All fair points. I just figured that people who are half-following should know that in broad strokes this report is being scored by most as strongly on the "pro rehire Salaita" side of the ledger (as you agree).
Like, a friend of mine on Facebook who is a professor at UIUC and recent former head of the English department, who has been harshly trashing the Administration's actions in the Salaita case, had this comment on the report: the Chancellor's response to the report was wholly insufficient, and failed to engage with the substance. This is not to take away from Kirstein's critique at all. Just to situate it in the larger struggle. :) Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] (202) 448-2898 x1 On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 1:48 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Robert Naiman < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> The head of the faculty union at UIUC (Campus Faculty Association, which >> has campaigned against the Chancellor's actions in the Salaita case) called >> this report a "gamechanger." >> > > > It is true the report is overall very good news for Salaita. The best > break he has had since this whole thing broke. > > Salaita (through his attorneys) also had good things to say about the > report. > > http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/salaita%E2%80%99s-attorneys-praise-academic-freedom-and-tenure-committee-findings > > Nevertheless, there are some problematic aspects to the report. > - There is some concern that the report is legitimizing the > administrations arguments about Salaita's tweets by recommending a new > review of Salaita's appointment instead of unconditional reinstatement. > - The Committee spoke with Wise and got her side of the story, but never > bothered speaking with Salaita or his attorneys in the course of its > investigation. > - The report includes in an Appendix a list of offending tweets, but > these are taken out of context and other, more typical example of his > Twitter activity were not included; so basically this list was cherrypicked > to make it look as bad as possible. > - There is also a concern that the process recommended by the CAFT report > undermines the American Studies department in various ways. > > See the comments at the article I cited earlier for a good critique of the > report: > > http://academeblog.org/2014/12/26/justice-denied-to-steven-salaita-a-critique-of-the-university-of-illinois-committee-on-academic-freedom-and-tenure-report/#comments > > -raghu. > > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:47 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> http://academeblog.org/2014/12/26/justice-denied-to-steven-salaita-a-critique-of-the-university-of-illinois-committee-on-academic-freedom-and-tenure-report/ >>> >>> http://www.senate.illinois.edu/aft_salaita_2014.pdf >>> >>> --------------------------snip >>> Dr. Steven Salaita’s proposed appointment was initiated, reviewed, >>> approved, and processed in accordance with all applicable university >>> procedures from the initiation of the search through his acceptance of an >>> offer of appointment. It was complete except for final Board of Trustees >>> approval. At that point, less than a month before his projected start date, >>> concerns about his professional suitability for appointment arose and he >>> was notified that his appointment would not be forwarded for that approval. >>> Eventually, it was forwarded for Board approval and was rejected. His >>> status at the time was complex: he was more than an applicant and less than >>> an employee. Under these circumstances, we believe the academic freedom and >>> liberty of political speech afforded to members of the faculty by the >>> University Statutes should reasonably apply. >>> >>> The process by which Dr. Salaita’s proposed appointment was withdrawn >>> and eventually rejected did not follow existing policies and procedures in >>> several substantial respects, raising questions about the institution’s >>> commitment to shared governance. The reasons given the civility of tweets >>> made by Dr. Salaita in the summer of 2014 is not consistent with the >>> University’s guarantee of freedom of political speech. Statements made by >>> the Chancellor, President, and Trustees asserting that the in civility of a >>> candidate’s utterances may constitute sufficient grounds for rejecting h is >>> appointment should be renounced. We conclude, however, that the Chancellor >>> has raised legitimate questions about Dr. Salaita’s professional fitness >>> that must be addressed. >>> >>> In light of the irregular circumstances leading up to the Board of >>> Trustees’ disapproval of an appointment for Dr. Salaita , the Committee >>> recommends that 3 Dr. Salaita ’s candidacy be remanded to the College of >>> Liberal Arts and Sciences for reconsideration by a committee of qualified >>> academic experts. >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > >
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
