Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. Claudio's avatar

    I teach both large courses, like Jurisprudence and Critical Legal Thinking (a.k.a Legal Argumentation), and small seminar-based courses at Edinburgh…

  2. Charles Pigden's avatar

    Surely there is an answer to the problem of AI cheating which averts the existential threat. . It’s not great,…

  3. Mark's avatar

    I’d like to pose a question. Let’s be pessimistic for the moment, and assume AI *does* destroy the university, at…

  4. A in the UK's avatar
  5. Jonathan Turner's avatar

    I agree with all of this. The threat is really that stark. The only solution is indeed in-class essay exams,…

  6. Craig Duncan's avatar
  7. Ludovic's avatar

    My big problem with LLMs at the present time, apart from being potentially the epitome of Foucault’s panopticon & Big…

Univ. of Saskatchewan disgraces itself internationally, violates academic freedom and tenure

Brian Leiter

MOVING TO FRONT FROM MAY 14–SCROLL DOWN TO COMMENTS FOR LATEST DEVELOPMENTS–sASKATCHEWAN REALIZES THEY MADE A MISTAKE

Many readers have sent this story, which is appalling:  see here and here for two accounts.

UPDATE:  A philosophy student at Saskatchewan writes:

Regarding your most recent post about the University of Saskatchewan,  academic freedom is unfortunately not the only problem. A few other problems would be:

1) The university is merging four programs (Philosophy, Women and Gender Studies, Modern Languages, Religion and Culture) into one, and having the gall to suggest that this program will a) be superior and b) produce more research, while providing significant incentives to faculty to retire without replacement.

2) Removing four libraries, including the law library.

3) Guarding the project briefs for the above changes behind passwords, so that only current students and faculty can access the files that tell us what the university shall do.

4) Doing all of this without properly consulting departments or students.

As you can see, the university is quite simply devastating what had been a modest, but creditable, humanities division, as well as damaging its dentistry program, its law program, its political science program and its libraries. I think it would be unfortunate if the focus was only on the academic freedom issue, rather than on the broader problem that Robert Buckingham sought to address before he was fired.

There have been two open letters published in response to this already. These can be found at: http://freeacademiausask.blogspot.ca/  What is more, the philosophy students are in the process of producing a further letter. We were hoping that if we sent it you, you might be able to make it a little more public and perhaps help us get signatures. The link is here: http://philosophyopenletter.blogspot.ca/2014/05/open-letter-to-university-of.html and if anyone emails us at uofsphilosophy@gmail.com with their details then we shall add them to the signatories of the letter. 

More direct emails can be sent to:

Ilene Busch-Vishniac, President of the University of Saskatchewan, uofs.president.usask.ca

Brett Fairbairn, Provost and Vice-President Academic of the University of Saskatchewan, provost@usak.ca

UPDATE:  I'm opening comments for links to more information and commentary.  Please be patient with comments, they may take awhile to appear, as I am on the road.

Leave a Reply to praymont Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

18 responses to “Univ. of Saskatchewan disgraces itself internationally, violates academic freedom and tenure”

  1. Paul Raymont

    A letter USask's Faculty Assoc: http://www.usaskfaculty.ca/2014/05/14/usfa-e-letter-academic-freedom-includes-the-right-to-criticize-the-university/

    More background on the "TransformUS" program: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/TransformUS+plan+from+University+Saskatchewan+spending/9792950/story.html

    The far-right gov't of Saskatchewan fabricates a crisis by offering inadequate funding for a public university and then passes on the dirty work to university administrators.

    Reply
  2. Dr Sarah Hoffman

    I am a professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Saskatchewan and am completely appalled by the dismissal of Buckingham, which is a clear violation of the academic freedom of faculty at a university and a gigantic blunder on the part of Provost Fairbairn and President Busch-Vishniac. Who but exactly those unfit for such roles would agree to become a 'leader' at a university when doing so means losing any credibility that what you say results from what you actually believe and not fear and a self-serving desire to keep your job?

    The student you quote however, makes some overstatements and (perhaps subtle) errors.

    The project briefs mentioned do include one with the description "amalgamate the most robust features of programming in Women’s and Gender Studies and programming in the departments of Philosophy, Modern Languages [sic], and Religion and Culture into a new department and program." But these briefs are, as yet, *drafts* produced by a very high level (some might say out of touch) committee whose TransformUS action plan (how do people write these phrases without a pained grimace?) says "Project leads and working groups (where relevant) will develop a more detailed project plan to determine how to address the expectations set out in the project briefs by [the President's Committee on Integrated Planning]. In many cases, the projects will require significant input and consultation with the campus community."

    So, departmental and program amalgamations including philosophy are not (yet) certain. It is somewhat premature to lament the impending demise of philosophy as a distinct and independent discipline or department at the University of Saskatchewan. The situation is not quite as dire as feared, I hope. Not for philosophy here. Not yet.

