Last month, Cornell University student Claire Ting was studying with friends when one of them became visibly upset and couldn't get on with her work.
For a Korean-American literature class, the woman was reading “The Surrendered,” a novel by Chang-rae Lee about an orphaned Korean girl. by the Korean War which includes a graphic rape scene. friend of Ms. Ting recently testified at a campus trial against a student he said sexually assaulted her, the woman said in an interview. Reading the passage soon after made him feel unmoored.
Ms. Ting, a member of the Cornell undergraduate student council, believes her friend deserves information about the upsetting material. That day, he composed a resolution urge instructors to place warnings on syllabuses about “traumatic content” that may be discussed in class, including sexual assault, self-harm, and violent transphobia.
The resolution was unanimously approved by the assembly late last month. Less than a week after submission to administration for approval, Martha E. Pollackuniversity president, vetoed it.
“We cannot accept this resolution because the actions recommended would violate our core commitments to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, and conflict with Cornell's educational goals,” Ms. Deep Pollack a letter with the chancellor of the university, Michael I. Kotlikoff.
For some, the conflict illustrates a stark difference in how different generations define free speech and how much value they place on its absolute protection, especially at a time of heightened sensitivity to mental health issues.
After decades of the university's battle over issues of student rights, speech codes, and how best to grapple with unpopular speakers and ideas, free speech advocates applaud Ms. Pollack. They characterize it as part of a larger national change, marked by a more resolute university leadership resisting attempts to shut down speakers and topics that might offend.
“What's unique about the Cornell situations is they quickly devolve into a ‘strong no,'” says Alex Morey, campus rights advocacy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a non-partisan organization focused on free speech issues. “There is no kowtow rate. It is a very strong defense of what it means to get an education.”
Ms Morey calls it the “Stanford Effect,” referring to page 10 Open letter written in March by Jenny Martinez, dean of Stanford University School of Law, in which she confirmed her decision to apologize to Stuart Kyle Duncan, a federal appeals judge appointed by Donald Trump, after hecklers interrupted his speech.
Earlier this month, Neeli Bendapudi, president of Pennsylvania State University, released a four minute video explains why public universities like Penn State have a legal and moral obligation to host speakers who espouse views that many people may find abhorrent. “For centuries, higher education has battled against censorship and the principle that the best way to combat speech is to speak more,” he said.
Understand Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
PTSD's invasive symptoms can affect war veterans and civilians alike. Early intervention is essential to manage the condition.
The current issue of free speech at Cornell is one that has been debated on campuses across the country. “Content warning” or “trigger warning” refers to an oral or written warning that the assigned material, including academic writing or artistic expression, may involve sensitive or upsetting themes or details that may cause students to have an emotional response tied to a personal experience.
Professors on some campuses use such warnings, though credentials are rare.
At Cornell, the student proposal suggests that such warnings be issued when course reading and discussion involves topics “including but not limited to: sexual assault, domestic violence, self-harm, suicide, child abuse, hate crimes, transphobic violence, homophobic. harassment, xenophobia.”
It stipulated that “students who choose to opt out of exposure to triggering content will not be penalized, contingent on their responsibility for making up the missed content.”
For Ms. Ting and the proponents of the measure, including women in a Korean-American literature class, were quick to rebuke the administration in frustration. “We have been characterized as triggered snowflakes,” said Shelby L. Williams, the sophomore who co-sponsored the resolution. “What we're asking for is a larger context.”
The concept of trigger warning first entered the cultural dialogue in the post-Vietnam War era, after the disorder post-traumatic stress disorder became a recognized health condition. Episodes of PTSD, which include anger and anxiety, are commonly triggered by places, people, sounds, or smells that are reminiscent of the traumatic experience, according to to the US Department of Veterans Affairs.
Integrating trigger warning into academia first took root in the 1990s, but became urgent after the #MeToo movement opened up dialogue about trauma. A Study published in 2019 in the Journal of American College Health said 70 percent of college students reported that they had been exposed to at least one traumatic event.
