In this week’s Chronicle, Colorado made the news with a story on the border line of scandal. Provost Upholds U. of Denver’s Handling of Professor Who Discussed Sex in Class reports the debate around Arthur N. Gilbert, the 75-year-old associate professor of international studies who was put on administrative leave after a couple of students reported him for sexual assault. The article is quite long but for the purpose of this blog, an attempt at summarization:
• Gilbert is well-liked by students on campus
• He is under question for sexual harassment for a number of items including talking about masturbating in class, touching students shoulders and trying to play “matchmaker” for his students
• All of the complaints about him were anonymous
• The two major issues are if he committed sexual harassment and how his case has been handled
• He was originally suspended by the Human Resources Department with no faculty board review
• Gilbert was put on leave for 101 days and returned to work this fall to teach graduate classes only
Issue 1: Gilbert was suspended by HR without the review of a faculty board
The only item I took issue with in this article was the faculty review committee stating, "We believe concerns about teaching method and faculty classroom behavior, along with other matters related to teaching, should be addressed by the faculty, not an administrative unit.” While I do believe that a faculty board should be involved in situations like this, I believe that this quote belittles the administrative side of higher education. I am unfamiliar with varying policies at different institutions but do believe that an Human Resources office as well as a faculty board should be involved in cases like this.
Issue 2: Whether or not Gilbert is guilty of sexual harassment
In the short bullet summary above, it may seem that Gilbert is guilty. I was disgusted as I began reading the article. However, after reading the story in its entirety as well as the included comments (some of which are obviously from a colleague of Gilbert), I struggle to believe that Gilbert is as guilty as they are portraying him to be. While I do not believe it is a professor’s job to play “matchmaker,” I am not sure I see the sexual harassment on this topic. I do not believe that a faculty member should be touching a student in the classroom setting as that probably does breach sexual harassment if it isn’t quite clearly considered harassment. So those two items I can sort of give the student benefit of the doubt as there seems to be a heavy gray area.
The article states that in a lesson titled "The Domestic and International Consequences of the Drug War” Gilbert references the “changing public attitudes toward masturbation in discussing connections between efforts in the early 1900s to restrict drug use and that period's taboos against various sexual behaviors widely regarded as sinful.” I have to defend Gilbert on this one. I don’t believe that in this context the topic of masturbation comes close to sexual harassment. If a student isn’t mature enough to handle the course content, then perhaps they should not be in that class, or maybe even in a college setting.
There are huge implications that this situation could have on higher education for both issues. Who is ultimately the decision-maker when it comes to faculty behavior issues? Who on campus should be involved and what bearing does that have on faculty? Where is the line when it comes to course content? What fears do faculty members face when planning lectures? Being mentors? Getting involved in student’s lives?
With the slew of topics this article (and its comments) covered, it will be interesting to see what may happen in similar cases in the future.
Sexual harassment is such a sticky topic in today's culture. While not trying to dimish the discomfort felt by his students, it seems as if the topic area in discussion was academic and relevant to the course. When I was in undergrad, I took an Abnormal Psychology course with a professor who acted out every single disorder we talked about. I remember our lesson on sexual disorders was full of details about the physical and psychological aspects of such disorders. While that class was not one that I would call comfortable, we all understand that the topic was academic and relevant to the course.
ReplyDeleteFor the other charge, the student's who were involved in the "matchmaking" are probably the only ones who know if the professor was acting innocently or was pushing his boundaries.
Kim M
Similar to Kim, I do not mean to take the students complaints lightly- as sexual harassment is serious and should be taken seriously in the workplace. However, I have to wonder what these messages send to other faculty in regard to academic freedom, when they are being penalized for their instruction. Isn’t one of the luxuries of being a faculty member the protection of academic freedom? Certainly this does not mean that faculty can do whatever they want to whenever they want to, but I would hate for a lecture or lesson to be "watered down" because the faculty member did not feel they could fullly teach the topic at hand.
ReplyDeleteI had a faculty member who would not allow sneezing or coughing in her class- it was literally written into the syllabus!. She would stop the class and ask a student to leave for any sort of bodily disruption. I had another faculty member who once said to me "if you have sex with me, I will give you A". He was simply trying to demonstrate the topic quid pro quo, which was the topic we were studying in his law class. The inability to cough in class was far more discomforting to me than the bizarre demonstration of quid pro quo. I think I prefer an academic climate where it is okay for faculty to use the means necessary to teach the topic.
Michele
Human Resources and the faculty board should have acted in concert. I can understand why HR acted in such a way; to have waited could have put the university in a liable situation. By taking swift action the university is protecting itself.
ReplyDeleteShould I have been in HR I would have taken the step of suspension after consulting the schools attorney and then set up a joint meeting with the faculty board for review as a suspension can be removed at any time.
As for the the other charges... the only one where he crossed the line is the touching on the shoulders. Any touch started by him as an authority figure could be suspect. If I were handling the case (given the limited knowledge I have of the situation) I would recommend a sexual harassment refresher course for the professor and counseling him on the appropriateness of playing matchmaker in the current culture we find ourselves in.
I think there is a large point being missed here. "THE" hot topic right now in higher ed law are Title IX and Title VII. Title VII calls for a swift action when it comes to alleged cases of sexual misconduct, and yes, sexual harassment is a form of sexual misconduct. Faculty review boards do NOT have the authority to enforce federal laws, however, human resources does have that authority. While DU is private, they are still bound to these laws because of their receipt of Title IV dollars.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think it's important to remember that news sources do not always report accurately, and that the nature of the complaints is likely not a complete picture based on what ends up in print. There could have been a lot more going on that is protected in the professor's human resources file. If the faculty review board gets to make this decision, they need to be trained on federal requirements--and most specialists in this are will say they do not feel adequately trained.
Dana, I agree with your level headed, common sense assessment of the alleged sexual harassment charges against the DU professor. I am clearly not versed in the letter of the law regarding institutions receiving Title IV funds; therefore, I appreciate the comments made by Jill on this topic.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest concern about the situation is that the resulting actions taken were based on anonymous allegations. The quote by Mr. Kvistad, “…it is the university taking seriously its commitment to create and maintain a community in which people are treated with dignity, decency, and respect” does not seem to be extended to its faculty. Although, I am confident there is more to the story just as Jill commented, I am still disappointed that such harsh and punitive action was taken against a professor based on anonymous allegations. What is to stop a student from making false allegations in retaliation if anonymous complaints are given credence by administration? Given the buzz in higher education related to funding as Jill explained, I cannot help but wonder if the reaction by the dean and provost was not overkill in an effort to be viewed as zero tolerance for sexual harassment.
Thank you for the great post, Dana, and thank the rest of you for your great comments! I absolutely agree with all of what you have said. Yet again, this seems like a case of over-reaction. While I agree that touching a student is inappropriate, the discussions of masturbation do lie in the realm of academic freedom.
ReplyDeleteI believe that students often learn the most when they are uncomfortable, or when someone challenges their views on a topic, allowing them to open their minds to other realms of possibilities and opinions. This, I believe, is the true purpose of college. I often give presentations in classes where the conversations can become uncomfortable for students, challenging them to re-evaluate or reconsider their views. It is in these teachable moments that students learn the most.