admin

Kansas House Concurrent Resolution No. 5035

May 18, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

Session of 2006

By Committee on Appropriations
2-2
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION expressing the sense of the Kansas House of Representatives and Senate that colleges and universities should adopt an Academic Bill of Rights to secure the intellectual independence of faculty members and students, protect the principles of academic freedom, promote intellectual diversity, and support the pursuit of knowledge and truth as a fundamental purpose of the university; and for other purposes.

WHEREAS, The central purposes of a university are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a constitutional republic, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large;

WHEREAS, Free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of the central purposes of a university, the freedoms to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls, and these purposes reflect the values of integrity, pluralism, diversity, opportunity, analytical intelligence, openness and fairness that are the cornerstones of American so-ciety, and academic freedom and intellectual diversity are values indispensable to an American university;

WHEREAS, From its first formulation in the General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the ideas that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom;

WHEREAS, Academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the general report, it is vital to protect ”as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results”;

Whereas, Because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise, and academic freedom is a national value as well;

Whereas, In Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, a historic 1967 decision, the Supreme Court overturned a New York State loyalty provision for teachers with these words: ”Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom,[a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, in 1957, the Supreme Court observed that the ”essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident”;

WHEREAS, Academic freedom consists of protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers, and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself, meaning that no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy should be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring, tenure or termination process, nor through any other administrative means by the academic institution;

WHEREAS, It has long been recognized that intellectual independence means the protection of students and faculty members from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a political, ideological or religious nature;

WHEREAS, The 1915 Declaration of Principles of the American Association of University Professors admonished faculty members to avoid “taking unfair advantage of the student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher’s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own”;

WHEREAS, In 1967, the American Association of University Professors’ Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students reinforced and amplified this injunction by affirming the inseparability of ”the freedom
to teach and freedom to learn” and, in the words of the joint statement, ”students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion”;

WHEREAS, It is essential that professors and lecturers not force their opinions about philosophy, politics and other contestable issues on students in the classroom and in all academic environments, as this is a cardinal principle of academic freedom laid down by the American Association of University Professors: Now, therefore,

Be it Resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Kansas, the Senate concurring therein: That, to secure the intellectual independence of faculty members and students, protect the principles of academic freedom, promote intellectual diversity, and support the pursuit of knowledge and truth as a fundamental purpose of the university:

(1) The Kansas House of Representatives and Senate strongly recommend that the following principles and procedures be observed at all public colleges and universities within the State of Kansas:

(a) All faculty members will be hired, fired, promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise and, in the humanities, the social sciences and the arts, with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives;

(b) no faculty member will be hired, fired, promoted or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political, ideological or religious
beliefs;

(c) no faculty member will be excluded from tenure, search and hiring committees on the basis of his or her political, ideological or religious beliefs;

(d) students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political, ideological or religious beliefs;

(e) curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas and provide students with dissenting sources and viewpoints;

(f) while teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints;

(g) academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches on all unsettled questions and institutions should recognize that exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty members;

(h) faculty members will not use their courses or their positions for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or antireligious
indoctrination;

(i) faculty and instructors have a right to academic freedom in the classroom in discussing their subjects, but they should make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints other than their own and should encourage intellectual honesty, civil debate and the analysis of ideas in the pursuit of knowledge and truth.

(j) The freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and freedom of conscience of students and student organizations shall not be infringed by instructors, university administrators, student government organizations or by institutional policies, rules or procedures;

(k) selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers’ programs and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism;

(l) except as provided by law, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, the destruction of campus literature and other efforts to obstruct a civil exchange of ideas shall not be permitted;

(m) academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry, recognizing that:

a. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts and theories have been validated by research; and

b. academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation; and

(2) the Kansas House of Representatives and Senate recognize that the principles and procedures described in paragraph (m) fully apply only to public universities.

Be it further resolved: That, the Secretary of State be directed to send enrolled copies of this resolution to the governing boards and to the president of every college and university in this state, and to the Governor, Lieutenant Governor and Attorney General.

California Senate Bill No. 5

May 18, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

Introduced by Senator Morrow
December 6, 2004

An act to add Section 66015.8 to the Education Code, relating to
public postsecondary education.

legislative counsel’s digest
SB 5, as introduced, Morrow. Public postsecondary education standard: Student Bill of Rights.

Existing law establishes the various segments of the public higher education system in the state. These segments include the University of California, which is administered by the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, which is administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and the California Community Colleges, which is administered by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.

This bill would request the Regents of the University of California, and direct the Trustees of the California State University and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, to develop guidelines and implement specified principles, relating to academic freedom, of a Student Bill of Rights.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 66015.8 is added to the Education Code, to read:
66015.8. (a) (1) The Legislature makes the following declarations and findings with respect to public institutions of higher education:

(A) The Legislature declares that the central purposes of the university are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large.

