OCC professors questioning district language

Deirdre Newman

OCC CAMPUS -- Some professors at the college are taking issue with

language the Coastline Community College District is proposing regarding

academic freedom, calling it vague and a threat to their constitutional

right to freedom of speech.

The topic is a touchy one in the wake of the administration’s handling

of political science professor Kenneth Hearlson after he was charged with

harassing Muslim students during one of his lectures.

Hearlson was not able to go back to the classroom until an independent

investigation was completed. He was eventually cleared of the bulk of the

charges, but he received a letter that he considered to be a reprimand

from the college president.

While the Coast Federation of Educators is still in the preliminary

stages of negotiation for its new contract, some professors contend the

district’s language is diluting their right to academic freedom.

“Instead of protecting our academic freedom to say what we think is

right about matters, it is requiring us not to say certain things,” said

Gayne Anacker, a philosophy professor.

The language in question concerns when faculty members should be

immune from actions affecting their employment status.

The union language states a professor should be protected for

“exercising freedom to examine or endorse unpopular or controversial

ideas appropriate to course content, discussions with students or

academic research or publication, nonetheless, the Faculty Member shall

attempt to be accurate, objective and show respect for the opinion of

others.”

The district suggested replacing the “opinion of others” with the

“right of others to hold and articulate differing opinions. Faculty shall

demonstrate respect for diverse cultures, religions and national

backgrounds.”

That kind of language makes Hearlson’s skin crawl.

“It’s the same opinion I felt about my particular case. It stifles

academic freedom and not only from my particular views as a conservative

Christian. It also stifles the liberal points of view,” Hearlson said.

Anacker called the district’s language a “disaster” because he

believes it’s too vague to be included in a legal contract.

“At what point are you failing to show sufficient respect for a

culture?” Anacker asked. “How much respect do I have to show to the

Nazis? To the Klu Klux Klan?”

Federation President Tina Bruning is also skeptical of the district’s

language.

“Part of what’s problematic is I don’t know what [their] language

means,” Bruning said. “In order to make it concrete, what kind of

guidelines are going to flow from this language?”

The union wants to get as much feedback as it can from its members, so

Bruning has sent out a flier with the union and the district’s language

for faculty at all three district colleges to respond.

And on March 1, the union will bring in faculty experts to testify

during negotiations on the language, Bruning said.

While Hearlson admits that trying to get a handle on academic freedom

is tantamount to walking a tightrope, he expressed optimism that some

kind of compromise can be achieved.

“I think we should work together in coming up with language that is

obviously fair to everyone but does not diminish or take away from the

freedom of people to speak up and have their own opinions in the

classroom and teach as they wish,” Hearlson said.