by James C. Sherlock

This article is rendered as a letter responding to an old friend and mentor, the University of Virginia, my alma mater.

I can imagine the University’s response to my last article on its culture:

The changes we have experienced in the culture of the University, its pervasive progressivism, which some may see as toxic to a public university, are not unique to the University of Virginia, have been decades in the making and will be very difficult to change from within.

I note the pessimism, but do not share the conclusion. Change it must, and we must not shelter in place and hope it blows over.

I firmly believe that the University will not survive as a public institution, and will not deserve to survive, with a leadership structure monitored by a political Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) commissariat that tolerates no dissent from progressive orthodoxy.

I don’t believe it will survive hiring practices that render the faculty politically single-minded.

I don’t believe it will survive a student experience that has driven large majorities of students to respond to surveys that they feel afraid to engage in debate on topics related to progressive dogma.

How can we honestly say we promote diversity, but not diversity of thought?

As for President Ryan, I think he is changing and getting better at his job.

But you must, in turn, realize that I was raised in a naval culture that held the captain responsible for whatever proved the fate of his ship, even if he was asleep in his cabin when it went aground. Yes, ship captains must sleep. They are required to put a system in place and train their crews to operate safely without their presence on the bridge.

The concept of complete and indivisible authority and responsibility has worked out for the best in navies for millennia. Many corporate boards operate the same way in oversight of the CEOs that are their employees.

I understand the University has adopted a distributed management model. Each school Dean is responsible for his or her own ship. Culture. Hiring. Budget. Performance. Reputation. But the University has unitary oversight from a single board. And it must enforce unifying principles.

The University can be operated on the current management model as long as it is successful. Many do not consider what they see as a lack of intellectual diversity and suppression of dissent at the University to be artifacts of success. Perhaps the Board of Visitors needs to examine its own oversight structure in light of the current management scheme.

You have indicated that a large number of the students matriculating into the University want a woke culture. That they learned it in their public and private elementary and secondary schools. And UVa is responding to customer demand.

Adam Smith would have noted the adoption by the University of his invisible hand theory: that competition and the choices of buyers, not the government, control businesses. I agree with that philosophy in commerce, but the University of Virginia is not a private business.

It is a public institution currently configured to serve only progressive students.That cannot stand and ultimately will not.

Start with the understanding that most bullies are cowards. And consider that the staff of the University may have more than its share of bullies. Indeed, the DEI staff virtually has bullying in their job descriptions. Put a stop to it.

As for the students, I recognize the tradition of student self-government at the University. They can self-govern up to the point that they make unwelcome at the University other students who simply hold views different than the majority. Then they have crossed a line, have proven that they cannot handle unfettered self-government, and need to be given binding direction to repair their approach.

If a University cannot teach them that, what use is it?

Given the authority, I would invite every member of the UVa administration and faculty to consider their place in a public university. I would give them a week.

Then I would ask them to certify as part of their employment contracts that they will expend every effort to make both progressive students and faculty and those of traditional personal beliefs welcome at the university. Not only their persons, but also their opinions and open minds.

It is a pledge that only persons themselves unwelcome at a public University would fail to sign.

Those who would not sign, I would dismiss for cause. If that proved to be a significant number of people, so be it. In a remark often attributed to Charles De Gaulle, “the graveyards are full of indispensable men.”

Then I would put the same commitment into a student contract with the University.

Some will consider me intemperate or not wise in the ways of universities in these remarks or both. I do not.

As I wrote, I fear for the very existence of the University as a public institution in a state as politically divided as this one. The revolt of the public school parents that elected Glenn Youngkin will not stop at high school. It is coming to Charlottesville.

Soon some Governor, perhaps the current one, will take the path I described above. He would get 80% public approval for requiring public university employees and students to sign binding agreements to treat students and staff of differing views fairly, equally and with respect. Maybe higher than 80%.

I hope that legislators and the Governor will propose that concept as a law in the Commonwealth that governs state universities, and includes prescriptions for due process for accused offenders.  It can mirror in the school administration the process used for over 200 years by the University’s student-run Honor Committee.

