Home  |   Jihad Watch  |   Horowitz  |   Archive  |   Columnists  |     DHFC  |  Store  |   Contact  |   Links  |   Search Sunday, May 27, 2018
FrontPageMag Article
Write Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article
9/11 for Dummies: Continued By: Professor Anonymous
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, August 12, 2005

What Are Professional Academic Standards?

Now you may wonder: why should a lack of academic experience and professional qualifications be so disturbing? There was a crisis and the response of the instant experts was intended to offer readily available guidance, right? Nevertheless, in the academic world there are professional qualifications to teach a subject at college-level. In most fields in the humanities and social sciences these are:

1. detailed knowledge of the main primary sources, records, documents, history and literature for one's field;


2. knowledge of secondary scholarship for the field—the work of important scholars, how other scholars responded to and expanded this work, knowledge of the main schools of thought, controversies, broad changes and developments in the field, a good sense of specific problems and questions which remain to be explored;


3. the guidance and criticism of an experienced scholar and of peers in the field, with exposure to disagreement and debate.


These are the basic kinds of knowledge one needs for college teaching.


There are also methodologies that qualified scholars rely on to understand, explain, and teach the large topics and many-sided questions—"problems"—within their field. These promise useful, cogent answers, and scholarship which expands and advances knowledge of the field.


They include standards such as:


1. logical argumentation based on reason and solid evidence—facts, sources, data etc.;


2. accuracy and honesty—a commitment NOT to sacrifice truth and factual accuracy for the sake of one's own theories and arguments;


3. honest critical evaluation of evidence, scholarship, and especially of one's own ideas;


4. careful interpretation and rational analysis with appreciation of complexity and nuance.


Standards of scholarship such as these guarantee reliable conclusions and new knowledge with authority. Any one-sided approach to complex problems and events is unacceptable: a violation of these standards; not educating, but indoctrinating, and not scholarship but propaganda. Accuracy, reliability, evidence, logic: these are strengths which make an expert's studied work on a subject more trustworthy and valuable than the ideas of the less-experienced and untutored novices.


My point is this: the qualifications for teaching a subject cannot be acquired overnight. The rush to develop new courses and adapt old ones in response to the emergency demands of the 9/11 crisis made some instructors aware of the time pressure and the problems this raised. At UCLA, where classes didn’t start until October, instructors for the new courses had over three weeks to prepare. But even three weeks isn’t really enough time to prepare a new course from scratch. Although the UCLA provost of the College of Letters and Science declared that faculty should “think of the event as a teachable moment and seize the day intellectually,” he also admitted that scholarship is “deliberate, contemplative, and methodical,” and professors might need to revise conclusions they reached now later on. [15] Did they? Achieving this level of knowledge and scholarship takes a lot of time and work, and it can't be done on the spur of the moment.


But: anyone who can master these standards of knowledge and scholarship is qualified to teach—to pass them on to students and to act as a guide and critic and supporter. In short, qualifications to teach are not a matter of academic degrees and formal titles and appointments. They are a matter of deep, detailed knowledge and scholarly discipline.


This leads us back to the question of why and how professors without this sort of expertise and discipline could designate themselves as qualified teachers more or less on the basis of their political beliefs rather than on traditional academic qualifications. As I've said, this occurred in response to the crisis and chaos of 9/11, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, continuing international conflict and terrorism. It was a response to the widespread call for explanations and guidance. It displayed academics’ commitment to “relevance” and real-world problems, another legacy from the 60’s.


But really this doesn't make sense. In a medical emergency would you take the advice of an untrained layman over an experienced medical professional's care? In the midst of war would you seek protection from anthropology and gender studies professors rather than trained, armed soldiers? By the same token, the knowledge of qualified, experienced specialists in relevant fields should be preferred to the ideology of inexperienced non-specialists and experts qualified in unrelated fields. All the more so in a crisis, and especially with such urgent need for reliable guidance.


