UCSD Committee on Academic Freedom: Report dated May 24, 2011 regarding June 16, 2009 letter from Dean Jeff Elman to sociology professor Richard Biernacki
_DRAFT_
The Report of the UCSD Committee on Academic Freedom, dated May 24, 2011 (text included at bottom of this page) can be seen on the internet archive; see https://web.archive.org/web/20111223133325/http://senate.ucsd.edu/assembly/1011/CAF05-24-11.pdf
The report was originally posted at senate.ucsd.edu/assembly/1011/CAF05-24-11.pdf . The UCSD Senate page at senate.ucsd.edu appears to have been reorganized, and documents only go back to about 2014 at the earliest.
I'll use the Report as the starting off point for discussion of issues of academic freedom at American universities.
For university faculty and other researchers, academic freedom has long been highly valued. It ensures that controversial opinions and research findings can be published, as long as they are based in evidence.
First, I'll provide an overview of the Report shown below.
Based on the UCSD Report, the Committee on Academic Freedom (CAF) investigated an incident where a UCSD dean, Jeff Elman (now deceased), sent a letter dated June 16, 2009 to Richard Biernacki, a professor in the UCSD sociology department (see wikipedia page for Jeff Elman, and discussion on the related Talk page
Identities of Jeff Elman and Richard Biernacki are public; no harm is being done by publishing their names here. Although the CAF Report obfuscated identities and referred to Elman as "the dean" and Biernacki as "Professor A", the identities of both were revealed at the time in multiple public records (cf.
this San Diego Union Tribune article dated May 25, 2011 ;
UCSD Guardian article dated June 4, 2012;
wikipedia page for Jeff Elman, and discussion on the related Wikipedia
Talk page). From these San Diego Union-Tribune and UCSD articles, it is clear that Biernacki talked to that newspaper; Elman is also identified in the article. Elman also identified himself on the wikipedia Talk page linked to above.
The CAF's Report states that "[t]he dean directed Professor A to cease pursuing a critical re-examination of the other professor’s research and data" and quoted Elman's original letter:
“You are to stop harassing [Professor B]. This means: stop contacting B with questions regarding [name of B's publication], his/her research methods, or his/her previous research methods; stop contacting others about your re-analysis of his/her data; refrain from discussing ... your re-analysis of B’s data at your presentations at any meetings, including scholarly meetings like the [name of professional association]; and do not publish texts that refer to ... your re-analysis of B’s data.”
The Report included a second quote from Elman's letter:
“If you continue to engage in these activities, you may be subject to formal discipline, which can include written censure, reduction in salary, demotion, suspension, or dismissal.”
The Report mentions that "....[t]he dean’s letter arose out of a long-running academic disagreement between two faculty members" and "... the letter was drafted with the assistance of lawyers in the Office of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The letter was cc’d to the
Office of Research Affairs and the Office of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs."
Elman told the CAF "... that his letter and subsequent actions were a well-intentioned effort to protect reputations and collegial relations, since the letter stemmed from a dispute between two faculty members."
The CAF stated "With regret, we have concluded that the administration did indeed violate generally accepted norms of academic freedom." Later in the Report, the CAF said:
However, the UCSD faculty should understand that the dean’s letter did not prohibit just slander, libel, or personal disputes; the dean’s letter prohibited utterance, research, and publication within the academic field of study. Moreover, no faculty body had (or subsequently has) found that either professor had talked or published unprofessionally.
CAF concluded:
Faculty members’ rights to study, re-analyze, and publish controversial scholarly materials cannot be abridged. These rights to academic freedom cannot be administratively revoked to prevent possible future breaching of professional norms. In our view, the campus administration’s fundamental responsibility is precisely to protect the right of faculty members to research and publish scholarly work even when others, on or off campus, find the work or its conclusions controversial or objectionable.
Underlying issues
The underlying issue is: how did UCSD administration (Office of Research Affairs; Office of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs; Dean Elman) AND UC attorneys make such a large error with the letter Biernacki received on June 16, 2009? In particular, how did the UC attorneys not identify the hazards of this letter? How did individuals who were also faculty not see the infringement of academic freedom?
From all accounts, Jeff Elman was a highly respected UCSD scholar - highly respected by UCSD faculty, researcher, post-docs, and graduate students, and also by scientists around the world. Elman died in 2018, was memorialized in various venues, and all accounts bear witness to this. He's referred to as "beloved", "revered", "really kind soul", "intellectual giant", and so on. Over and over, his colleagues' words reveal the high respect they had for him.
