Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1964 [PAGE 1226]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

1964]

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

1181

On the other hand, other parts of Section 39, particularly Section 39 (b) dealing with the role of a faculty member as a citizen, invite debate as to whether they are admonitory in nature or postulate standards for dismissal for cause. Since the new Section 38 (d) orients due cause for dismissal to the question of the faculty member's professional competence or responsibility, it is felt that a specific crossreference in it to Section 39 might tend to confuse, rather than to clarify, and that clarification should occur as an amendment to Section 39 (b) as discussed below. Accordingly, the Committee on General Policy's recommendation to delete the phrase in question was prompted by its conviction that freedoms, protections, responsibilities, and obligations delineated in Section 39 will always be given "due regard" when the conduct of a faculty member is in question, and that a reference to them in Section 38 (d) would serve no constructive purpose. T h e language added to the Council's version of Section 38 (d) by the Board of Trustees' action on April IS, 1964, was designed to clarify that conduct clearly demonstrating professional incompetence or irresponsibility may constitute cause for dismissal, whether it occurs in the classroom, laboratory, or elsewhere. It was felt that without the addition of the words "or otherwise to conduct himself" and "conduct," as proposed by the Board's April 15, 1964, action, the paragraph might be interpreted to mean that dismissal proceedings could be initiated only for classroom or laboratory deficiencies that directly relate to the individual's ability to perform within the classroom or research context. As modified, there should be no uncertainty that, consistent with previous statements by the Board of Trustees, extramural activities of a teacher may be of such a nature and of such seriousness as to demonstrate his professional unfitness. Your Committee views Section 38 (d) as recommended by the Board to be an affirmation of the fact that one who is professionally competent and responsible can rely on security of employment at the University of Illinois, and that the central issue in any dismissal proceeding will remain such professional competency and responsibility, rather than the effect of particular conduct upon the public image of the University. 2. Amendments to Section 39 (b) As noted above, the action of the Board of Trustees on April IS, 1964, proposed a modification of Section 39 (b), with respect to which no recommendation had been made by the Senate or the Senate Coordinating Council. Section 39 (b) in the existing Statutes reads: "(b) In his role as citizen, the faculty member has the same freedoms as other citizens, without institutional censorship or discipline, although he should be mindful that accuracy, forthrightness, and dignity befit his association with the University and his position as a man of learning." Extended discussions have occurred regarding the nature of the matters a faculty member is to be "mindful" of under existing Section 39 (b). By some they are regarded as ideals of scholarly conduct and expression which 39 (b) admonish a faculty member to strive to achieve. By others they are viewed as standards of professional conduct and expression which the factulty member must observe under pain of University discipline. Contributing to the uncertainty is the_ fact that, while the old section 39 (b) refers to "institutional censorship or discipline," the University Statutes do not provide for any censorship or discipline other than dismissal for cause. It was the view of your Committee, confirmed by the Board's action on April IS, 1964, that clarification of Section 39 (b) was in the best interest of the University and its faculty. Accordingly, the following is the text of Section 39 (b) now being transmitted to the Senates for advice: "(b) In his role as a citizen, the faculty member at the University has the same freedoms as other citizens, but his special position as a member of a learned profession associated with an educational institution carries with it a special obligation to recognize that the public may judge his profession and the University by his conduct or his utterances. When he speaks or writes, a faculty member should be mindful of the admonitions that accuracy, forthrightness, and dignity befit his association with the University and his position as a man of learning. If a faculty member fails to heed these admonitions on an occasion when he is exercising his freedom of speech as a citizen, such failure shall not, of itself, constitute due cause for dismissal but, after consultation with the