Cornell Rejects Student Demands for ‘Trigger Warnings’ Before Class Discussions
“The Student General Assembly Resolution is a gross attempt at speech and academic content policing which infantilizes students, relies on faulty claims that academic content worsens PTSD, and violates the academic freedom of faculty”
If you need trigger warnings, you’re probably not ready for college. Professor Jacobson is quoted in this story.
The Daily Caller reports:
Cornell University Rejects Student Demands To Insert ‘Trigger Warnings’ Before Class Discussions
Cornell University rejected a student government proposal to insert trigger warnings in class syllabi to warn students about “traumatic content” that could be discussed, according to an email obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.
The Cornell University Student Assembly unanimously voted to approve Resolution 31 during its March 23 meeting, which would “require instructors who present graphic traumatic content that may trigger the onset of symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) to provide advance notice to students and refrain from penalizing students who opt out of exposure to such content,” its text reads. The university rejected the resolution because it violates Cornell’s commitment to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, according to an email obtained by the DCNF.
“Academic freedom, which is a fundamental principle in higher education, establishes the right of faculty members to determine what they teach in their classrooms and how they teach it, provided that they behave in a manner consistent with professional ethics and competence, and do not introduce controversial matters unrelated to the subject of their course,” the email reads. “And freedom of inquiry establishes the right of students, researchers, and scholars to select a course of study and research without censure or undue interference.”
The trigger warnings would inform students that content in the course could include reference to “sexual assault, domestic violence, self-harm, suicide, child abuse, racial hate crimes, transphobic violence, homophobic harassment [and] xenophobia,” according to the resolution. Students who opt out of participating in the discussion would not be penalized…
William A. Jacobson, clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School, and founder of Legal Insurrection, called the student resolution a “manipulative powerplay.”
“The Student General Assembly Resolution is a gross attempt at speech and academic content policing which infantilizes students, relies on faulty claims that academic content worsens PTSD, and violates the academic freedom of faculty,” he told the DCNF.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
college≠kindergarten
entrance requirements/maturity level for the incoming class of ’28 should be closely examined
If you need trigger warning for college course materials, you’re probably too fragile to attend college and should stay at home and wrap up in blankets or something
Here again it was Prof. J and L.I. which brought this forward after it was first picked up and published. Daily Caller also noticed, yet it was Prof. J.’s voice and presence at Cornell who gave voice where in Cornell U. Administration acted on rejecting said policy. A voice which they now recognize and hopefully are giving the respect it deserves. As Prof. J. has attained a certain number of well known journalists in national news outlets who follow what is covered here at L.I. and is invited to speak on issues taking place at Cornell, but also on all our campuses. There now is a following of University and College Alumni who are listening and also speaking out on the policies and actions having been endorsed and allowed to happen to the point that the Alumni are re-thinking their contributions to their school. That is a huge achievement went it hits their endowment revenue.
The interesting point here is that SA Resolution 31 used the term “instructors”. In many cases, a professor gives the lecture and graduate student “teaching assistants” (TA) leads the small discussion break-out groups. The proposal would apply to both. So, if our discussion group is being lead by a TA, and I unexpectedly bring up Joan of Arc, but the TA had failed to anticipate that, so he did not issue the trigger warning applicable to burning at the stake. Who would take the heat from the thought police, the TA or his boss the professor? Recall the unfortunate Canadian graduate student who was reduced to tears for showing a short Jordan Peterson clip about pronouns to her seminar.
By the way, many professors have tenure and job security. TAs most decidedly do not have any job security.