they find anything to be objectionable. What constitutes an uncomfortable work environment versus a piece of academic content (or art for example) that was accepted as relevant content in its field?
ReplyDeleteOne of our academic English textbooks this term covers the content topic of Art. In it is a picture of Michelagelo's David sculpture. Several students from Saudi Arabia told their teachers they objected to the photo in the text because their religion does not permit them to see such images. But does this constitute a "hostile work environment"?
If it's just a matter of using a disclaimer on the syllabus ahead of time, we may all have to start doing that regardless of our content. As an instructor, it's hard to guess everything a student may be offended by these days.
-Michelle Bell-
Another timely article (The Chronicle) following up today's class discussion and this Pavela report -
ReplyDeleteJune 23, 2010, 07:00 AM ET
In Lawsuit, Allen U. Vice President Accuses President of Sexual Harassment
An admissions official at Allen University has filed a lawsuit alleging that the university's president, Charles Young, coerced her into a sexual relationship and choked and shoved her, according to The State, a newspaper in Columbia, S.C. Sonya Melton, who is on leave from her job as the university's associate vice president for enrollment management, also named the university and the African Methodist Episcopal Church in the suit, which she filed in federal court. The church operates the university.
Ms. Melton's suit says that Mr. Young coerced her into having sex from 2006 to 2008, and that he later demoted her when she attempted to complain about the situation. A spokesman for the university said its policy is not to comment on personnel matters.