Paul Brandon wrote: > > > First of all, this is *not* an academic freedom question since he was > not fired because of the *content* of what he was teaching.
This is not true. Academic freedom extends well beyond that. Please read the 1940 AAUP statement on academic freedom (which is widely considered to be the definitive statement on the topic in the US), esp. freedom #2, and the 1970 "Interpretive comment" #2. http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/1940statement.htm > Rather, the issue is whether he was requiring his students to know > (and answer test questions on) content not specified in the syllabus > -- a violation of the contract between the student and the state. > If his additional material was simply and literally a supplement; not > adding any content not in the text, so that students could pass any > exam question without the use of the supplemental material, then he > has a case. > On the other hand, if he added exam questions that could not be > answered *without* the use of his supplemental material, *he* was in > violation of his contract. That might be true, but according to the story, the materials were intended merely to elucidate concepts and procedures that were not (according to some of the students) explained clearly in the textbook. And more broadly, are you really arguing that he should have, instead, allowed the students to founder with the poor textbook rather than doing what he could to help them understand the material? After all, having students understanding the material is the real imperative for teacher, not simply dragging them uncomprehendingly through a particular presentation of the material. It seems to me that if some of the students preferred not understanding the material to reading some explanatory pages prepared by the teacher then (a) that is their prerogative but it should not be imposed on the rest of the class (i.e. those who are actually there to learn), but b) it is foolish for us to encourage such anti-intellectual behavior on the part students by punishing the teacher who tried to help while laboring under bad circumstances not of his own making (i.e., why not fire the person who mandated the textbook that the students found to be so poor?). Regards, Chris -- Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 Canada 416-736-2100 ex. 66164 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ "Part of respecting another person is taking the time to criticise his or her views." - Melissa Lane, in a /Guardian/ obituary for philosopher Peter Lipton ================================= > > On Jul 23, 2008, at 8:27 AM, Christopher D. Green wrote: > >> What would you do if an adjunct instructor at your school responded to >> students' complaints that the mandated textbook was unclear, by creating >> original supplementary materials to help the students understand the >> topic better? Give him a pat on the back? One Indiana college decided to >> fire him instead. >> http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/07/23/ivytech >> >> Chris >> -- >> Christopher D. Green >> Department of Psychology >> York University >> Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 >> Canada >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> http://www.yorku.ca/christo/ >> phone: 416-736-2100 ext. 66164 >> fax: 416-736-5814 >> >> >> --- >> To make changes to your subscription contact: >> >> Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) > > Paul Brandon > Emeritus Professor of Psychology > Minnesota State University, Mankato > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
