September 2010
July 12, 2010
Dr. Steven Franklin
President and Vice-Chancellor
Trent University
Dear President Franklin:
We are a national organization of scholars dedicated to
maintaining academic freedom (www.safs.ca). We are writing to you to ask for
clarification regarding your new vision statement, as described by Penni Stewart
in her President’s Column in the June 2010 issue of the CAUT Bulletin, p.
A3. You can access this column at: http://www.cautbulletin.ca/en_current.asp?sectionID=1259&articleID=0.
Professor Stewart states that the Trent Senate approved a new
vision statement that includes the following sentence: “We foster an environment
where Indigenous knowledge is respected and recognized as a valid means by which
to understand the world.”
Our organization takes no stand on the
validity of Indigenous approaches to knowledge, but we are troubled by the
notion that a university might decide to declare any specific approach to
understanding the world valid. In an academic
setting, it is inappropriate to designate any school of thought as worthy of
special respect, since all points of view and all disciplines need to be subject
to healthy skepticism, vigorous debate, and potential discrediting.
We
are also concerned that this vision statement implies that dissent from this
"policy" will be regarded as unacceptable. If our inference is correct, it
follows that criticism of Indigenous knowledge would violate the new vision
statement. We would consider that position to be an abridgement of academic
freedom.
Importantly, the Statement of Goals and Objectives now posted on
your webpage, http://www.trentu.ca/calendar/overview_goals.php, contradicts the
new approved vision statement. The first goal says: “To
create a teaching, learning, research and living environment fundamentally
committed to the promotion of free inquiry and expression.”
We fail to see how free inquiry, which your
university claims to endorse, could be compatible with a statement that
effectively declares that inquiry about the validity of Indigenous approaches to
knowledge is off-limits. Possibly your Senate had some other purpose in mind
when it approved the new vision statement.
We
would greatly appreciate a clarification of the meaning of the vision statement.
In particular, we would like to be assured that the new vision statement does
not prevent inquiry about or criticism of the validity of Indigenous approaches
to knowledge.
If it does, then it violates academic freedom. The CAUT Policy
Statement on Academic Freedom clearly states “Academic
freedom includes the right, without restriction by prescribed doctrine, to
freedom of teaching and discussion; freedom in carrying out research and
disseminating and publishing the results thereof … “
We
look forward to your response, which we will post on our website along with this
letter to you.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Dr. Clive Seligman, SAFS President.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