Who in the General Assembly would vote against a law requiring state employees and students at state universities to treat other staff and students equally and with respect?  We should find out.

Three of our children and I are graduates of UVa. We love the University.

It makes me very sad to have felt the obligation to write this letter. But not for writing it.

Warm Regards.

Updated June 5 at 10:20


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

40 responses to “A Letter to an Old Friend”

  1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
    Eric the half a troll

    Your approach sounds an awful lot like a Fairness Doctrine for universities… my how Conservatives have changed as of late…

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Or, “how to elevate fringe opinions only because they exist…”

    2. When universities create ideological litmus tests in the form of mandatory “diversity statements,” conservatives are left with no alternative.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “We only support government intervention when it benefits us! Then we are left with no choice!”

      2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “We only support government intervention when it benefits us! Then we are left with no choice!”

    3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      My suggested is a version of the University of Chicago statement on free speech. The difference is that mine has teeth with single sanction consequences for violators.

      You know, just like the student honor code at UVa had for 200 years.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        except you wanted state law and prosecutors?

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          I want to emulate in the school administrations the same process that has been in place for over 200 years at the University in the form of the student-run Honor Committee. The administration at UVa may already have that authority.

          The reason I suggest it be a law for all state universities is the obvious need to have uniform compliance among them. And the need to have that law to back the administrations.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            “uniform compliance” means the AG will investigate and bring charges?

            you serious?

          2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            No, Larry. It means that the same internal rules and adjudication system will be set up at each University. Give it up. It is an issue with which you are not familiar.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            who insures the same policy is set up at each University? who investigates complaints that they’re not following the “law”?

          4. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            Each has an Assistant Attorney General as its legal officer.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Ah – their on-site reps for the AG? So you very much do want the AG to do this?

          6. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Uniform compliance means that all public colleges and universities will have the same free speech policy in place. Adjudicating violations would be left to students.

          7. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            but the “uniform policy” is a state law defining it and how it works and the AG will investigate the “compliance’ issues?

    4. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Or, how to elevate fringe opinions only because they exist…

      “In contrast to the theory we’ve just examined, some researchers believe it is a large disk riding on the back of a giant tortoise…”

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    re: ” Who in the General Assembly would vote against a law requiring state employees and students at state universities to treat other staff and students equally and with respect? We should find out.”

    This is hilarious. As much as Sherlock rails against DEI and star chambers, here he comes with his own version.

    What kind of office would review and determine if people treated others equally and with respect?

    indeed. let’s see what the GA can cook up.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      They can mirror the student honor code and honor committee that is more than 200 years old at the University, Larry. Not rocket science.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        so you want State Law and criminal prosecution?

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          see my response above.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            saw that. now answer the question. You want the State to make this a crime?

  3. Sherlock: “I would ask them to certify as part of their employment contracts that they will expend every effort to make both progressive students and faculty and those of traditional personal beliefs welcome at the university. Not only their persons, but also their opinions and open minds.”

    I like this idea, although I would phrase it more simply. Faculty would expend every effort to make all students feel welcome at the university, regardless of race, sex, gender, religion, or belief system.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Do you mean like a statement that they’d not discriminate like is probably already in their contracts?

      And you’d want the GA to mandate it and create sanctions for non-compliance and a process for prosecution if they are accused of violating the terms?

      Ya’ll are downright hilarious at times…

      talk about your authoritarian instincts!

      You want us to do what the Chinese do and have the Govt in charge of Higher Ed “thinking” and writing?

      yes indeed.

      1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        I don’t know what school you may have attended, Larry, but UVa has had a student honor code and student-run honor court in place for more than two centuries. Until this year, that court had a single sanction for those found guilty – expulsion. Not a new concept.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          No, but that’s NOT what you are proposing. You are proposing the State codify a process and enforce it but your “defense” is that it’s just like the UVA honor code.

          Nope. It’s not. When you bring the State into it – it’s not at all.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      Both your words and mine are versions of the University of Chicago statement on free speech. The difference is that ours has teeth with sanction consequences for violators.

