Position Paper The California Conference of the American Association of University Professors

BILL TITLE

S.B. 5, an act to add Section 66015.8 to the Education Code, relating to public postsecondary education.

OUR POSITION

The California Conference of the American Association of University Professors (CA-AAUP) is opposed to S.B. 5.

OUR REASONING

Proponents of an Academic Bill of Rights (ABOR) believe that American colleges and universities should guarantee "intellectual diversity" by legislating "fair and balanced" practices of grading, curriculum development, selection of invited speakers, allocation of university funds, hiring, firing, promotion and tenure review (see: http://studentsforacademicfreedom.org/abor.html ). This movement has built momentum in several states, and appeared last year in California as proposed Senate Bill 1335. S.B. 1335 died in Committee, but has now reemerged with new force in the form of S.B. 5, due to be considered by the legislature early this year and currently in review by the Senate Committee on Education.   While the language in this new piece of legislation has been streamlined and all references to an "Academic Bill of Rights" have been replaced with "Student Bill of Rights," the intent of the bill remains the same - to introduce a new level of legislative oversight into the academic realm.

While the CA-AAUP appreciates the value of reaffirming prudent academic values (as do parts of S.B. 5), including constant vigilance in protecting First Amendment Rights for all citizens, we conclude S.B. 5 to be flawed precisely because it fails to acknowledge the systems of checks and balances already in place within California's system of public higher education and maintain that this oversight would necessarily intrude a counterproductive, and potentially expensive, layer of external oversight into our education system.  

The CA-AAUP agrees with S.B. 5 that California higher education serves a vital role for California citizens in "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." The CA-AAUP further agrees that "free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals"; that it is unconscionable that students, teachers, and researchers would be rewarded or punished solely on the basis of personal viewpoints; that harassment must not be tolerated; that college and university services must not be withheld solely because of the personal viewpoints that individuals may hold, advocate, express, or demonstrate; and that California's colleges and universities are indeed subject to the provisions of applicable state and federal law.

The CA-AAUP wishes to emphasize that these values are already carefully articulated, exercised, and protected by college and university policy and procedure in accordance with California Higher Education policy and procedure and subject to verification and oversight by state sanctioned administrative boards of directors/regents. While the State of California has a legitimate oversight role in state-sponsored higher education, the individual institutions and their governing bodies are in the best position to implement policies to respect the rights of their students and faculty. College and university leadership, administrative staff, and faculty are ever vigilant to ensure compliance with local, state, and federal law with regard to allocating state resources. Further, California colleges and universities have effective and elaborate systems of checks and balances in place to ensure that all individuals and groups are treated fairly, enjoying due process, and sharing equally the privileges and protections promised them by policy and law. Finally, S.B. 5 wrongly assumes that California's students somehow need to be protected from the free flow of critical and controversial ideas that constitute one of higher education's greatest strengths. Such an assumption does a disservice to our students, our colleagues, and our institutions.

Perhaps it is because of our strong agreement with many of the foundational principles espoused in S.B. 5 that ultimately, the CA-AAUP takes issue with the resolution proposed. The CA-AAUP is in agreement with the position statement of the AAUP's National Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure regarding legislation modeled on the Academic Bill of Rights -- which was originally drafted by columnist David Horowitz (see: http://studentsforacdemicfreedom.org ). In the words of Committee A: " Not only is the Academic Bill of Rights redundant, but, ironically, it also infringes academic freedom in the very act of purporting to protect it" (see: http://www.aaup.org/statements/SpchState/billofrights.htm ). For these reasons the CA-AAUP is, therefore, opposed to S.B. 5.