Students with PTSD who are diagnosed deserve treatment from a university and should be cared for by trained professionals, said Amna Khalid, professor of history at Carleton College in Northfield, Minn., who has written and spoken about campus culture since 2016.
But, says Professor Khalid, tackling students' mental health issues through trigger alerts is the right thing to do ineffective. It weakens people by reducing their identities to traumatic events and “breeding” students professors must prepare for adult life, he said.
“Life happens to you while you are driving, while you are walking, while you are at the supermarket,” he said. “Life's most challenging moments rarely come with a warning.”
Professor Khalid said that the trigger-warning mandate was a violation of the academic freedom of professors whose role is to help students develop critical thinking skills.
“Sometimes they need to surprise and challenge them in uncomfortable ways,” he says. “It diminishes the learning experience for students if professors protect themselves.”
Some professors support using trigger alerts. “When used properly,” says Connor Strobela professor of social sciences at the University of Chicago, “trigger alerts can open conversations” with college students, allowing professors to inform them of available resources.
Professor Strobel recently asked his students to read “The Second Sex,” by Simone de Beauvoir, and reminded them that the book contains themes “menstruation and menopause, and things women are ashamed of,” he said.
A student approached him and said that due to family problems, he was worried about reading it. He was willing to create alternative assignments for her but first encouraged her to start the book and see if she found it more interesting than disappointing. “He found it really stood out,” he said, and completed the task.
“In universities, there is no topic that should not be discussed, but the trigger alert is a preview of an upcoming attraction that treats students with humanity,” he added.
When Professor Strobel became a graduate student at the University of California Irvine in 2016, he wrote an application asking faculty government associations to support the use of trigger alerts on campus.
The document served as inspiration for Cornell Ms. Ting.
The Cornell measure published by The Cornell Sun Daily, the student newspaper, and start a conversation on Twitter. Usually, Ms. Pollack, the university's president, took about a month to consider the student meeting proposal. But in this case, he responded within just a few days.
The resolution concerned him, he said in an interview, because it could infringe on faculty's freedom to choose material and present it as they find it most useful.
He also believed the rules codifying the avoidance of upsetting topics conflicted with the university's role. “Our students come here with good intentions,” said Ms. Pollack, “but I think it's an important part of higher education to learn how to engage with challenging and difficult ideas. It teaches you to listen, compromise and advocate.
It was the first assembly measure in more than 30 academic years that the president has rejected.
Prof. Lee Humphreys, chair of the communications department at Cornell, was pleased with Ms. Pollack.
In the past, he has presented violent, sexual, and objectionable content in his classes to encourage students to consider who might be attracted to the program and who might benefit financially from it.
“If I was really concerned about making sure I covered all of my bases when it comes to trigger alerts, it would make my life easier not to show the kind of content in class that I should be showing, just in case something happens. which I ignored, ”he said. “I think it's to the detriment of the class and students, to avoid difficult things.”
Professor Humphreys often previews students of what will come in the lesson, as part of “reinforcing the pedagogical goal,” he says, and aims to be sensitive to students. “Being you don't support mandates doesn't mean you don't support an inclusive learning environment.”
Students had mixed reactions to the resolution, with the conservative student newspaper, The Cornell Review, calling it “disgraceful,” in a editorial published last week. “Hiding from ideas is nothing short of intellectual cowardice. Precisely the opposite of what this country needs,” the paper said.
Cullen O'Hara, co-editor-in-chief of The Review, said the editorial board did not believe the student council represented the majority of students and saw the resolution as endemic to the wider free speech issue. “We are very much against triggering an alert that we think will chill classroom discussion, which we already believe is one-sided,” said Mr O'Hara, a senior.
The student council will discuss trigger-alert resolution with the administration on Thursday, at a previously scheduled meeting between Ms. Pollack and the assembly. “I think the response was aimed at focusing on the wrong parts of the resolution,” said Valeria Valencia, a senior and president of Cornell University's Student Council, “turning it into an issue of academic freedom and not an issue of protecting students, when both things can coexist.
Ms Ting, author of the resolution, said she was considering amending the proposal. “But first I want to do more due diligence and reach out to the faculty and administration to see how we can find the right balance,” he said.