    Any proposed changes to programs at the university must and will go through the normal collegial processes provided by college and university level faculty councils. I suspect any plan to amalgamate or delete programs without majority support from the faculty involved would fail to get approval from those bodies, however much the Provost or President might wish them to be implemented. So, unlike the student quoted, I think right now the issue of academic freedom is *precisely* the issue that needs focus.

    If faculty as well as 'leaders' feel their jobs are under threat if they publicly oppose these proposals then what the Provost is thought to want is what the Provost is likely to get. But as a faculty member who has quite publicly made criticisms of the processes, the projects and the actions of those in power here over the past 15 years I can report that I have never had pressure of any kind placed on me to desist. Not by a Dean, Provost, President or any other 'leader' here. At least not before I learned about Buckingham's firing and the revocation of his tenure. Now there is in the air a certain feeling of threat. But it isn't strong, and our faculty association is far from timid. Faculty employment contracts do not include the requirement to refrain from criticizing central administrators. Indeed our collective agreement explicitly includes a clause that faculty “whether tenured or not and regardless of prescribed doctrine, are entitled to the exercise of their rights as citizens and to freedom in carrying out research and in publishing its results, freedom of discussion, freedom to teach the subject assigned in classes, freedom to criticize the University and the Association without suffering censorship or discipline.”

    It is clear to me that the proposed metrics for the project are at the very least unsubstantiated as likely outcomes of the sort of amalgamation of poorly resourced humanities disciplines vaguely dreamed of in the brief, and arguably entirely likely to produce diminished research measures at both input and output ends, further eroded faculty morale, and lowered not increased student satisfaction. A critical mass of something might be produced but not faculty able to focus on the core missions of teaching and research in philosophy. But the project isn't yet more than a draft and there is indeed consultation with individual faculty and the department of philosophy. Unless presented with some as yet unknown arguments to support the idea that philosophy will be helped and not harmed by any proposed changes there will be tremendous resistance from philosophers here.

    Reply
  3. Andrew Sneddon

    As of midday Thursday, the firing has been largely reversed, but not his removal from his "leadership position":

    http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/saskatoon/University+Saskatchewan+firing+offers+tenure+outspoken/9842411/story.html

    Reply
  4. Stephen Menn

    The firing has been reversed! (He's been fired qua dean, but reinstated as a tenured professor.)
    See http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/fired-university-of-saskatchewan-professor-re-hired/article18686903/

    Reply
  5. Dr Sarah Hoffman

    A release to media was circulated to faculty, staff and students at the University of Saskatchewan late this morning from the President reverses *part* of what they so stupidly did yesterday:

    University of Saskatchewan reconsiders part of the decision regarding Executive Director of the School of Public Health

    Senior leaders at the University of Saskatchewan have announced that part of a decision they made regarding the Executive Director of the university’s School of Public Health (SPH) has been reconsidered and reversed. " Academic freedom and tenure are sacrosanct at the University of Saskatchewan. This case, however, is not about academic freedom. Dr. Buckingham was removed from his executive director position for acting contrary to the expectations of his leadership role.” U of S President Dr. Ilene Busch‐Vishniac said. "Dr. Robert Buckingham, who was terminated from his position on May 14, will not return to that leadership position. He will, however, be offered a tenured faculty position. The confusion on this issue stems from differing interpretations based on his contract. Because we hold tenure in high regard, we will immediately reverse that part of our initial decision.” She adds “Another point of confusion is with respect to an interpretation that Dr. Buckingham was banned from the university. Let me set the record straight ‐ that was never the case.”

    “The University of Saskatchewan has been on the receiving end of inaccurate and undeserved criticisms launched from across the country,” Dr. Busch‐Vishniac said. “Up to now, the university offered limited comment on the matter because of principles regarding individual privacy on employment matters. The debate that is raging confuses Dr. Buckingham’s former role as Executive Director of the School of Public Health with the academic freedom associated with that of a tenured faculty member. In his role as an administrator at a level that removes him from the faculty association, Dr. Buckingham is not only permitted but encouraged to have opinions that might disagree with those developed by top administrators. However, once a decision is made at the institutional level, all senior leaders must publicly conform to that decision or resign their leadership role.

    Dr. Busch‐Vishniac said the university does not punish tenured faculty for their opinions, adding that the TransformUS initiative itself has been debated and written about extensively on and off the campus for over a year now, she explained. “We have set in place numerous mechanisms for people to express themselves on matters related to TransformUS and they have worked well. The initiative has been debated, criticized, amended, changed and disparaged. This was all done without any sense that people could not express themselves. The TransformUS process was done slowly, carefully and openly. To suggest that we are doing something secretly or we are obscuring details of plans is plainly false,” she said. "Our university has been, is and always will be, committed to providing a positive and safe campus while maintaining our academic values of open, unencumbered discussion. These are statements I have uttered on numerous occasions and I repeat them again today—researchers, faculty, scientists, scholars, students, librarians—all enjoy academic freedom. We have a culture of encouraging vigorous debate."

