<p>Controversial</a> Tenure Case at Columbia U. May Be Over - Chronicle.com</p>
<p>Can't say this is a new low, as this is simply business as usual.</p>
<p>Gotcha journalism!</p>
<p>Two things:</p>
<p>First, there’s no evidence that he actually says that – he denies that the events in the video never happened.</p>
<p>Secondly, tenure decisions are supposed to be made based upon a scholar’s scientific aptitude and the body of his work, not his politics or personal beliefs. While it is generally wise for a tenure-track professor to keep his or her personal politics to himself until he or she is awarded tenure, the purpose of tenure is not to vet people based on their personal beliefs or political stances. It is to evaluate a body of their scholarly work and evaluate them as a scholar.</p>
<p>Of course, if Professor Massad really made those statements I do not agree with them, but he has a freedom of speech just like anyone else in this country does, and if he is a truly outstanding scholar, then he is a truly outstanding scholar. Period.</p>
<p>yeah way to go C’02. let’s not grant tenure to anyone with extreme political views, let’s have professors hide all personal views until they are tenured, what other irrelevant privileges should he be barred from? Your glowing powers of analysis just baffle me, you seem smart at times, but then, the dogmatic neanderthal in you, pops out from time to time.</p>
<p>Typical straw men in this thread from juliet and confidentialcoll. Yes, he’s entitled to his personal political views. But he’s not entitled to harass and intimidate Jewish students who take his classes. And there are very credible allegations that he has done exactly that. Teaching ability is certainly a tenure criteria, and the allegations against him seriously call his teaching ability into question.</p>
<p>c02, it is a tenure critera, one of many as you would yourself agree. after you weigh the pros and cons which clearly there are many on both sides, the tenure committee twice voted in the affirmative for him it would seem. </p>
<p>So then you have the argument spilling over from this guy is bad, to the tenure committee must be bad because it approved him, to the university must be horrible because it would have the likes of Joseph Massad at Columbia. Lest we forget that it also has an entire institute for Israel and Jewish studies ([Columbia</a> University Institute for Israel and Jewish Studies](<a href=“http://www.iijs.columbia.edu/people/index.html]Columbia”>http://www.iijs.columbia.edu/people/index.html)) and has incredibly strong ties to the local Jewish community with prominent Jewish alumni. The university is a big tent for political views. I don’t know Massad so I am not here to vouch for him, but I don’t like it when the tenuring of one professor becomes equated with some sort of evilness of Columbia more generally. If we held a political litmus test for all professors than academia would cease to function. You are going to have people you agree with, people you don’t. I do not feel capable of making the determination, however, at what point is a person’s individual politics too much of a hindrance. I leave that the the P&T committee and the Provost to decide those standards and to make a determination as to whether they believe he will continue to contribute to his department and his field.</p>
<p>I see no point in this post. It seems like instead of trying to start some reasonable debate about Massad and his getting tenure, C2002 only posted this to vent his own frustrations. </p>
<p>I’m willing to bet c2002 has never taken a class with Massad yet he wants to call into account his treatment of students based off of “very credible allegations” (read: anecdotal evidence). [You can argue the point about anecdotes but are there video recordings of him harassing students?] Then you dismiss the major point that his scholarship is top-notch as straw men.</p>
<p>Just because he hurts some peoples feelings doesn’t mean the university should let an academic of his caliber go. I don’t know about you but I have taken a class in MEALAC taught by a very Jewish professor who outright said very derogatory things about Palestinians, and Muslims in general, but no one has ever said anything about him. </p>
<p>I hope that whatever bug crawled up your butt is gone now and you can let this go. </p>
<p>Full disclosure: I am of jewish decent and have half of my family living in some of the more heavily bombed areas of Israel. Go ahead and try calling me out for being anti-semitic.</p>
<p>"Go ahead and try calling me out for being anti-semitic. "</p>
<p>I’m not sure one can claim that Massad is “anti-semitic” either…unless he’s anti-himself (at some point certain Jewish activists hijacked the term and pretended it only pertained to themselves even though Arabs are semites as well).</p>
<p>I’ve been following the smear campaign against this guy since 2004. Seems like anybody who takes an anti-Zionist position is immediately throttled by Jewish activist groups with obvious political agendas. I appreciate the voice of dissent that this man lends to Academia and I think the ones that try to silence him should be ashamed.</p>
<p>Listen jaykoblives – I attended an all-Jewish Model United Nations Conference a couple years back and there were (Jewish) high school students representing Iran in the Middle East Summit. They presented their arguments well about the ongoing conflict in Gaza and they did it maturely. </p>
