Institutional neutrality, the statement declares, ‘means that University leaders will not communicate institutional positions on controversial political topics except where such issues directly impact the University’s role or functions.’ So far, so neutral – and nothing much that’s new.
But then the statement goes on to say that ‘examples of such functions are the safety and wellbeing of staff and students, financial and regulatory concerns, sustainability, equity, ethical investment, and obligations under the Tiriti o Waitangi’ as well as everything in the university’s ‘strategic documents and frameworks.’
Presumably, this includes the university’s ‘Vision 2040’ scheme, which aims ‘to integrate te ao Māori, tikanga Māori, te reo Māori and mātauraka Māori into our teaching, learning, research and support services.’
All of this, I would submit, constitutes a highly innovative take on neutrality. Rather than taking the boring, old view that institutional neutrality involves remaining neutral on controversial topics, Otago has decided that neutrality can involve universities being decidedly un-neutral on the very topics that people are most concerned about.
That’s not just my hunch. The Treaty of Waitangi consistently emerges as the number one issue that academics feel uncomfortable discussing, with fully half of respondents telling a Free Speech Union survey in 2022 that they didn’t feel free debating the topic.
They will surely be comforted by the news that their employer has now found a way to be absolutely, 100% neutral except regarding the Treaty – as well as other topics (like sustainability and equity) that have a habit of evoking debate and disagreement.
It is entirely coincidental, of course, that Otago’s announcement comes just as the Education and Training Amendment Bill has passed its first reading in Parliament. That bill asks universities to commit to institutional neutrality as part of free speech policies that universities will be expected to draw up.
Luckily, though, Otago has already made clear how committed it is to real institutional neutrality. Everyone who is convinced by their statement should now immediately refrain from supporting the new bill. And from pressing for changes to it that would force universities like Otago to adopt old-fashioned, outmoded concepts of neutrality that actually involve universities remaining neutral on hot-button issues.
Dr James Kierstead is Senior Lecturer in Classics at Victoria University of Wellington.This article was first published HERE
Presumably, this includes the university’s ‘Vision 2040’ scheme, which aims ‘to integrate te ao Māori, tikanga Māori, te reo Māori and mātauraka Māori into our teaching, learning, research and support services.’
All of this, I would submit, constitutes a highly innovative take on neutrality. Rather than taking the boring, old view that institutional neutrality involves remaining neutral on controversial topics, Otago has decided that neutrality can involve universities being decidedly un-neutral on the very topics that people are most concerned about.
That’s not just my hunch. The Treaty of Waitangi consistently emerges as the number one issue that academics feel uncomfortable discussing, with fully half of respondents telling a Free Speech Union survey in 2022 that they didn’t feel free debating the topic.
They will surely be comforted by the news that their employer has now found a way to be absolutely, 100% neutral except regarding the Treaty – as well as other topics (like sustainability and equity) that have a habit of evoking debate and disagreement.
It is entirely coincidental, of course, that Otago’s announcement comes just as the Education and Training Amendment Bill has passed its first reading in Parliament. That bill asks universities to commit to institutional neutrality as part of free speech policies that universities will be expected to draw up.
Luckily, though, Otago has already made clear how committed it is to real institutional neutrality. Everyone who is convinced by their statement should now immediately refrain from supporting the new bill. And from pressing for changes to it that would force universities like Otago to adopt old-fashioned, outmoded concepts of neutrality that actually involve universities remaining neutral on hot-button issues.
Dr James Kierstead is Senior Lecturer in Classics at Victoria University of Wellington.This article was first published HERE
6 comments:
Is this the same as the statement that Prof James MacLaurin had drafted for Otago? We got to see that just as Otago welcomed its new Vice Chancellor. I thought that early statement had looked pretty good but then it didn’t include a special carve out Te Tiriti. What happened?
Last night I was considering my pending submission to the Education and Training Amendment Bill (see: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/54SCEDUW_SCF_8826C9D4-8F6E-4018-CDF7-08DD758B2660/education-and-training-amendment-bill-no-2#RelatedAnchor) and the points made in this article echo what I was thinking. Basically the bill needs to have the 'Treaty Principles' elements ripped out as they are not relevant - what is the point of the NZF/National Coalition agreement to deal with this when the damned references are allowed to remain in something so important as removing indoctrination from our education system?
With Robertson running anything, who would expect neutrality ?
Clearly demonstrated while in Parliament.
A new VC?!!!
Word salad stuff - words assume the meaning intended in a specific context. Like Te Tiriti.
Anon@8.49 good on you! What's proposed is utter bs, but if passed, it's He Puapua here we come. We so need to push back on this. And nevermind the universities, look at what's proposed for schools!
Post a Comment