2010Unpublished venueRequires access

Academic Freedom: Liberal Professors, their Critics and the Effect on Today's College Student

Bernadette McHugh

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill drew national attention in 2005 for an essay in which he described the victims of the 9/11 attacks as “little Eichmanns” (Johnson & Seelye, 2009), a reference to the passively complicit Nazi Adolf Eichmann. On April 2, 2009, a jury in Denver delivered a verdict that the University of Colorado had wrongfully dismissed Churchill for voicing these unpopular political views. Some viewed the verdict as a victory for free speech and academic freedom while others saw it as further proof that America’s universities had been corrupted by liberal professors who were intent on politicizing academia (Horowitz, 2006). The Churchill case has brought a long standing debate into the national spotlight during the 2008 presidential election season. Controversy arose on many campuses when some schools’ officials discouraged teachers from wearing political buttons around campus, barred them from attending political rallies, and told them not to affix political bumper stickers on their cars. The argument was that students need to be protected from a liberal professorate who are taking advantage of their youth and inexperience and indoctrinating them into a liberal mindset (Jaschik, 2008). There were also accusations that conservative students were discriminated against in class and in grading, and that universities were not making an effort to hire more conservative professors to promote equality of viewpoints.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill drew national attention in 2005 for an essay in which he described the victims of the 9/11 attacks as “little Eichmanns” (Johnson & Seelye, 2009), a reference to the passively complicit Nazi Adolf Eichmann. On April 2, 2009, a jury in Denver delivered a verdict that the University of Colorado had wrongfully dismissed Churchill for voicing these unpopular political views. Some viewed the verdict as a victory for free speech and academic freedom while others saw it as further proof that America’s universities had been corrupted by liberal professors who were intent on politicizing academia (Horowitz, 2006). The Churchill case has brought a long standing debate into the national spotlight during the 2008 presidential election season. Controversy arose on many campuses when some schools’ officials discouraged teachers from wearing political buttons around campus, barred them from attending political rallies, and told them not to affix political bumper stickers on their cars. The argument was that students need to be protected from a liberal professorate who are taking advantage of their youth and inexperience and indoctrinating them into a liberal mindset (Jaschik, 2008). There were also accusations that conservative students were discriminated against in class and in grading, and that universities were not making an effort to hire more conservative professors to promote equality of viewpoints.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill drew national attention in 2005 for an essay in which he described the victims of the 9/11 attacks as “little Eichmanns” (Johnson & Seelye, 2009), a reference to the passively complicit Nazi Adolf Eichmann. On April 2, 2009, a jury in Denver delivered a verdict that the University of Colorado had wrongfully dismissed Churchill for voicing these unpopular political views. Some viewed the verdict as a victory for free speech and academic freedom while others saw it as further proof that America’s universities had been corrupted by liberal professors who were intent on politicizing academia (Horowitz, 2006). The Churchill case has brought a long standing debate into the national spotlight during the 2008 presidential election season. Controversy arose on many campuses when some schools’ officials discouraged teachers from wearing political buttons around campus, barred them from attending political rallies, and told them not to affix political bumper stickers on their cars. The argument was that students need to be protected from a liberal professorate who are taking advantage of their youth and inexperience and indoctrinating them into a liberal mindset (Jaschik, 2008). There were also accusations that conservative students were discriminated against in class and in grading, and that universities were not making an effort to hire more conservative professors to promote equality of viewpoints.

Key concepts: Academic freedom, Politics, Verdict, Political science, Victory, Law, Presidential system, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Academic Freedom: Liberal Professors, their Critics and the Effect on Today's College Student — Research Paper | ScholarLens