The Colby Echo

Issue date: 3/11/09 Section: News

Media Credit: Chris Hoder

On March 5, the Goldfarb Center for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement sponsored the annual Cotter Debate, which this year focused on the question "Whose Interests do Academic Freedom Protect: The Individual or the Institution?" Director of the Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression and Professor of Law Emeritus at the University of Virginia Robert O'Neil and Chief Counsel for the Christopher Newport University William Thro were present to debate and offer their insight on the constitutional issues behind the question.

William R. Kenan Jr. Professor of Government and Director of the Goldfarb Center L. Sandy Maisel moderated the event.
The Cotter Debates, accordingly to Maisel, originated when "in 1983 or 1984…the CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] decided they wanted to interview on campus…so Bill Cotter organized a debate moderated by a Colby trustee." The question over whether or not the College had a right to ban CIA recruiters from the Hill sparked national interest. Since then, the debate has evolved into the William R. and Linda K. Cotter Debate Series, which "bring[s] to campus experts who debate pressing contemporary issues."

This month's Cotter Debate focused on academic freedom. A member of the Goldfarb Center's Student Executive Board, Khoa Nguyen '11, said, "Academic freedom is defined as the freedom of teachers and students to teach, study, and pursue knowledge and research without unreasonable interference or restriction from law, institutional regulations, or public pressure…With the establishment of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)…and its 1944 statement of principles on academic freedom and tenure, the United States has generally been a fortress of academic freedom. However, recent rulings at different federal and state courts have raised doubts about the status of academic freedom at public colleges and universities."
The debate format consisted of a 20-minute argument delivered by Robert O'Neil, followed with 20 minutes presented by William Thro. The two were then allowed to respond to each other's claims for five minutes each. Afterwards, the room was opened up to questions from the audience.

O'Neil, a proponent of academic freedom, asserted that the Constitution protects the rights of teachers and students to teach, to study, and to research in the area of their expertise. "Most reputable private institutions pride themselves on free expression," said O'Neil. He cited Urofsky v. Gilmore (1999), a Supreme Court case in response to Virginia's ban of sexually explicit material from public computers. These restrictions also applied to professors at public universities. In this example, O'Neil argued that "you can't do this more than you could tell a custodian not to bring a Penthouse to his break time." He believed that if a professor accessed sexually explicit material for legitimate research, then they certainly had a right to do so.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools