Academic Freedom in Pennsylvania

From the York Dispatch:

Local Pennsylvania representatives say they've heard the stories.

College professors strongly stating viewpoints supporting one political party over another. Or showing films maligning a candidate just before an election.

It's one thing to challenge students to think and express their own opinions, said Rep. Ron Miller, R-Jacobus.

However, academic freedom is hindered when professors fail to discuss opposing views, while attempting to make students adopt certain viewpoints, Miller said.

And legislators have heard from students who think they were given unfair grades or treated unjustly because of their political ideologies, Miller said.

He co-sponsored a resolution -- approved Tuesday night by the state House of Representatives, 108-90 -- that calls for the formation of a committee to investigate whatever problems exist at state-owned colleges and universities and then determine if corrective legislation is necessary.

The resolution, which does not need the governor's signature, was proposed by Rep. Gibson Armstrong, R-Lancaster, who said he collected about 50 examples of "intolerance" from college students.

What it says: The resolution says that "students and faculty should be protected from the imposition of ideological orthodoxy," and students should be "graded based on academic merit, without regard for ideological views."

"We've all heard anecdotal stories, so let's find out how much really exists," said Miller, who serves on the House education committee. "Why sit around and guess at it?"

The investigative committee -- composed primarily of the House's higher education subcommittee, plus two appointees -- will make a report of its findings and recommendations by June 30, 2006. If needed, the committee's investigation could extend to Nov. 30, 2006, according to the resolution.

Read it here.

As I have said time and again, academic irresponsibility invites this kind of outside interference. With the rise of the concept of the "public intellectual" academics abandoned all pretense of objectivity and disinterested authority. This was a logical and entirely predictable result. Note that this is being presented as the empowerment of students and their families against the irresponsible exercise of academic authority. That is a message that politicians can sell to the voters.