It makes no sense for professors to abandon their greatest strengths—expertise and professional standards--in a climate of crisis and uncertainty. Yet this is what happens when professors of English, cultural studies, anthropology, women's studies, math, music and other such fields rush to take the podium without adequate preparation in times of political crisis and terrorism. (You can forget about “peace studies,” that vague, ephemeral field currently for unabashed propagandists who have transcended academic discipline and standards. [16] If professors substitute politically correct leftist ideology for detailed knowledge, accuracy, and honest critical analysis, the result is unthinking conformity to PC dogma. The same applies to the political right, where the substitution of conservative ideology for thoughtful, high-quality teaching results in rigid conformity to the dogma of the right. But how many right-wing teach-ins on Afghanistan and Iraq have there been? The pressure on students to conform is great, both because they long for security and the fellowship of others, not to mention their approval, and because in their fear and confusion they are attracted to simple answers and forceful directives. The "blame America first" ideology is simpler and more compelling than studying the complex foreign relations and conditions that produce tyranny and terrorism and developing strategies to combat them. We have a better idea now of how 9/11 instant “experts” became so influential, how they  have failed to uphold the standards of professional scholarship and the purpose of universities, and how they have succeeded in gaining acceptance and influence in academia.


On the other hand, insisting on the upholding of high academic standards, besides offering more reliable knowledge and analysis, promotes trust and respect among scholars and students who are committed to them, even if scholars disagree among themselves. In fact especially if they disagree, for they value balance and testing ideas through debate. Maintaining academic standards and ideals creates a strong sense of community for professors and students, where security and freedom to disagree can coexist. [17] In conditions of crisis and disruption these serious academic communities can generate useful knowledge and productive debate. They provide security, emotional comfort, constructive criticism, and intellectual insight. They offer the guidance of a variety of many different experts with varied ideas to evaluate and embrace or reject. These values and strengths were tested and proved in some universities before, during, and after the crisis of 9/11. [18] Members of successful academic communities voiced (and debated) many different political views. Neither agreement nor conformity was required; but logic, evidence, accuracy, critical analysis and rational debate were expected. Perhaps most important of all, ideally in successful academic communities freedom, individualism, creative and critical reflection, rational thought, the will to improve and change for the better, all great strengths of our Western civilization, must be valued and thrive. These are our most reliable guide and our best weapon against totalitarianism and terrorism.


Now it is four years later, and many of the teach-ins are regular courses, curricula, whole departments of "peace studies" and "ethnography". What began as emergency, stop-gap measures for conveying crisis care to needy students—which justified temporarily setting aside professional scholarly and pedagogical standards somewhat—is now institutionalized and widely accepted as pedagogically valid. And the setting aside of academic rigor continues, and the courses have multiplied (there are at least 250 “peace studies” programs in North America. [19]) University administrators are happy! They continue to bask in the glow of good PR and their glorious display of social responsibility. Instant experts and faculty are happy! They are cool and popular, they have real authority and freedom to rant and recruit for the left. And students are happy! Happy to be enrolling like  mad in "relevant" courses with lightweight requirements and easy grading, for especially instructors with less-than-sterling expertise are apt to have lower expectations and greater inclination to give higher grades for political correctness (even if the students' writing is horrendous and grammatically incorrect). And they get high enrollments and great student course evaluations, which in turn endears them to the administrators.


Happy !Happy! Happy! Everyone is happy.


Everyone, that is, except for all of us who wish to continue the disciplined pursuit of real knowledge and rigorous professional standards, and who want our universities to be fully devoted to the pursuit of real scholarship. That is what will make us, and in the long run, everyone happy. And then our universities will be able to fulfill their true mission in society. Now--how do we get there?



"Professor Anonymous" teaches at a large state university,



 [1.] “In institutions of all types and sizes, and in a wide variety of disciplines, instructors are struggling with how the events of September 11 have forced them to re-evaluate what they teach and how they teach it.” Ana Marie Cox, “The Changed Classroom, Post September 11,” Chronicle of Higher Education, 00095982, 10/26/2001, vol. 48, Issue 9.  Cox reports on increased enrollments in relevant courses, modifications to make courses more relevant, and new courses at a variety of universities. Of particular interest is UCLA, where fifty new seminar courses were created. UCLA Provost Brian Copenhaver admitted that “some of the courses ‘are on the fringes of what various people might regard as not relevant.’ " These courses included “Understanding the Unthinkable and Incomprehensible,” “Navigating Between Blithesome Optimism and Cultural Despair,” “Beyond Tears: Evidence, Fact, and Crisis,” “Silence, Slogans, and Flags,” “Responses to National and Personal Tragedies in the Bible (Prophets and Psalms),” “Literature as Mourning: China and Greece,” “What the U.S. Should Do to be Popular in the Third World,” “Poetry and Loss.”