    “In the case of senior leaders of the university, we met individually with each a minimum of three times to hear their reactions to comments in the TransformUS reports provided by committees dominated by faculty peers. In this particular case, I also met with the Department of Community Health and Epidemiology in the College of Medicine (at their request), and with Dr. Buckingham to discuss possible means of combining these two structures given their substantial overlap. Dr. Buckingham expressed himself forcefully on all of these occasions and his concerns were heard, although the recommendations in the action plan made public recently reflect a decision to push for amalgamation of these two units.”

    Dr. Busch‐Vishniac stressed that the University of Saskatchewan will remain focused on its goals. "Change is necessary. The university will not be deterred from efforts to ensure its financial sustainability—for current and future students, faculty, staff, alumni and communities and stakeholders all over the world."

    Reply
  6. Jonathan

    The administration is now backtracking: http://words.usask.ca/news/2014/05/15/university-of-saskatchewan-reconsiders-part-of-the-decision-regarding-executive-director-of-the-school-of-public-health/

    Reply
  7. Dilip ninan

    A day after firing him, the University of Saskatchewan has offered to return Buckingham to a tenured faculty position (though they won't reinstate him as director of the School of Public Health):

    http://www.thestarphoenix.com/health/University+Saskatchewan+firing+offers+tenure+outspoken/9842411/story.html

    Reply
  8. praymont

    The Univ of Saskatchewan's Board of Governors has called an emergency meeting for Monday (a holiday Monday in Canada). Won't be surprised if some high-ranking administrators are let go. Details here: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/Emergency+meeting+Monday+university+saskatchewan+busch/9849959/story.html

    Reply
  9. John Lamont

    For those not familiar with the Saskatchewan scene it is worth pointing out that the province, formerly in a bad financial position, is now doing very well as a result of a resource boom. So there are no fiscal pressures requiring a significant reduction in the humanities program.

    The question of how universities come to be run by people who have no serious academic or even business credentials is a good one that I have never seen answered.

    Reply
  10. praymont

    USask has just tweeted that the provost (Fairbairn) has resigned. https://twitter.com/usask/status/468564343559573504

    Reply
  11. Rob Wilson

    Provost resigns! http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/05/19/university-of-saskatchewan-provost-resigns-amid-controversy-over-firing-of-outspoken-professor/

    Reply
  12. praymont

    A statement from the Univ of Saskatchewan's Board of Governors (indicating that the provost has resigned): http://words.usask.ca/news/2014/05/20/statement-from-the-university-of-saskatchewan-board-of-governors/

    Reply
  13. Les Green

    This is encouraging. On May 15th, I wrote as below to the now-former Provost of the university, copying the Dean of Law and some friends and colleagues at Saskatchewan. I think my letter was, in light of the facts, moderate, and I do not think the tone was hostile. Still, not one replied. In my experience, that sort of hunkering-down and group-think, even behind an obviously and egregiously wrong decision, is common. What are the tenured so afraid of? Oh, wait. I know.

    Dear Provost,

    Like many other Canadian academics, I'm dismayed by what I read in the press about your decisions and conduct at University of Saskatchewan. In this challenging environment, most people will understand the need for bold vision and new, sometimes risky, strategies. But these things need to be undertaken in a spirit of collegiality, and always with an eye to the leading values of higher education. A management team does need to be able to work together; but it also needs to be able to accommodate and to learn from dissent. Where academic freedom is, or could be, at stake, we should err on the side of protecting it.

    Everything I have read in the Canadian press and, now, in the international media, strongly suggests you have got this badly wrong. I know well the temptation to entrench and dig in behind a bad decision. But doing so will damage even further the reputation of your university. I have friends and colleagues among your faculty, some of them leaders in my own fields. I could not encourage people to work with them if it meant being in the sort of environment you are creating at the University of Saskatchewan.

    I suggest you pause and reconsider your position. Re-open discussions with your deans; listen to your students; consider what the CAUT has to say. They may, after all, be right.

    yours truly
    Les Green

    Reply
  14. Lisa S

    The Globe and Mail story re the provost's resignation: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/university-official-resigns-amid-furor-over-firing-of-professor/article18752199/

    Reply
  15. Erin DeLathouwer

    For Canadian Academics concerned about this issue, here is an open letter you might consider signing.

    http://artssquared.wordpress.com/2014/05/18/canadas-academics-invited-to-sign-on-to-open-letter-to-university-of-saskatchewan-board-chair-ms-susan-milburn/

    Reply
  16. Sarah Hoffman

    The Board has now terminated the President of the U of S. Unfortunately they did so 'without cause', which is in principle incorrect and will also mean a large golden handshake for her. Story here: http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/saskatoon/University+Saskatchewan+president+Busch+Vishniac+fired/9865028/story.html

    Reply
  17. praymont

    "President Ilene Busch-Vishniac has been fired." http://www.thestarphoenix.com/news/saskatoon/University+Saskatchewan+president+Busch+Vishniac+fired/9865028/story.html

    Reply
  18. Stephen Austin

    This provides some very interesting background information about the U of S School of Public Health, and Buckingham himself:
    http://www.thestarphoenix.com/health/University+Saskatchewan+professor+fired+staff+speaking/9894902/story.html

    Reply

Designed with WordPress