  4. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    In the spirit of the 4th of July, what UVA really needs is a voice of dissent to emerge from the student body. Thomas Paine certainly performed that role and his voice changed minds for the better. Oh, for the want of “Common Sense”.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d58c497c78789366418246d9a8a6eec33d10c556117be33ed8f57abe47b703a2.jpg

  5. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    Have you considered this possibility? Progressives view the universities as a place for secure, well-paid employment. They’re willing to drive conservatives and moderates out of the faculties and off of the curriculum, because that leaves more jobs and money for themselves. They’re betting that many of us are so emotionally attached to our alma maters that we’ll keep sending our kids there, paying the higher tuitions and supporting state funding for them.

    The answer is to speak honestly with our children and tell them what we think our universities have become. And, if they decide to go, they’ll go with no illusions.

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      I reject the idea that citizens have no voice in how their public institutions are run. The answer in America is to handle this politically through our elected officials.

  6. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    The challenge with this idea is the definition of stifling free speech. If somebody says, “Trump was a failure as president” and I respond, “shut up, you don’t know what you are talking about” … have I stifled free speech? Should I be permanently dismissed from school?

    Even the existent honor system has definitional issues. The so-called “Jackie” from the Rolling Stone article, “A rape on campus” clearly lied. Yet she was not brought before the honor committee and dismissed. Perhaps she skulked away of her own volition before that could happen.

    At the most, I think stifling free speech or expression should be a judicial offense. The first offense might be a semester probation. The next might be a suspension.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      so.. you don’t want the AG doing this? The one who decides “what free speech is or is not” . Won’t the AG become the “decider” if someone complains the University is not following the law?

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      I assert we need a law to position the same rules on protection of freedom of speech in all state universities and enforce them.

      I have offered a model – the UVa honor system and its enforcement and brand new, expanded new sanctions (plural) regime.

      You seem to concur with the basic assertion and offer different ideas on sanctions and the administrative process to enforce them.

      Your ideas are surely as valid as mine.

      Maybe better as long, in my view, that dismissal from the University is on the authorized sanctions list.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        Comon, DJ, you KNOW this is a manifestly BAD idea – to put the Government in charge especially so with the likes of someone like Miyares or Cuccinelli !

        This is a gross misuse of govt.

        Sherlock confirms my suspicions that Conservatives in their heart of hearts are authoritarians!

  7. James McCarthy Avatar
    James McCarthy

    If the greater society is bitterly divided among progressives and conservatives, what steps can be taken to diminish that divide at UVA and elsewhere? Collectively, it seems the responsibility is upon the adults in the polity to resort to civility and accommodation. The “we” and “they” views only exacerbate the situation. I am not convinced that legislation nor enforced honor codes are remedies. Time to think outside the silos.

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Students at UVa are, almost always, adults. When they agree to take on student debt they do so as adults. When they haze people during fraternity rush they do so as adults. When they stifle free speech they do so as adults.

      It’s time to stop infantilizing college students.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      How Creationism enters the Biology 101 curriculum.

    3. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      Please share your thoughts “outside the silos” to address the issues.

      You may have a good idea we can use.

      Something to remove the fear expressed by UVa students of contesting progressive dogma in the classroom. Something to ensure no idealogical litmus tests for hiring. Something to eliminate the DEI political watchdogs.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        something = a Virginia Law that the AG will then investigate and prosecute.

        … and probably a “TIP” line… for those aggrieved, no doubt.

        Job interviews will be taped. All correspondence will be subject to review by the AG to ensure “compliance”.

        cam’t happen?

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/3b0c8d80b027d1959a0fa511f130c31a4f579676d4a4dc4068d82e7b47deba95.jpg

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney_General_of_Virginia%27s_climate_science_investigation

        1. LesGabriel Avatar
          LesGabriel

          Science by definition is open and transparent. If it not, then it cannot be duplicated, tested, and confirmed or denied. Secrecy and science are diametrically opposed concepts. No researcher who wants their findings treated as scientific should want their methodology, data or conclusions hidden from other researchers. When their work is paid for by taxpayers, openness is even more compulsory. Cuccinelli was right.

Leave a Reply