TO:                William MacQueen, Vice President for Human Resources
FROM:            Professor John Bonnell
SUBJECT:     Meeting of February 26, 1998
DATE:            February 23, 1998

 I have received your memo of February 19, 1998 regarding my use of certain language in the classroom and the subsequent meeting you have scheduled for Thursday to discuss/"investigate" this issue. I will attend the meeting along with my MCCFO representative. However, prior to the meeting I want to inform you of the serious concerns I have with this entire procedure.

*      Your memo states that this "investigation" was generated by a letter of complaint from the "parent" of a student. This means you are investigating a complaint of a person who has never met me nor attended any of my classes. Article VIII of the MCCFO labor agreement addresses investigation of written complaints of students. It does not include parents, children, cousins, friends, co-workers, etc. These are college students we're dealing with here. In accordance with my contract rights, I request a copy of said written complaint be delivered to me prior to the meeting.

*      The learning environment for women (and men) in my classroom is the antithesis of hostile as indicated in the very document you are citing as evidence for your
investigation, i.e., "My Semester Overview" that I distribute to all students along with my syllabus. Despite this being written by one of the very small minority of my students who object to certain language I use, this letter is actually a glowing report on my ability to achieve the College's true mission--to teach the students. This student strongly objected to certain language yet states that "   . . much was learned, ... to my surprise, I gained an abundance of knowledge, … we had an in-depth teaching on how to think out, comprehend and interpret literary works; … I have never had to think on a level like this before and, as a result, I am now able to understand the author's intended meanings, … you have very unique, yet effective methods of teaching." And perhaps most telling, this student concluded: "I did enjoy your course and many of our classroom discussions and debates and as a result I will recommend your class to others." All this from a student who initially considered dropping the course. Hostile environment? I think not.

*       My methods of teaching are for the most part the same as they were 30 years ago when I first started at the College. They are predicated on an immense respect for all my students regardless of gender, race, age, etc. In the vast majority of cases, this respect is mutual by the end of the term. The language I use is based on who I am. That is, a person from a blue-collar background who worked his way through school on jobs and scholarships and has spent a lifetime teaching great literature to primarily blue-collar students -- and being highly successful in this endeavor.

*       This language that you (and a very small percentage of my students) object to is not gratuitous. It is never directed at a student. It has a specific purpose. It reflects who I am and it gets the students' attention. In many cases, it creates life-long readers from people who entered class claiming that they hate and/or don't read literature. I can categorically state that I have never sexually harassed a student. In fact, on the issue of sexual discrimination, when discussing the subject of so-called "offensive" language with my students, many women over the years have strongly indicated that they believe it is very condescending, therefore discriminatory, to eschew such diction out of deference to their gender.

*        To me this is clearly an academic freedom/free speech issue. I have lived both my personal and professional life as a feminist and civil libertarian even before they became such significant political issues. However, I draw the line at the current insanity of "political correctness" that threatens our fundamental right to freedom of speech in this country. If you are successful in the "disciplinary action" threatened in your memo because of language in a literature class, what safeguards will we have when another "parent" of a student wants to ban discussions of the works of such authors as Toni Morrison, James Joyce, Raymond Carver, Philip Roth, D. H. Lawrence, to name just a few?

cc:
Albert Lozenzo
Magaret MacTavish
Ruth Reed
James VanEman
MCCFO Representative
 
 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1