Elman was a scientist who had many works published in highly respected journals, works that were regarded as seminal. Aslin and Levy stated "... his 1990 article "Finding Structure in Time" ... remains among the most influential in the history of cognitive science" (in "Cognitive Science Honors the Memory of Jeffrey Elman"; see link to source below). Words written in memoriam to Elman after his death in 2018 lead to the conclusion that Elman himself in general believed in and upheld academic freedom
Certain sections of the Report of the CAF may, in part, shed some light on how Elman came to endorse such a letter. Elman's letter to Biernacki reveals that Biernacki was (correctly or incorrectly) perceived of as harassing another professor (Professor B), through questions regarding a specific publication and that professor's research methods. The CAF Report states: "The dean’s letter arose out of a long-running academic disagreement between two faculty members ...". The Report also says " [Elman] told CAF that his letter and subsequent actions were a well-intentioned effort to protect reputations and collegial relations, since the letter stemmed from a dispute between two faculty members.
Under the assumption that harassment had occurred: If Elman had simply instructed Biernacki to stop engaging personally with Professor B, that likely would have been permissible, especially if there was evidence of such harassment, and Professor B having asked Biernacki to stop contacting him/her. Employers absolutely have the responsibility to protect all employees from harassment from other employers.
Universities also have the responsibility to uphold academic freedom. While academic freedom is a highly held value, that value can, and must, be upheld while still protecting other employees from personal harassment.
Academics who publish should expect others to critique and analyze their works. That is permissible. But harassment, in the form of repeated personal communication, when the other has asked for such communication to stop, is not permissible. There certainly are cases in academia where one person's style is fairly aggressive, and that can be perceived as threatening to another person (one would expect sociologists to be aware of this reality, but academics, like all others, can engage in very uncollegial behavior).
Thus, had the letter simply included the instructions shown below, this would unlikely be seen as a violation of academic freedom (especially if Professor B had already communicated this to Professor A).
“You are to stop harassing [Professor B]. This means: stop contacting B with questions regarding [name of B's publication], his/her research methods, or his/her previous research methods; ..."
The violation of academic freedom mainly lies in these instructions quoted below from Elman's letter, and the UC attorneys absolutely should have caught this violation.
" ... stop contacting others about your re-analysis of his/her data; refrain from discussing ... your re-analysis of B’s data at your presentations at any meetings, including scholarly meetings like the [name of professional association]; and do not publish texts that refer to ... your re-analysis of B’s data.”
The existence and details of a settlement between Biernacki and the UC are unknown. I would not be surprised if there was one, as Biernacki incurred legal fees in fighting the restrictions the letter put on him. "I had to pay a steep attorney’s fee to fight the UC legal team in Oakland. Being on a level playing field is costly. If you have to bankrupt yourself to protect your academic freedom, then academic freedom is dead." The likely scenario is that UC in the end paid Biernacki's legal fees plus some additional amount. All too often, such agreements usually include a hush clause that prevent the public from knowing the full details. cite
What are the lessons here?
(1) Even the best of us can demonstrate poor judgment at times, even deans, administrators, and attorneys.
(2) Collegiality matters. Some academics really enjoy heated debates. However, for many, such debating styles seem overly aggressive and indeed, can be similar to harassment. If someone asks you to stop engaging with them, indeed, you should stop engaging on a personal level. That doesn't mean that you cannot raise legitimate concerns in academic publications. This reality, however, does not give you the freedom to use the academic process to harass another at a personal level. Sometimes academics' egos get so tied up in the argument that the academic cannot see that indeed, they're engaging in attacks on a personal level, rather than a legitimate analysis of data, methods, evidence-based inferences, and so on. It indeed is possible to critique such areas with respect and politeness, avoiding personal attacks. Reasonable minds can disagree. The real danger is when the critiquer's ego gets tied up in the critique.
Quotes from other sources attesting to the deep respect others had for Jeff Elman, both as a scientist, and as a person
Quotes from the article "Cognitive Science Honors the Memory of Jeffrey Elman"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8412187/ ; see also https://direct.mit.edu/opmi/article/doi/10.1162/opmi_e_00023/5374/Cognitive-Science-Honors-the-Memory-of-Jeffrey
Introductory paragraph: "Jeff Elman (1/22/1948–6/28/2018) was a major and much beloved figure in cognitive science ..."
