Running head: CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH

Critical Issues Paper- Free Speech

Anna Crow

Seattle University

SDAD 5760: Leadership and Governance in Postsecondary

Education

Dr. Timothy Leary

CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 1

Introduction

Around the country in higher education, the issue of free speech is more prevalent than

ever. Many campuses have had to implement some sort of policy to ensure that students are safe

but also heard. Free speech on a college campus is tricky, as everyone has the legal right to their

own opinion and beliefs, a lot of students also feel unsafe around political rhetoric that is “anti”

many forms of identities. Higher education institutions must strike a balance of protecting the

rights of all involved entities and ensure safety. This is not easy and often times, many perceive

this as an institution being bias one way or another (Zelizer & Keller, 2017). However, this

cannot be the case as the institution is upholding legality. To analyze this important and timely

topic, there must be an understanding of the history of how campuses became places of

intellectual debate and protest.

The American Civil Liberties Union states that, “An open society depends on liberal

education, and the whole enterprise of liberal education is founded on the principle of free

speech” (2018). Classrooms are the originators of critical thought and analysis. Being critical in

the classroom is about really understanding content and developing one’s own personal beliefs.

On college campuses, everyone has the right to free speech as it is the cornerstone of the

institutions themselves. To censor one would silence all who wish to have their voice heard. The

history of free speech on campuses stems from higher education being a place where students

should be encouraged to debate and have engage in critical discourse, a higher education

institution should be challenging the beliefs of students and creating critical thinking of issues

rather than accepting face value.

CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 2

From a historical events standpoint, free speech movements began in the 1960’s Civil

Rights time where university students were instrumental in rallying for desegregation and basic

human rights for black americans. A decade or so after the civil rights movement, students across

the country heavily protested the US participation in the Vietnam war. More recently, protests

have focused on the Iraq war and university and college policies themselves. Presently, protests

are often in response to key speakers student groups are bringing to campus, institutional action

that students are not agreeing with, or rallying for certain causes, for example, the Black Lives

Matter movement (CNN, 2017).

​Connection of Interviews

While interviewing the Dean of Student Life at Cornish College of the arts, Brittany

Henderson, it was clear where the Dean and Cornish as an institution stands as pertaining to free

speech on campus. Henderson referred to the policies that are laid out in the student handbook

with the guidelines of students having the ability to organize and hold events or gatherings

peacefully. However, students at Cornish have not approached Student Life with any requests

since Henderson as been at Cornish (​B. Henderson, personal communication, March 6, 2018).

This is an interesting dynamic because the college has policies set up to support free

speech and the capacity to protect student’s rights, however, it is not being taken advantage of.

The other interesting dynamic to this is Cornish as an arts school and full of artists that produce

art everyday that utilize their free speech rights. However, there appears to be a lack of

interaction between the art being made and the discourse behind it. This common place where

the two could meet does not seem to be happening at Cornish. Humanities and Sciences Faculty
CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 3

member Justine Way, discusses this lack of discourse among students but also of faculty

initiation of the discourse ​(J. Way, personal communication, March 1, 2018).

As free speech should be exercised in the classroom and can be a powerful tool in

understanding others and developing a critical opinion, Way was able to give insight on what is

happening in the classrooms that maybe isn’t happening on the campus as a whole. Often times

in class, students shut down or shut one another down when they hear something that they don’t

agree with. Most of the time, this statement has a racial or minority status or claim to it. Students

often will shut the remark down but don’t necessarily want to have a conversation about it. Way

also believes that this is a huge part of students not feeling comfortable finding spaces they can

challenge and learn from or even build comradery. This is built into the student’s understanding

of what political correctness is and how they believe it is supposed to be used. Political

correctness refers to using the correct term or identity rather than a stereotyped, vulgar, or

discriminatory word. How it has been used does not mean stating facts are not okay or talking

about realities that exist. The term also doesn’t call for a silencing of challenge or dialogue, in

fact the word has created more dialogue.

