The URI Student Senate’s Post

New paper! The Fundamental Alteration Fallacy explores how courts defer to academic institutions that deny student accommodations on fundamental alteration grounds. It takes a hard look at Wynne v. Tufts U. School of Medicine, a leading case that, I contend, makes two key errors. First, it borrows its standard of review from qualified immunity cases, under the incorrect assumption that cases in which students sue institutions for accommodations are similar to cases in which individuals sue govt officials for constitutional rights violations. Second, Wynne borrowed language about academic deference from due process cases like Ewing and Horowitz, overstating their significance in the Section 504 context. Wynne has had a lot of influence in this area of the law, and it's time to look at it more critically. https://lnkd.in/exzqZtG4

In case you missed it, yesterday I published a new paper with IMEU Policy Project on the history of student activism on Palestine, the weaponization of the law to repress student and faculty voices, and how this undermines the integrity of higher education institutions, civil rights law, and ultimately American democracy. As we see students return to college campuses, it’s critical that we reject the politicization of our universities, protect faculty independence and their role in the governance of higher education institutions, and protect all students from hate and discrimination. Read my report here: https://lnkd.in/edPUj5Fm

Indiana Law Requires Professors to Promote ‘Intellectual Diversity’ or Face Penalties. According to a recent New York Times article, Indiana professors who do not promote "intellectual diversity" could face penalties. The law's focus is on intellectual diversity, not racial diversity, or the truth about history. So right wing and racist ideology such as eugenics must be forced on kids at the threat of penalty but the truth about American history you cannot let pass from your lips. As the kids say make it make sense. #IndianaLaw #IntellectualDiversity #HigherEducation

"During the 2021, 2022, and 2023 state legislative sessions more than one hundred and fifty bills were introduced seeking to actively undermine academic freedom and university autonomy. This includes nearly one hundred academic gag orders affecting higher education, such as those restricting the teaching of 'critical race theory' (CRT) and other so-called 'divisive concepts.' These academic gag orders were shortly followed by efforts to undermine campus diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), bills weakening tenure and accreditation, and legislation mandating 'viewpoint diversity' and academic programming, often in ways that circumvented faculty governance over the curriculum. This legislative onslaught has been understood as simply an effect of America’s highly polarized politics. However, as this white paper demonstrates, this legislation has been pushed by a network of right-wing and libertarian think tanks, working closely with Republican politicians, to manufacture a culture war backlash against educators and academic institutions." https://lnkd.in/eJWcSPZS

Tenure protects professors in developing and disseminating new knowledge from all viewpoints, including conservative, moderate, liberal, and apolitical. Patricia Okker, who fired as President of New College in Florida for protecting academic freedom, describes how "How Bipartisan Coalitions Can Strengthen Our Educational System". #academicfreedom #tenure #highereducation #highered #freedomtolearn #freedomtoteach #teaching #research #expression #dueprocess #sharedgovernance https://lnkd.in/gMJFrD25

Cancel culture is a serious concern when it comes to employees discussing, debating and exploring currently live and emotive world events, especially within the spere of protected philosophical beliefs. New legislation aimed at protecting the rights of staff, students and visiting speakers to talk about subjects which are controversial or sensitive is due to come into force soon. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 amends provisions in the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 (HERA) and will require some colleges to promote the importance of free speech and protect academic freedom.  This article looks at the nuances and extent of this protection in higher education ⬇ #ukemploymentlaw

Some scholars suggest that academic outcomes are the best indicators of effectively serving Hispanic students. Indicators such as graduation and persistence rates, time to degree, and transfer rates from community college to four-year institutions are the accepted benchmarks for academic outcomes. However, I argue that non-academic outcomes, such as academic self-efficacy and student engagement, could be just as crucial in assessing how well we are serving the Hispanic community. #Education #HispanicStudents #AcademicOutcomes

New legislation aimed at protecting the rights of staff, students and visiting speakers to talk about subjects which are controversial or sensitive is due to come into force soon. The Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 amends provisions in the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 and will require some colleges to promote the importance of free speech and protect academic freedom. This blog explains the key principles and sets out the steps colleges need to take to prepare. #educationsector #he #registeredcolleges #universities #freespeech #academicfreedom #beliefdiscrimination Irwin Mitchell

*A PROPOSAL FOR INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING *Need Help from Legal Experts A nonpartisan congressional education committee should be formed to address how federally funded universities balance free speech by equally highlighting debates from liberal and conservative viewpoints.         Faculty and Curriculum: Faculty members will play a crucial role in modeling respectful discourse. They will ensure that course content reflect diverse perspectives and challenge stereotypes. A comparative list of all faculty members will be published by the university board of directors and made available online and to prospective students detailing full biographical backgrounds, previously offered courses, and feedback from previous students. Universities will establish a BCB, Better College Bureau, like the Better Business Bureau with annual rankings by peers and students. Legal Considerations: Universities must comply with federal, and state legal requirements related to free speech, including the First Amendment.  Additionally, universities must establish transparent policies that outline the boundaries of free speech while promoting respectful dialogue. These policies should address hate speech, harassment, and discrimination, ensuring that they do not infringe on legitimate expression. Promoting Civil Discourse: Encourage open dialogue and debate on campus. Create spaces where diverse perspectives can be shared without fear of reprisal. Foster an environment where disagreement is met with respectful engagement rather than hostility. Student access to free legal counsel in the Guidance Department when confronted by antisemitism, racism, or discrimination. Continuous Assessment: Regularly assess campus climate, student experiences, and incidents related to hate speech. Adapt policies and practices as needed to maintain a healthy balance. Universities must actively engage in dialogue, promote understanding, and create an environment where DIVERSE voices can coexist while safeguarding the well-being of ALL community members.

The problem is that Title IX and Inclusion Offices are frequently also charged with DHR and student ADA compliance tend to be underfunded, understaffed and cannot comply with university mandated policies and procedures, not just Title IX work deadlines. The @CaliforniaStateUniversitySystem just underwent a CA State Audit, as well as systemwide audit by Cozen O'Connor . Both had the opportunity to address compliance with DHR (discrimination, harassment, retaliation) laws/policies/practice as well as, but narrowly only dealt with Title IX which post #Metoo movement has gained political traction. Universities and their attorneys would be well served to consider compliance issues raised by failed DHR work as part of the overall systems that govern civility and equal opportunity on campuses. The complete lack of analysis through the lens of the university’s DHR policies and procedure, and existing legal standards applicable to DHR was a huge missed opportunity. Free speech inside of a university must be considered within these parameters. Time, place & manner limitations on free speech are the icing on, and not the foundation of the DHR cake. Moreover, not apparent that students comprehend DHR policies. Teachable moment here, missed.