Elissa Newport (Georgetown): "... he was the nicest person I have ever known." ... " I dearly miss having someone so generous, warm, and kind in my life. Our field must remember him for the example of kindness and generosity he represented for all of us."
Ken McRae (University of Western Ontario):
I had the extraordinary pleasure of collaborating with Jeff for 20 years. That’s a long time! I loved working with Jeff. ... Many of us love and miss Jeff so much because, in addition to being an extraordinary scientist, he was an even better person. He was incredibly warm, kind, patient, and generous with his time. I witnessed many times when he was quick with lavish praise, especially with young people. Jeff was most definitely a passionate fighter for equity and social justice during his entire adult life, and the importance of this cannot be overstated.
Richard N. Aslin (Haskins Labs) and Roger P. Levy (MIT):
- "... his 1990 article "Finding Structure in Time" ... remains among the most influential in the history of cognitive science";
- "Jeff was unfailingly generous to and supportive of everyone in his field, from entry-level students to his most senior colleagues."
- "Colleagues like Jeff Elman are rare indeed, and he will be sorely missed."
Gary Cottrell (UCSD): "... his spirit will live on at UCSD in the many people whose lives he touched here and around the world"
Carol Padden (UCSD):
"He shared his time freely because he saw time not as something to hoard or to jealously guard, but to give whenever possible. As generous as he was, he was always effective and efficient. He was the first to apologize if something was done wrong or insensitively. He was compassionate to his colleagues, but he could tell the truth. Above all, the gift he had as Dean was that he liked the puzzle of institutions, and how to make them work in favor of human beings. ... His legacy is here for everyone to see: the first Department of Cognitive Science in the world at UC San Diego and, just last year, a new Data Science Institute that he cofounded just before he passed away. ... Those of us who worked closely with him know very acutely what we lost in a heart-breaking moment on a summer day in June: a dear friend and an extraordinary human being."
Mark Johnson (University of Cambridge): " ... I had the privilege of seeing Jeff’s masterful academic and personal leadership skills close up ..."; " ... with a network of UK friends and colleagues devastated by news of his death ..."; "We have lost not only an exceptional scientist and leader, but also a loyal and empathic friend."
Janet Wiles (University of Queensland): "Fun to work with, intellectually challenging, Jeff would listen wholeheartedly and was always worth listening to. Jeff—For your intellectual excitement, wise council, and friendship, thank you. You are sorely missed." ]
Susan Goldin-Meadow (University of Chicago): "If I had to choose one word to describe Jeff, it would be generous. ... Jeff did things, big and small, that made the world a better place ... " ]
Jamie Alexandre (Learning Equality, Inc.): "You wove a tapestry of minds that strive toward a common goal: a more vibrant world, a more just world, a world where everyone can flourish and learn. This will be your legacy: the hearts you touched, the minds you changed, the seeds you planted."
Arielle Borovsky (Purdue): "Jeff was an extraordinarily generous person, and this generosity extended to his mentees. ... "Jeff made an enormous contribution to our field on the value of learning structure in time. Jeff himself was deeply learned, with great structure of character. I just wish there had also been more time."
Other relevant sources:
"Jeff Elman ... was revered for his mentoring throughout his career." https://news.ucsc.edu/2023/01/matlock-elman-award.html
"As well as being an intellectual giant, pioneering research on artificial neural networks and language processing, he was an incredibly kind man and enormously generous with his time. " https://web.archive.org/web/20230530043720/https://www.lucid.ac.uk/seminars-news-events-blog/news/passing-of-our-colleague-distinguished-professor-of-cognitive-science-jeffrey-elman/
https://web.archive.org/web/20230516041508/https://today.ucsd.edu/story/passing_of_distinguished_professor_of_cognitive_science_jeffrey_l._elman
https://web.archive.org/web/20181120114240/https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/science/sd-me-jeffelman-obit-20180629-story.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20221224144714/https://medium.com/@jamiealexandre/remembering-jeff-elman-38d16ad9072
https://web.archive.org/web/20201204200102/https://magnuson.psy.uconn.edu/wp-
https://web.archive.org/web/20240411010538/https://library.ucsd.edu/dc/object/bb5837484v/_1.pdf