Spring Break
Harassment laws explained
by Anya Bergman
News | 10/7/08
Posted online at 5:26 AM EST on 10/7/08
/ Last updated at 10:36 PM EST on 10/7/08
Attorney Daryl Lapp, an expert on antidiscrimination in higher education, addressed the faculty Thursday, Sept. 25 upon invitation to speak from University Provost Marty Krauss, whose move was criticized by those who felt Krauss' invitation reflected the authoritative position she took in a case involving the University's harassment policy last fall.
Krauss prohibited students and staff members from attending the speech.
Krauss told the Justice last month that she hired the lawyer after faculty members told her last year that they did not understand how antidiscrimination law is applied in various cases. She wrote in an e-mail to the Justice following the event, "This session was organized to provide an opportunity for the faculty to learn more about discrimination law and its applications and to have their questions about these issues addressed. It was not intended as an open event for the campus and thus, students and staff were not invited to event."
Prof. Sarah Lamb (ANTH), who attended the speech, said it should have been open to program administrators, who should be prepared if a student comes to them with a question or complaint about potentially harassing behavior in the classroom.
Last year, the Faculty Senate tried to bring a panel to speak on this issue after the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities said Krauss did not apply the full definition of discriminatory harassment found in the University's harassment policy when Krauss placed sanctions on Prof. Donald Hindley (POL) after students complained that he made racially insensitive remarks in class. The CFRR ruled in Hindley's appeal that the sanctions violated his right to academic freedom, and Krauss overruled this decision and closed the case in January.
In a Sept. 22 article on the Web site for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit education foundation that works to defend and sustain individual rights at U.S. colleges and universities and has been monitoring Hindley's case, Adam Kissel, director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program wrote, "We hope that Lapp sticks to the law and respects the principles of free expression, … but we are concerned because such training sessions tend to scare professors into restricting their speech in order to avoid investigations and worse."
Krauss prohibited students and staff members from attending the speech.
Krauss told the Justice last month that she hired the lawyer after faculty members told her last year that they did not understand how antidiscrimination law is applied in various cases. She wrote in an e-mail to the Justice following the event, "This session was organized to provide an opportunity for the faculty to learn more about discrimination law and its applications and to have their questions about these issues addressed. It was not intended as an open event for the campus and thus, students and staff were not invited to event."
Prof. Sarah Lamb (ANTH), who attended the speech, said it should have been open to program administrators, who should be prepared if a student comes to them with a question or complaint about potentially harassing behavior in the classroom.
Last year, the Faculty Senate tried to bring a panel to speak on this issue after the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities said Krauss did not apply the full definition of discriminatory harassment found in the University's harassment policy when Krauss placed sanctions on Prof. Donald Hindley (POL) after students complained that he made racially insensitive remarks in class. The CFRR ruled in Hindley's appeal that the sanctions violated his right to academic freedom, and Krauss overruled this decision and closed the case in January.
In a Sept. 22 article on the Web site for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit education foundation that works to defend and sustain individual rights at U.S. colleges and universities and has been monitoring Hindley's case, Adam Kissel, director of FIRE's Individual Rights Defense Program wrote, "We hope that Lapp sticks to the law and respects the principles of free expression, … but we are concerned because such training sessions tend to scare professors into restricting their speech in order to avoid investigations and worse."
Be the first to comment on this story