----------
From: Ted Hamilton <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: school of communications
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 11:49:20 PDT
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [media-culture] the latest on David Noble

Hello all:

Here is the latest on David Noble's (blocked) appointment to the J.S.
Woodsworth Chair of the humanities at SImon Fraser University, Canada. I
would submit that this is, as Prof. Angus suggests below, an issue of vital
importance to academics everywhere, certainly not just in Canada. Here, it
has been sugested that this move on the part of the SFU administration could
be precedent-setting, and has certainly created an atmosphere of extreme
discomfort, to put it mildly.

It would, I think, be extremely helpful if you could forward this message
along whatever channels you might have access to. I believe that most of the
faculty at SFU are in the process (too late, some might say) of responding
to the administration's decision to block Noble's appointment on what were
quite obviously political and personal grounds. It would be encouraging if
academics outside SFU and outside Canada could add their voices to a general
call for accountability of university administration around this issue, as
well as the (albeit touchy) issues of academic freedom.

Read on,

 >From: Ian Angus <[log in to unmask]>
    >Subject: Noble Appointment Blocked!
    >
    >19 May 2001
    >
    >Dear Colleagues:
>      The university appointment procedure in the case of the proposed
>appointment of David Noble to the J.S. Woodsworth Chair of the Humanities
>has now run its course and it is possible, and necessary, to draw some
>conclusions.

>I have participated in this process as an active member of the Humanities
>Department and as one of its representatives to the review of the case by
>the University Appointments Committee. (I was not on the original search
>committee.) The UAC returned the issue to the Humanities Department with a
>request for further information, thereby effectively supporting the
>administration position that Noble was being deemed inacceptable due to
>procedural irregularities during the search, and failing to address the
real
>issue. Dean Pierce, in a memo (8/5/2001) to the Humanities Department, has
>suggested that a new search be undertaken, after a "re-examination takes
>place of the policies and procedures." The Humanities Department has
>consistently rejected the interpretation that there were any irregularities

>in its conduct during the search process.

>There were irregularities, of course. The main one is that when the
>Dean decided that more references were required, instead of returning the
>recommendation to the department with a request for more references, he
>contracted with a private firm. This private firm then called Noble, asking

>him to allow them to contact four named individuals. Exercising a legal
>right under B.C. law, Noble refused. He has also stated that all four of
the
>individuals were unknown to him personally but were proponents of
>enterprises that he had publicly criticized. President Stevenson has
>maintained that he has played no role in blocking this appointment, despite

>his opposition to the faculty strike at York University where Noble was a
>prominent voice. No one in the administration has yet offered an
explanation
>of how, and by whom, these names were generated.

>The J.S. Woodsworth Chair search of 2000-1 is thus effectively over.
>The administration is blocking the appointment of David Noble. They say
that
>this action is warranted due to insufficient information in the file and to

>procedural irregularities during the search. I will not undertake a
detailed
>examination of each of the charges here. Suffice it to say that they have
>appeared at various points in the process, though always in retrospect. For

>example, two days prior to the UAC hearing, a memo from Academic
>Vice-President Waterhouse took issue with the length of Noble's c.v. This
>was already three months after Noble's visit to the campus, when he met the

>Dean, and his file was circulated to all concerned. All of the
adminstration
>charges are of this type. There is no substance to any of them. What, then,

>should one conclude?

>When a multitude of charges are made, charges that appear and disappear at
>various stages of the process, and these charges are all entirely without
>merit, it is only reasonable to conclude that there is another, unstated
>reason behind the proliferation of spurious charges. In my opinion, there
is
>only one such underlying reason that would explain the course of events
that
>have led to blocking the appointment of David Noble: David Noble's
political
>views and actions. I therefore conclude that the actions of the
>administration constitute a two-fold violation of academic freedom: the
>academic freedom of the Humanities Department to choose its colleagues
based
>solely on academic merit and the academic freedom of David Noble to act
>politically without being penalized as an academic.

>Bear in mind that if the administration is about to violate your
>academic freedom, they do not send you a signed memo announcing the fact.
>The stated 'reasons' have to be something else. Thus, dissimulation is the
>order of the day. If the reasons do not hold up, when they appear and
>disappear at convenience, a concerned participant or observer has to
>consider the situation as a whole. The evidence, short of an inquiry in
>which written evidence can be required and spoken evidence can be taken
>under oath, will always require some reasonable conjecture. This being
said,
>I do not see how the course of events which I have witnessed can reasonably

>be interpreted in any other way.

>Thus, I call upon the SFU faculty, the SFU Faculty Association,
>students at the university, the Canadian Association of University
Teachers,
>and colleagues at other academic institions to involve themselves in
courses
>of action designed to call the Simon Fraser University administration to
>account for its actions in this case. A public university operates in the
>public trust, and academic freedom is an important feature of that trust.
 >We, faculty and students of this university, have a duty to bring its
 >actions into line with the great slogans that it espouses. Academic
freedom
 >is the core of the university.
 >
 >Sincerely,
 >
 >Ian Angus
 >Professor of Humanities
 >Simon Fraser University

Ted Hamilton
School of Communications,
Simon Fraser University
24 Rue St. Viateur, O.
Montreal, PQ



To unsubscribe, email [log in to unmask]


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/