(B) The Legislature further declares that free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the
achievement of these goals, the freedoms to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and
opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls, and these purposes reflect the
values of pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness, and fairness that are the cornerstones of American
society.

(C) The Legislature finds that academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects
and fosters independence of thought and speech, and that academic freedom protects the intellectual independence of
professors, researchers, and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or
authorities within the institution itself.

(D) The Legislature further declares that intellectual independence means the protection of students from the
imposition of any orthodoxy of a political, religious, or ideological nature. To achieve the intellectual independence of
students, teachers should not take unfair advantage of a student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him or her with the teacher’s own
opinions before a student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before
a student has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his or her own, and
students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment
about matters of opinion.

(b) To secure the intellectual independence of students, and to protect the principles of intellectual diversity, the Regents of the
University of California are requested to, and the Trustees of the California State University and the Board of Governors of the
California Community Colleges are hereby directed to, develop guidelines and implement the following principles of the Student
Bill of Rights:

(1) Students shall be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and
disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

(2) Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences shall respect the uncertainty and unsettled character of
all human knowledge in these areas, and provide students with dissenting sources and viewpoints. While teachers are and should
be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their
students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.

(3) Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major
responsibility of faculty. Faculty shall not use their courses or their positions for the purpose of political, ideological, religious,
or anti-religious indoctrination.

(4) The selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers’ programs, and other student activities shall observe the principles
of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.

(5) An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction
of invited campus speakers, the destruction of campus literature, or any other effort to obstruct this exchange shall not be
tolerated.

Washington House Bill 1991

May 18, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

Creating an academic bill of rights.

State of Washington 59th Legislature 2005 Regular Session

By Representatives Dunn, Wallace and Schindler
Read first time 02/14/2005. Referred to Committee on Higher Education.

AN ACT Relating to creating an academic bill of rights; adding a new section to chapter 28B.10 RCW; and creating a new section.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

NEW SECTION. Sec. 1 The legislature finds that:

(1) The central purposes of a university are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large. Free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals. The freedom to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in classrooms and lecture halls. These purposes reflect the values, pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness, and fairness, that are the cornerstones of American society.

(2) Academic freedom and intellectual diversity are values indispensable to American universities. From its first formulation in the “General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors,” the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the idea that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom. Therefore, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the general report, it is vital to protect “as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results.”

(3) Because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise itself, academic freedom is a national value as well. In a historic 1967 decision, Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, the supreme court of the United States overturned a New York state loyalty provision for teachers with these words: “Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 1957, the court observed that the “essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident.”

(4) Academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers, and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself. This means that no political, ideological, or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring, tenure, or termination process, or through any other administrative means by the academic institution. Nor shall legislatures impose any such orthodoxy through their control of the university budget.

(5) This protection includes students. From the first statement on academic freedom, it has been recognized that intellectual independence means the protection of students, as well as faculty, from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a political, religious, or ideological nature. The 1915 general report admonished faculty to avoid “taking unfair advantage of the student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher’s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own.” In 1967, the American association of university professors’ “Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students” reinforced and amplified this injunction by affirming the inseparability of “the freedom to teach and freedom to learn.” In the words of the report, “Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.”

NEW SECTION. Sec. 2 A new section is added to chapter 28B.10 RCW to read as follows:
To secure the intellectual independence of faculty and students and to protect the principle of intellectual diversity, the following principles and procedures shall be observed. These principles apply only to public universities and to private universities that present themselves as bound by the canons of academic freedom. Private institutions choosing to restrict academic freedom on the basis of creed must explicitly disclose the scope and nature of these restrictions.

(1) All faculty shall be hired, fired, promoted, and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise and, in the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts, with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives. No faculty may be hired, fired, or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.

(2) No faculty member may be excluded from tenure, search, and hiring committees on the basis of the member’s political or religious beliefs.

(3) Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

(4) Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.

(5) Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious, or antireligious indoctrination.

(6) Selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers’ programs, and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.

(7) An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas is an essential component of a free university; the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature, or other effort to obstruct this exchange is prohibited.

(8) Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation. To perform these functions adequately, academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry.

— END —

South Dakota House Bill No. 1222

May 18, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

EIGHTY-FIRST SESSION
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, 2006

866M0470 HOUSE BILL NO. 1222

Introduced by: Rep. Phyllis M. Heineman

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to require regental institutions to annually report to the Legislature regarding intellectual diversity.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. That chapter 13-49 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

The Board of Regents shall require each institution under its control to annually report to the Legislature detailing the steps the institution is taking to ensure intellectual diversity and the free exchange of ideas. For purposes of this chapter, intellectual diversity is defined as the foundation of a learning environment that exposes students to a variety of political, ideological, and other perspectives.

