April 1, 2024

Dear Colleagues,

We write to express our objection to the university administration hastily pushing through a Disruptive Activity Policy that impinges on freedom of assembly and freedom of expression at our university.

We see this issue as very important to the mission of the university. U-M has a long history of student protest that current university leaders celebrate regularly. Past student protest movements have achieved the creation of institutions – the Trotter Multicultural Center, the Spectrum Center (to give just two examples) – that make our university better for everyone. Freedom of assembly is vital in ensuring that marginalized groups – who often ask in vain for opportunities to communicate with those with power – can communicate how this institution could be made more responsive, more equitable, and more inclusive. Historically, disruption of the status quo has been the only way that marginalized groups have been able to advocate for their rights, and it is only in hindsight that we recognize the value of disruptive activities in making our institutions more just, equitable, and inclusive.

There is a lack of transparency about when this policy was drafted or who made the decision that it was needed. To our knowledge, the statement was drafted in absence of genuine consultation with faculty, students, and staff. The President of the Central Student Government expressly stated that such a policy was not needed and that the perceptions of donors and parents were being placed ahead of the needs and experiences of students. Perhaps most surprisingly, the newly formed Committee on Diversity of Thought and Freedom of Expression was not involved or consulted. A survey with a turnaround of one week is not a substitute for discussion and vetting by the relevant bodies representing faculty, students, and staff.

Substantively, this policy draft is deeply problematic. Our concerns include, but are not limited to:

·  The lack of a clear definition of “disruption”

·  The role of an unidentified hearing officer determining a student’s future. The draft policy provides no details about the selection of the hearing officer nor a rationale as to why a student’s fate is left to a single person and not a committee of students, faculty, and administrators

·  Sufficiently vague definitions of “University Operations” such that the administration could weaponize this policy against any form of speech that challenges the administration 

·  Insufficient detail as to how the draft policy will interface with the protections to speakers, artists, and protesters afforded by SPG 601.01

·  Conflation of political speech by faculty with hostile actions referenced in UM SPG 201.96

In short, the draft policy seems to be a policy of repression directed primarily against students, but includes faculty, staff, contractors and visitors in its punitive purview. Expulsion and/or sanctions is the threat if any students, faculty, or staff speak against the administration in a manner that is deemed disruptive.

We urge the UM administration to reflect upon the sentiments expressed by past UM President Robben W. Fleming during then-unpopular student demonstrations:

“This is a time when a great international issue—the war in Vietnam—and a great domestic issue—race relations—divide our people. The realist would have to say that both issues are likely to get worse before they get better. The campus cannot be isolated from the mainstream of national life. . . . It is often easier for critics of the present generation of students to fulminate against their bad manners, which are frequently displayed, than to accept the fact that underlying the bad manners may be a dedication to human well-being not found in their critics. . . . A university is not merely a knowledge factory; it is rather one of the great humanizing influences of civilization. . . . My dream is that these values and aspirations will then be reflected in the lives of Michigan students and graduates.” (Fleming, March 11, 1968). 

Demonstrating respect for all members of our community means listening to and considering seriously the views expressed by marginalized groups, rather than ignoring or silencing them. We see this is the best way to improve campus climate.

Sincerely,

UM Ann Arbor Chapter of the AAUP

November 16, 2023

The Executive Officers of UM Ann Arbor’s Chapter of the AAUP wish to reaffirm our commitment to protect academic freedom. With reference to the AAUP statements on Academic Freedom in Times of War (October 24, 2023) and Polarizing Times Demand Robust Academic Freedom (November 15, 2023), we maintain the principle of academic freedom in the classroom–and teaching about Israel, Palestine, and events of the moment is no exception.

The UM AAUP chapter is delighted to host Professors Judith Wilde and James Finkelstein to speak about presidential searches at universities on April 12 (Tue), 3-4:30pm. Prof. Wilde is Professor and Chief Operating Officer of the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. She has conducted research on presidential compensation at public universities, the use of search firms at public universities, and a range of topics in education. Prof. Finkelstein is Professor Emeritus and former Vice Dean at the Schar School. His research focus was on the selection and employment of university presidents.

The event will be held on Zoom. If you would like to be kept informed of event details, please complete this Google Form (https://j.mp/AAUPinterest). (The form will also ask about your interest in the AAUP.)

With the termination of Mark Schlissel, the University of Michigan begins a search for a new President. The UM AAUP chapter immediately began work to request a public search. Working in conjunction with SACUA, the chapter drafted a position statement on the presidential search. The statement requests the following:

1. That there be broad representation of UM stakeholders on the search committee;
2. That at the point of identifying 3-5 finalists, a broader group of UM stakeholders be enabled to evaluate and engage with them, ideally by announcing the finalists publicly.

The rationale for these requests is that a public university should enable a public vetting of its president; that broader stakeholder engagement increases trust in the final decision; that a public search is most likely to uncover any problematic histories, and that the main argument against a public search — that it would discourage qualified applicants — is based on little evidence. In fact, up until the search for UM President Lee Bollinger in 1996, all UM presidential searches were public; and, Bollinger’s publicly named rivals, Carol Christ and Larry Faulkner went on to become heads of UC Berkeley and UT Austin, respectively. (The detailed argument is provided in the statement.)

The first point was thankfully met by the Regents even before we conveyed our request. The announced Search Committee includes broad representation of students, staff, alumni, labor, and faculty, with diversity in race, gender, and gender identity. In meetings with SACUA and the Senate Assembly, Board Chair Jordan Acker indicated that the Regents wanted to rebuild trust with the UM community, and that broad representation on the search committee was an intentional step in that direction.

The second point, however, has faced resistance. Immediately after the search committee was announced on Feb. 8, 2022, the UM AAUP Chapter and SACUA sent the position statement to all Search Committee members (including the Regents). On Feb. 14, a request to publicly announce the finalists was again made to Regent Acker by several members of the Senate Assembly (including UM AAUP chapter members). Regent Acker, however, was firm in indicating that the Board would not announce finalist names.

The UM AAUP chapter is disappointed with this decision. However, we will continue to press for other means to ensure a thorough vetting of the finalists in a way that is favorable to UM stakeholders.

In response to the erosion of shared governance at the University of Michigan, nationwide challenges to academic freedom, and concerns about UM’s COVID-related policies, the UM Ann Arbor chapter of the AAUP was revived on August 23, 2021, with members voting in a new set of bylaws and officers.

(For UM AAUP members: The new bylaws are based on the AAUP‘s basic template.)

The elected officers are…

• President: Kentaro Toyama, W. K. Kellogg Professor of Community Information at the School of Information and current SACUA member.
• Vice President: June M. Howard, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor of English, American Culture, and Women’s and Gender Studies, LSA.
• Secretary: Valerie Traub, Adrienne Rich Distinguished University Professor of English and Women’s and Gender Studies, LSA.
• Treasurer: Rob Sulewski, Lecturer IV, Program in Technical Communication, College of Engineering.

Terms last for three years.

UM affiliates who are interested in knowing more about the AAUP or the UM chapter are encouraged to contact umaaupec@gmail.com (emails will be forwarded to the officers).