Spring Break
'Leter': faculty dissent root of civility luncheon
By Letters to the Editor
in OpinionIssue date: 5/7/09 Section: Opinion
I noted with interest the recent Civility Luncheon held on campus.
Historically, the idea of an administrative action of this sort originated in the fact that, during the early years of Jon Larson's administration, the then existing College Council did not endorse a good number of administrative proposals. The dissent was often strenuous and tense and occasionally veered toward the personal. Unhappiness with this display of democratic speech led to two administrative actions. First came dissolution of the College Council even though meetings were underway to revise the group's bylaws, followed by creation of a senate, with its much more limited size. Senate members were far fewer; hence there was less chance of noisy dissent. And powers were severely limited, making passionate discourse very unlikely. The second result of the strenuous dissent and debate that occurred in the College Council was the civility topic was assigned to an office, which is the entity that sponsored the luncheon.
These actions were stimula-ted by faculty discourse; students were not offensive in any way. In fact, students attended the College Council in numbers, sometimes as many as a dozen or more. The patronizing attitude toward students, with which the editors of the Viking News are very familiar, reached the predictable conclusion that students are not players when
it comes to civility. They do
not exist, as the luncheon invitation made clear..."employee luncheon." After all, the administration may reason, do we expect barnacles to sing? Of course not! Do we expect pets to reason and learn? No. So, in that sad framework, students are excluded; I will bet there are some who might profit from thinking about civility, too! Regrettably, this advertised event is part of the administration's wish to limit not only the flow of ideas, but also the very tone with which they are expressed.
NORMAN BOSLEY
Adjunct English Professor
Historically, the idea of an administrative action of this sort originated in the fact that, during the early years of Jon Larson's administration, the then existing College Council did not endorse a good number of administrative proposals. The dissent was often strenuous and tense and occasionally veered toward the personal. Unhappiness with this display of democratic speech led to two administrative actions. First came dissolution of the College Council even though meetings were underway to revise the group's bylaws, followed by creation of a senate, with its much more limited size. Senate members were far fewer; hence there was less chance of noisy dissent. And powers were severely limited, making passionate discourse very unlikely. The second result of the strenuous dissent and debate that occurred in the College Council was the civility topic was assigned to an office, which is the entity that sponsored the luncheon.
These actions were stimula-ted by faculty discourse; students were not offensive in any way. In fact, students attended the College Council in numbers, sometimes as many as a dozen or more. The patronizing attitude toward students, with which the editors of the Viking News are very familiar, reached the predictable conclusion that students are not players when
it comes to civility. They do
not exist, as the luncheon invitation made clear..."employee luncheon." After all, the administration may reason, do we expect barnacles to sing? Of course not! Do we expect pets to reason and learn? No. So, in that sad framework, students are excluded; I will bet there are some who might profit from thinking about civility, too! Regrettably, this advertised event is part of the administration's wish to limit not only the flow of ideas, but also the very tone with which they are expressed.
NORMAN BOSLEY
Adjunct English Professor
Be the first to comment on this story