On the UCLA courses also see Tom Kuntz, “Academe on War: Man (and Woman) The Psychobabble Detectors!The New York Times (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Nov. 4, 2001. Section 4, pg. 5. Kuntz quotes Bryan Appleyard in The Sunday Times of London: “an unprecedented assault on mainland America is being turned into sentimental psychobabble, an occasion for nationwide counseling or politically correct pseudo-courses.”


Also see Donna Foote, “Islam, Arabic and Afghanistan 101,” Newsweek, 00289604,

11/12/2001, Vol. 138, Issue 20.


A few of the many other universities which added new courses are USC, Emory University, Brown University, The University of Denver, Seattle University, George Mason University (which offered among 27 new summer courses, a business school course on “Marketing Tragedy”). See: Karen W. Arenson, “Campuses Across America Are Adding ‘Sept.11 101’ to Curriculums,” The New York Times (Late Edition (East Coast) ), New York, N.Y.: Feb. 12, 2002. pg. A11; Amy Argetsinger and Valerie Strauss, “Schools Translate Terror into Curriculum Changes,” Final Edition, The Washington Post, Washington, D.C. Feb. 8, 2002. pg. A.01 c.; Leef Smith, “In Responses to Sept. 11, Many Points to Teach; George Mason Examines Meaning of Events in 27 Courses, from Marketing to Managing Crisis,” Final Edition, The Washington Post, Washington D.C.: Jul.18, 2002. pg. T.04; Michael Berube, “Ignorance is a Luxury We Cannot Afford,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Chronicle Review, October 5, 2001, Vol. 48, Issue 6, p. B5.


Among the examples of “instant experts” are Sunera Thobani, assistant professor of women’s studies at The University of British Columbia, whose right to make rather extreme remarks about U.S. foreign policy in public was protested by politicians but defended by the university;  Karla Jay, a professor of English at Pace University, who “realized that women’s and gender-studies were in a unique position to help students better comprehend the events around them;” Thomas Keenan, a professor of Literature at Bard College who began teaching writings of Henry Kissinger on Foreign Policy; and Diane Ravitch, a professor of education history at NYU. See: Karen Birchard, “U. of British Columbia Stands Behind Professor Who Blasted U.S. Foreign Policy,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Thurs. Oct. 4, 2001; Karla Jay, “Point of View: Teaching as Healing, at Ground Zero,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Chronicle Review, issue of Oct. 12, 2001, Vol. 48, Issue 7; and Anemona Hartocollis, “Campus Culture Wars Flare Anew Over Tenor of Debate After the Attacks,” The New York Times (Late Edition (East Coast) ). New York, N.Y.: Sep. 30, 2001. Sec. 1a, pg.32 .


[2.] Joan Scott Wallach, “Higher Education and Middle Eastern Studies Following September 11, ” 2001, Academe, 0190-2946, Nov.1, 2002, Vol. 88, Issue 6, President Atkinson, Higher Education and Middle Eastern Studies Following September 11, 2001. HTML Full Text; Robert Post, “Academic Freedom and the ‘Intifada Curriculum’, ” Academe, May/June 2003, Vol. 89, Issue 3, p. 16 (AN 9889835)Academic Freedom and the 'Intifada Curriculum'. HTML Full Text .


On the other hand, according to Professor Sven Birkerts, a writing teacher at Mount Holyoke College, “his classes on poetry and creative writing are just as crucial for those who are trying to make sense of the unthinkable.” He believes that his writing courses are helpful to students struggling with “emotional turmoil” following the 9/11 attacks, “but he chides himself for not taking even greater advantage of the moment. ‘I wish I had been given a chance to rise to my role, to go beyond the subject I already teach.’ ”Cox, “The Changed Classroom, Post September 11,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 10/26/01 (see above, n. 1).


[3.] “Responses to September 11, 2001,” Academe Jan./Feb. 2002, Vol.88, Issue 1, p. 10f., “Teach-ins Help Campuses Deal With Terror Attacks”; Francis X. Clines, “At a Waiting College Campus, An Echo of the 60’s;” The New York Times Sep. 28, 2001, pg. B7; Anemona Hartocollis, “Campus Culture Wars Flare Anew Over Tenor of Debate After the Attacks,” The New York Times 9/31/01 (see above, n.1); Michael L. Jackson, “Mobilizing a University at a Time of Crisis,” Liberal Education, Winter 2002, pp. 24-276, MOBILIZING A UNIVERSITY AT A TIME OF CRISIS.(AN 6467583) PDF Full Text ; Amy Argetsinger and Valerie Strauss, “Schools Translate Terror into Curriculum Changes,” The Washington Post 2/8/02 (see above, n.1).