Section 2. That chapter 13-49 be amended by adding thereto a NEW SECTION to read as follows:

The report required in section 1 of this Act shall address the specific measures taken by the institution to ensure and promote intellectual diversity and academic freedom.
The report may also include any steps taken by the institution to:
(1) Conduct a study to assess the current state of intellectual diversity on its campus;
(2) Incorporate intellectual diversity into institutional statements, grievance procedures, and activities on diversity;
(3) Encourage a balanced variety of campus-wide panels and speakers and annually publish the names of panelists and speakers;
(4) Establish clear campus policies that ensure that hecklers or threats of violence do not prevent speakers from speaking;
(5) Include intellectual diversity concerns in the institution’s guidelines on teaching;
(6) Include intellectual diversity issues in student course evaluations;
(7) Develop hiring, tenure, and promotion policies that protect individuals against political viewpoint discrimination and track any reported grievances in that regard;
(8) Establish clear campus policies to ensure freedom of the press for students and report any incidents of student newspaper thefts or destruction;
(9) Establish clear campus policies to prohibit political bias in student-funded organizations;

(10) Eliminate any speech codes that restrict the freedom of speech; or
(11) Create an institutional ombudsman on intellectual diversity.

The report shall be posted on the institution’s web site.

Georgia Senate Resolution 661

May 18, 2020 by admin Leave a Comment

04 LC 33 0427S (SCS)

Georgia Senate Resolution 661
By: Senators Johnson of the 1st, Hamrick of the 30th, Smith of the 52nd and Balfour of the 9th

GEORGIA SENATE

A RESOLUTION

Recommending the observance of the Academic Bill of Rights at public universities in Georgia; and for other purposes.

WHEREAS, the principles enumerated in this resolution fully apply only to public universities that present themselves as bound by the canons of academic freedom contained within. Nothing in this resolution shall be construed as interfering with the right of a private institution to restrict academic freedom on the basis of creed or belief; and

WHEREAS, the central purposes of a university are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large; and

WHEREAS, free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals, the freedoms to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls, and these purposes reflect the values – pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness, and fairness – that are the cornerstones of American society; and

WHEREAS, academic freedom is indispensable to the American university. From its first formulation in the General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the idea that human knowledge is the pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge; and

WHEREAS, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the General Report, it is vital to protect “as the first condition of progress [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results”; and

WHEREAS, because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise itself, academic freedom is a national value as well. In a historic 1967 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a New York State loyalty provision for teachers with these words: “Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” (Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the Univ. of the State of New York). In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, (1957), the Court observed that the “essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident”; and

WHEREAS, academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers, and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself, meaning that no political or ideological orthodoxy should be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring, tenure, or termination process, nor through any other administrative means by the academic institution, nor should the legislature impose any such orthodoxy through the control of the university budget; and

WHEREAS, from the first statement on academic freedom, it has been recognized that intellectual independence means the protection of students as well as faculty from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a political or ideological nature. The 1910 General Report admonished faculty to avoid “taking unfair advantage of the student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher’s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own.” In 1967, the American Association of University Professors’ Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students reinforced and amplified this injunction by affirming the inseparability of “the freedom to teach and freedom to learn.” In the words of the report, “Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion;” and

WHEREAS, the academic criteria of the scholarly profession should include reasonable scholarly options within the areas of discipline; and

WHEREAS, the value of the life of the mind was articulated by Thomas Jefferson when he stated, “We are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it;” and

WHEREAS, the education of the next generation of leaders should contain rigorous and balanced exposure to significant theories and thoughtful viewpoints, and students should be given the knowledge and background that empowers them to think for themselves.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SENATE that to secure the intellectual independence of faculty and students and to protect the principles of academic freedom, this body strongly recommends that the following principles and procedures be observed at all public colleges and universities within the State of Georgia:

1. All faculty members shall be hired, fired, promoted, or granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise. No faculty member shall be hired, fired, or denied promotion or tenure solely on the basis of his or her political or ideological beliefs;

2. No faculty member shall be excluded from a tenure search or hiring committee on the basis of his or her political or ideological beliefs;

3. Students shall not be graded on the basis of their political or ideological beliefs. Each college and university should have well known and publicly accessible policies and procedures available to students who believe they have been penalized for their social, political, or ideological beliefs;

4. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their viewpoints, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome exploration of unsettled questions;

5. Faculty members should not use their courses for the purpose of political or ideological indoctrination;

6. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature, or other efforts to obstruct this exchange shall not be tolerated; and

7. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretations.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the Senate is authorized and directed to transmit appropriate copies of this resolution to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia and to the president of every college and university in this state.

http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2003_04/sum/sr661.htm

Adopted March 22, 2004, 1:50 p.m. – 41 Yeas, 5 Nays, 8 NV, 2 Excused

—