<p>The delegate representing Iran and her views was awarded Best Delegate of the entire committee by an all Jewish panel of judges. </p>
<p>Jews have been debating for centuries – it’s what they’re both comically and seriously known for. This professor has been accused of saying things like “If you refuse to admit the atrocities being committed in Palestine than you can get out of my classroom!”. If that is true, then he is not engaging in open debate and he is not allowing others their freedom of speech. It is also a violation of our Bill of Rights to prohibit others from benefiting from their civil liberties. </p>
<p>As for the allegations being unclear, all I can say is that where there’s smoke there’s fire. I don’t necessarily believe he should be denied tenure (again), but I do believe he should receive instruction about how to allow dissenting views in his classroom to be expressed.</p>
<p>^
Did it seem like I was trying to generalize about the Jewish community as a whole? I’m well aware that many Jews are open minded. There is also a segment of the Jewish community that has political agendas that could be described as “radical”. This could be said about pretty much any ethnic group.</p>
<p>As far as Massad is concerned, I read that the original case against him concerned three students who claimed he was hostile towards their inquiries. Later, over 20 students who were in the class signed a statement refuting the allegations of the three. That sounds like the word of 20 against the word of 3. </p>
<p>You said:
“this professor has been accused of saying things like “If you refuse to admit the atrocities being committed in Palestine than you can get out of my classroom!”.”</p>
<p>Just to play devil’s advocate, I wonder what would happen in the following scenarios:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>In an American Civil War class, a student hailing from a southern state consistently and adamantly denies that blacks were persecuted in the antebellum South.</p></li>
<li><p>In a World War II class, a student who identifies himself as a Nazi denies the atrocities of the Holocaust.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Do you think many professors would put up with this for very long after they present an extensive amount of evidence showing that the student’s position is ludicrous? It seems to me that there comes a point where a student may just be unwilling to learn, in which case, I agree that they don’t belong in the classroom.</p>
<p>To argue that the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory is as clearly evil as the persecution of African-Americans in the antebellum South and the Holocaust is CONTROVERSIAL. When I say controversial I mean it should ignite controversy – that means it should be argued, all opinions being represented.</p>
<p>The point is that if students kept denying the persecution of blacks and the atrocities of the Holocaust, there would be an insurmountable amount of evidence to counter them. Past that, they would just be arguing senselessly. There is MUCH to be discussed even with these clear-cut tragedies, imagine how much more there is to be discussed in a situation as ethically murky as the one in Palestine. To sum up, I don’t see how anyone feels justified in telling someone to get out of his classroom due to a dissenting opinion about one of the hottest topics in the international discourse.</p>
<p>^
Except, the quote you mentioned, “If you refuse to admit the atrocities being committed in Palestine than you can get out of my classroom!” doesn’t necessarily refer to the issue of occupation specifically. So I’m not arguing that the issue of occupation is “clearly as evil” as the persecution of African Americans. What I’m drawing reference to is the undeniable fact that African Americans suffered atrocities, just as Jews did in the holocaust, just as Palestinians do in places such as Gaza. Since I don’t know the context in which the quote was said, I can only speculate and if you can define “atrocities” as thousands of Palestinian civilians killed in Israeli military missions, the destitution that much of the Palestinian populace is forced to live, and their status as second rate citizens in many territories, I think the professor has a point. There ARE atrocities being committed in Palestine and, no matter what side of the issue you happen to be on, if you cannot admit that to yourself, you have no business in a classroom. </p>
<p>With that said, there are, of course, atrocities committed against the Israeli people who suffer from terrorist attacks. If some moron stands up and says “no these attacks aren’t happening. no innocent Israelis are being killed.” after being presented with the irrefutable facts, I don’t feel they have anything to contribute to a classroom either. My statements are not politically motivated. I am just capable of identifying an atrocity. </p>
<p>Again, I don’t know what this student said or if this event even actually occurred. Like I said, we have twenty eye witnesses defending the professor versus three that claim he was out of line.</p>
<p>Columbia’s middle east studies department has been a hotbed of radicalism for quite some time. This is nothing new–so long as the poison doesn’t spread to other departments. Will SIPA catch the contagion before it departs to M’Ville? I will be curious to find out, as a potential future SIPA student.</p>
<p>^
What’s radical about the department?</p>
<p>I’m seeing a lot of accusations being tossed around in this thread, but not a lot of evidence. Is this how people roll at Columbia?</p>