At UCLA the University’s Emergency Management Team was summoned and declared a “policy crisis.” This team of administrators seeking instructors for the 50 new courses to be offered sent out an “Urgent Call to Action,” to faculty.  And what were these seminars like? One of the students, a political science major, commented that “In most classes there is hardly any interaction; here [in the 9/11 seminar] you just go and let out what’s inside you.” [Sounds more like group therapy than a college course]. Donna Foote, “Islam, Arabic and Afghanistan 101,” Newsweek, 00289604,11/12/2001, Vol. 138, Issue 20. Also see Cox, “The Changed Classroom, Post-September 11,” Chronicle 10/26/01 (see above, n.1); and “September 11 and the Academic Profession: a Symposium,” Academe, Jan/Feb2002, Vol. 88 Issue 1, p18, (AN 6206096), September 11 and the Academic Profession. HTML Full Text .


[4.] As the Association of American Colleges and Universities’ official Statement on Higher Education’s Role in the Wake of the National Tragedy of September 11 said, “Valuing diversity and enabling constructive intergroup learning have become hallmarks of the contemporary academy. As we face the current crisis, we must redouble our efforts to     build broad understanding of the diversity that is a wellspring both of our democracy and of our intellectual vitality.”


The Association of American Colleges and Universities Statement on Higher Education’s Role in the Wake of the National Tragedy of September 11, Liberal Education, Fall 2001, Vol. 87 Issue 4, p. 5.


At most universities administrators issued warnings such as the one at The University of Southern California: “Our goal was to prevent harassment of students who shared a common heritage or religion with those responsible for these crimes.” And to that end the president “communicate[d] to all faculty. staff, and students via e-mail that, while he condemned the attacks, he also condemned the harassment of Muslim students, faculty, and staff. At the same time, student affairs staff contacted Arab and Muslim student leaders to reassure them of the university’s support;” and in meetings offered reassurance  to Arab and Muslim students “that we did not want anyone unfairly attacked or questioned about their status in our educational community.” Michael L. Jackson, MOBILIZING A UNIVERSITY AT A TIME OF CRISIS. PDF Full Text Liberal Education, Winter 2002, Vol. 88 Issue 1, p24, (AN 6467583).


“Sensitivity ” was sometimes harshly enforced. At Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa an instructor was suspended because of allegations that he called Muslims “terrorists” and “murderers” in a class discussion. Four Muslim students filed a grievance against the instructor, who was placed on indefinite administrative leave pending an investigation. The instructor had taught at Orange Coast College since 1980. Even before college administrators received the students’ complaints they had distributed a memo to faculty, staff, and students urging that they be “sensitive to various customs, cultural heritages , and opinions of students of diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds.” Scott Smallwood, “Community-College Instructor is Suspended After Discussion on Terrorist Attacks,” The Chronicle of  Higher Education, Sept. 25, 2001. The instructor was later reinstated, but with a reprimand, even though the charges against him were never substantiated and other students in the class indicated that the complaints were unwarranted. See Los Angeles Times, Dec. 12, 2001. I wonder what sorts of experts took over his class while he was suspended.


An Arabic-speaking international student got into trouble at San Diego State University for challenging several other students who were cheering in delight at the 9/11 attacks, in Arabic. The student who confronted the others [how insensitive!] was reprimanded for his “abusive behavior,” and warned that he would face serious disciplinary sanctions if this happened again. See Thor L. Halvorseen, “FIRE and the Aftermath of September 11,” Jan. 2002.


[5.] Eric Foner , London Review of Books, 4 Oct. 2001, Vol. 23 n. 19; Howard Zinn, “Compassion, Not Vengeance,”    The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Chronicle Review, Sept. 28, 2001, Vol.48, Issue 5; Catherine Lutz, “Our Legacy of War,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Chronicle Review, Sept. 28, 2001, p. B14; “Responses to September 11, 2001,” Academe, Jan./ Feb. 2002, (see above, n. 3); Katherine S. Mangan, “Reacting to War:” “Students and professors organize protests, counterprotests, teach-ins, and discussions,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Special Report, March 28, 2003, Vol.49, Issue 29.


[6.] “Responses to September 11,” Academe, Jan./Feb. 2002 (see above, n.3).