Way and Henderson both alluded to students’ fear of confrontation and holding a

negative understanding of what challenging words and opinions mean. Way especially sees this

in the classroom when a student has an opinion that does not follow the rules of political

correctness or inclusiveness. Classmates are quick to alienate that person and shutdown their

words. After that happens there is silence on the issue. This is where Way sees her role as most

crucial. Encouraging students to have a healthy dialogue on what that student meant and why the

class reacted the way they did is important. Students need to experience critical discernment on
CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 4

how to talk to peers. Way emphasises this in her classroom and advocated from her colleagues to

do the same. The larger piece missing that will be explored in the frameworks is what faculty and

staff can do enforce and encourage the right of student free speech.

Theoretical Frameworks

The issue of free speech on college campuses has many institutional governance issues

attached. These issues have faculty and staff implications as well as policy and procedural

shortcomings. Three governance issues and frameworks that are predominant when examining

free speech on campus are co-optation, collegium, and overall leadership style clash.

Co-optation is a process that administrators use to create policy that appears to beneficial

to the student body and often a specific population of the student body, however, the policy

actually is more beneficial to the administrators than the students (Manning, 2017). This

deception creates a cycle of unproductive frustration from the campus community. This is

imperative to understand when assessing free speech on college campuses as students who may

ask for changes within the realms of their free speech, may be met with this co-optation that is

not useful and silences free speech of the student body. Secondly, the framework of collegium is

present. Manning describes the collegium as faculty having more of an influence on the policies

and the environment of the institution (2017). This is extremely problematic when assessing how

students interact with the institution and what they are comfortable with. One entity cannot

dictate the atmosphere of the institution. This tension also contributes a larger clash. Leadership

styles of the administration can also have a significant impact on how students view the

university and their ability to exercise free speech. When these leadership styles clash, it creates

a significant barrier for students to be able to have effective change on the institution. The
CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 5

diversity of administrators and their ideas create a dysfunctional discourse for students, staff and

faculty (Manning, 2017).

Recommendations

The first recommendation based on the theoretical frameworks requires adoption of

strategies to address co-option in the college. These strategies may include; bureaucratic

management, reactive leadership, change oriented management, and transformational leadership

(Manning, 2017). Many students do not feel safe expressing their viewpoints and opinions on

campus. Administration has an opportunity to listen to students needs and adapt stronger policies

that support this.

Faculty are the core of any institution. They are the individuals who students come to see

and spend their money on at the institution. Because of this, faculty can often set the tone. The

collegium can become an issue when only a select set of issues and topics are being covered.

Therefore, the recommendation for institutions of higher education is to create a cross

department institutional relationship. This relationship will benefit the students as there will be

more ability to understand where the student is coming from. A student’s essence will be

captured beyond their academic performance. This is a critical piece of student affairs work and

the advocacy for student services.

The third and final recommendation for institutions includes creating an environment

where faculty and staff are able to harness the talents and energy of each other in order to better

develop the student body. The competitive leadership style should not have a place in higher

education institutions. The focus should be on the student needs and rights. Faculty and staff

should be cultivating an environment where students feel safe to exercise their right to free
CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 6

speech and healthfully challenge classmates. Critically engaging in dialogue and understanding

can further the development of students, faculty need to step up and foster this environment.

Additionally, Staff and administrators need to actively create space for students to occupy and

welcome difference of thinking and opinion.

Closing

Overall, many students may not know what their rights of free speech actually entail. The

higher education institution needs to inform and encourage students to use this right. Excising of

opinion and finding similarity in others but also being challenged is the crux of young adult

development. If faculty and staff do not step up and create learning opportunities for students

that require critical engagement, the institution is not adequately preparing the student for their

own professional and academic future.

CRITICAL ISSUES PAPER- FREE SPEECH 7

References

A history of free speech on campus. (2017). Retrieved from

https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/18/us/gallery/college-campus-protests/index.html

Manning, K. (2017). ​Organizational theory in higher education​ (2nd ed.). Milton:

Routledge.

Speech on campus. (2018). Retrieved from ​https://www.aclu.org/other/speech-campus

Zelizer, J. E., & Keller, M. (2017, Sep 15,). Is free speech really challenged on campus.​ The

Atlantic​. Retreived from

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/09/students-free-speech-campus-p

rotest/539673/