[7.] Michael Jackson, “Mobilizing a University in a Time of Crisis,” (see above, n. 3).


[8.] At Central Michigan University “American Flags or pictures that were pro-American had to be taken down because they were offensive to people, ” (Thor Halvorseen, Executive Director, Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, “FIRE and the aftermath of September 11.")


Similar prohibitions were imposed at the College of the Holy Cross, Florida Gulf Coast University, the University of Massachusetts, Lehigh University ( see reports in above-mentioned article), and Wesleyan, Berkeley, and Harvard, (Dana Mulhauser, “Campuses Near World Trade Center Plan to Resume Classes; Elsewhere, Flag-Waving and Retaliation are Debated,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Sept. 18, 2001.


[9.] See ACTA’s web site for the full report, with over a hundred examples of “the shocking divide between [sic] academe and the public at large.”


Goldie Blumenstyk, “Group denounces ‘Blame America First’ Response to September 11 Attacks,” Chronicle of Higher Education, The Faculty, 11/30/2001, Vol. 48, Issue 14,  ; Ahmad Dallal, “September 11 and the Academic Profession,” Academe, January 1, 2002, (see above, n.3). Also see Peter Euben, “Critical Patriotism,” “Our responsibility to critical thought complicates simple-minded notions of loyalty and patriotism,” Academe, September 1, 2002, Vol.88, Issue 5, Critical Patriotism. HTML Full Text .


 [10.] Shereen Abdel-Nabi, “University of Virginia Teach-in,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Nov. 2001, Vol.20, 8, p. 91, (Academic Search Premier, accession number 5429023.).


[11.] Andrew Brownstein, “College Board Conference Reflects a New Concern for Colleges and Students: Terrorism,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Today’s News section, Monday, Oct. 29, 2001; Eric Hoover, “On One Campus: Shock, Anger...and Resilience,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Students section, September 21, 2001, Vol.48, Issue 4.


[12.] Robin Wilson, “CUNY Chancellor, Trustees Denounce Professors Who Criticized U.S. Policy After Attacks,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Today’s News section, Friday Oct. 5, 2001;

“Responses to September 11, 2001,” “City University Teach-In Draws Fire,” Academe, Jan./Feb. 2002, Vol. 88 Issue 1, p. 10f, (see above, n.3).


[13.] When the editors of Academe gathered comments from professors for “September 11 and the Academic Profession: a Symposium,” Academe, Jan. 2002 (see above, n.9), “we expected them to discuss how the heightened patriotism, fear of terrorism, and incursions against the First Amendment would affect the nation’s universities.” As expected, Joan Scott Wallach wrote that the government  and U.S. Attorney General “promised that unwarranted interference with citizens’ rights [such as had occurred in the past] would not happen again. But in the atmosphere of heightened patriotism that has accompanied the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon and the launching of war in Afghanistan, it is almost inevitable that those promises will be broken.” She seems to believe that patriotism is the enemy of citizens’ rights.


Other academics also expressed worry about threats to academic freedom and freedom of speech, and some were criticized by students and administrations alike. See Robin Wilson and Ana Marie Cox, “Terrorist Attacks Put Academic Freedom to the Test,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 5, 2001, Vol. 48, Issue 6. The authors make note of “stunning intolerance” exhibited at universities with constricted “boundaries for what constitutes acceptable speech on campus.” It seems that these “constraints” were mostly complaints and protests aimed at professors who were critical of the government and its policies and who opposed the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In other words, while urging and  displaying exquisite sensitivity and tact towards “Others,” some professors were thoughtless or deliberately provocative when it came to their own students and university populations. But were objections and protests about this really a threat to freedom of speech? If conservatives, Republicans, the Attorney General etc. had a mind to limit the academic freedom of the left, they did an absolutely terrible job. Look at the sorts of criticism that poured forth from great “voices” of the left—Noam Chomskey, Ward Churchill, Susan Sontag, and institutions such as Columbia University, Brown University, Yale, and CUNY, and organizations such as the Committee on American-Islamic Relations, Move-On and many others. Were they prevented from speaking out? Are they now suffering restraints on their academic freedom and freedom of speech? In fact, despite the hysteria of some members of the AAUP, others commented that things were not bad at all as far as limitations on academic freedom. For example, Mary Burgan, the general secretary of the AAUP, noted in January of 2002: “We have heard of very few incidents wherein academic freedom may have been threatened,” and many more where there was productive discussion and disagreement. “Responses to September 11, 2001,” Academe, Jan/Feb 2002, (see above, n. 3).


The AAUP was nevertheless moved to extra vigilance, and formed The Special Committee on Academic Freedom and National Security in Times of Crisis. They were still particularly fearful of McCarthy-era repression, and wished to gather pertinent information on 6 topics: “adverse personnel actions against individual professors; government policies that might impair teaching, research, and scholarly communication, including international collaboration among scholars; government policies affecting the academic freedom of graduate students, visiting scholars, and others within the academic community; government policies that impair academic freedom by denying or curbing access to information vital to scholarship; government policies or statements that could chill the  climate for free inquiry and scholarship; and institutional actions or policies (whether or not governmentally compelled) that threatened to inhibit or impair free inquiry and academic freedom at the campus level.” Robert O’Neil, “Academic Freedom and National Security in Times of Crisis,” Academe, May 1, 2003, Vol. 89, Issue 3, Academic Freedom and National Security in Times of Crisis.; “September 11 and the Academic Profession,” Academe January 1, 2002 (see above, n.3). Now that is real vigilance! Yet there is not a single word about the academic freedoms of undergraduate students—the sorts of students who might disagree (or be afraid to disagree) with their professors, or object to a lack of balance in material they were to study.


And even more striking is the extent of academic freedom as depicted here; this would be unimaginable in almost any other country.


[14.] Leftists complained when their views were criticized, and implied that criticism of their views was an attack on academic freedom, although they were free to criticize conservatives and supporters of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As one professor who thought that academic freedom was in good shape commented: “We expected the usual ‘blame America first’ professors to excitedly hold forums and teach-ins, and we were not disappointed. As they explained that these attacks were deserved and were really our own fault, most faculty and students understood that free speech and academic freedom gave these professors the right to express their views. ...They were mostly ignored. The  university community understood that the academic freedom cherished by the professors critical of American policy also protects the rights of those who want to express support for their country and its leaders. Academic freedom guarantees the right to be critical. It does not protect the critic from being criticized in turn by those who disagree.” Melvin T. Steely, State University of West Georgia, “September 11 and the Academic Profession,” Academe, January 1, 2002, (see above, n. 3).


In fact there were no major problems of the sort that the AAUP feared. And yet there were and are persistent complaints about the “hostile climate” created by organizations such as Campus Watch and Noindoctrination.org which provide a forum for students’ complaints about bias in the classroom. See Robert O’Neil, “Academic Freedom and National Security in Times of Crisis,” Academe, May, 2003, (see above, n. 13); “September 11 and the Academic Profession,” Academe (see above, n.3); and Robin Wilson and Ana Marie Cox, “Terrorist Attacks Put Academic Freedom to the Test, Professors who criticize the U.S. government or society find little tolerance of their views,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, 10/5/01 (see above, n. 13).


[15.] See Arenson, “Campuses Across America are Adding ‘Sept. 11 101’ to Curriculums,” New York Times, Feb. 12, 2002 (see above, n.1); and Cox, “The Changed Classroom, Post September 11,” Chronicle of Higher Education 10/26/01 (see above, n.1).


[16.] Greg Yardley, “Peace Studies’ War Against America,” April 30, 2003 .


[17.] As opposed to the Berkeley English course on Palestinian resistance with a warning on the syllabus that conservatives should not bother to enroll. See n.2.


[18.]  See comments of professors Steely and Katz in “September 11 and the Academic Profession,” Academe, Jan. 2002 (see above, n3); Douglas L.Howard, “Teaching Through Tragedy,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Careers section, September 20, 2001;

Karla Jay, “Teaching as Healing, at Ground Zero,” The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Chronicle Review, Point of View section, October 12, 2001, Vol. 48, Issue 7 ;

and Scott, “Higher Education and Middle Eastern Studies Following September 11, 2001,” “Four Presidents Speak Out for Academic Freedom,” Academe, Nov. 1, 2002 (see above, n.2).


[19.] See Yardley, “Peace Studies’ War Against America,” FrontpageMagazine.com (see above, n. 16).

We have implemented a new commenting system. To use it you must login/register with disqus. Registering is simple and can be done while posting this comment itself. Please contact gzenone [at] horowitzfreedomcenter.org if you have any difficulties.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Home | Blog | Horowitz | Archives | Columnists | Search | Store | Links | CSPC | Contact | Advertise with Us | Privacy Policy

Copyright©2007 FrontPageMagazine.com