Unfortunately I believe the Kristakises are at great risk of losing their positions, despite the formal policy of the institution. Of course they most likely will be given the opportunity to “resign” and thus no discussion of the policy need take place.
In the case of Yale I won’t point you to the Constitution but rather to an excerpt from their Undergraduate Regulations relative to freedom of expression. It appears they have already balanced the interests that are the subject matter of this thread. If I read it correctly they have as an institution given freedom of expression the highest priority even superseding “civility and mutual respect.” “Bolding” is mine:
“As originally intended in the constitution, it’s only meant to protect dissenting speech from legal prosecution by the government. It doesn’t mean one is free from possible consequences of exercising one’s free speech from other parties/venues whether it’s criticism…including harsh criticism or in the case of private institutions like Yale, private sector companies, or in some cases public sector agencies…mean one is free from possible negative consequences such as receiving a poor performance review or sometimes even being terminated.”
Why do you even start wth this straw man? No one has ever said or suggested that free speech doesn’t bear consequences. Part of those consequences can be that others think poorly of you and don’t wish to associate with you.
If someone goes ahead and wears a highly offensive blackface costume, or hangs a Confederate flag in their dorm, or chatters on incessantly about high school classmates, the consequences are that other people will roll their eyes and dismiss them.
IMO, the Christakis couple is entitled to exercise free speech and should not apologize for it or be punished for it.
However, the Christakis couple in the role of Masters also should be mindful of their position as guides, mentors and role models. IF they have been disrespectful in their dealings with students, they are not suited to that particular position. That’s a big IF, however.
I really don’t see why they should be fired as professors; universities should welcome all viewpoints on campus from an intellectual standpoint, even (or especially) controversial ones.
It can be if the one reporting has good reason to believe the offender and/or his/her immediate supervisor/chain of command will likely attempt a coverup and/or retaliate for his/her bringing up the concern with him/her first.
In reply to your post. The master’s wife said nothing derogatory in her email rather just an opinion. She didnt tell her boss off, she wasn’t trying to convert someone’s religion, she was not rude only thoughts to ponder. Now if Yale and its students oust them for having an opinion what do these kids learn? Do we send our students to college to learn to think critically or do we send them off to college to only be in a cozy warm environment insulated from the realities of life where they are taught only one viewpoint. So yes the administration, its student and alumni can clamor for their dismissal but what happens to higher learning in the process?
The reason we have such rules in the workplace is because it can be full of people who never learned how to communicate and act respectfully.
Not everybody goes to college. But for the kids who do, shouldn’t we be training them to NOT be the idiot who doesn’t know how to communicate? Should we be training them to run to authority to fix every little offense? Should we be training them that the authority/boss/principal/government/etc. is the ultimate decider of how interpersonal relationships should be conducted?
Far better to teach them HOW to handle these matters independent of rigid rules. Hopefully, we can create a population of people who intuitively know how to behave through trial and error experience, rather than a population of people who only know how to follow the rules.
If Jonri and other Yalies posting here are correct about the Master and the spouse’s role in the college, sending off the email in the manner she did can construe undermining the trust and confidence of his/her constituents…namely one faction of students with whom she took a position against. Considering their role in the college, it would have been better for them to remain above the fray in order to not give even an appearance they’re taking a side and in so doing, showing themselves to not be neutral/fair enough to be trusted to represent and hear out concerns from ALL students living in that college.
And the fact NC facilitated a friend in videotaping a student in what some Yalies posting here consider a private area and posting it up online which resulted in death threats against that very student underscores the complaint by one student that he’s failed in one of his duties…creating a safe educational environment for all students at the college. He certainly failed in that case regardless of the right/wrongfulness of her behavior.
Again, is there evidence of this? People keep saying this, but I have not seen evidence of it.
Yes, the speaker was on campus, and yes NC/EC socialized with him. But that doesn’t automatically lead to the conclusion that he was instructed to do this, or even supported by NC/EC in doing it. Also, I don’t think he was the only one filming in the crowd.
“I think that the NE region is in general more “liberal” than where the University of Missouri is located at. Not sure whether this (being liberal) has something to do with the fact that there are a higher percentage of African Americans in New Haven than in the relatively rural Kansas City (is It where the latter university is located at?)”
Mcat - Mizzou is located in Columbia, MO, equally distant from St Louis and Kansas City, neither of which are remotely “rural.” They are good size cities like any other similar size city. Both St L and KC have significant African American populations.
As for the NE being more liberal - that isn’t necessarily due to what % of the population is African American. The % of the pop that is AA is higher in the south but they are less liberal - and states such as Vermont or Maine have relatively few AA but they are plenty liberal.
St. Louis used to be a lot more like the upper Midwest in terms of being socially liberal (and sharing similarities with the NE in that regard). In recent years, it seems to have “turned” more southern, which is a pity. Having lived in the St Louis area and knowing a lot of Mizzou alums, I’m seeing a lot about this on my newsfeed.
I’m not convinced this is unfortunate. They don’t seem to be well suited for the job of Master/Associate Master. I haven’t watched the entire video, but in the part I watched, Christakis was condescending. He didn’t seem to acknowledge the students’ distress. He just bludgeoned them with “free speech,” instead of listening.
It also seems that there was concern about their fitness before this incident.
Interesting distinction between the Masters and the Deans in this link from the Yale website. Note that the Masters are, among other things, responsible for the PHYSICAL safety of the students in the college–but there is no mention of the kind of nurturing, house parent role that some assume is part of their job description.
I also think it’s worth noting–because it seems to be widely overlooked–that in the video, along with affirming the importance of free speech, NC continually states that he is on the students’ side and that he has fought against racism throughout his career–a claim that a quick internet search seem to support. His apology for the hurt the email caused–which he reiterated even more strongly in the conversation reported in the (surprise!) slanted coverage by the The College Fix seems to be entirely within the spirit of the Salovey/Holloway email.
With that in mind, I’d argue that the Christakises are fully meeting their obligations as Masters and seem very mindful of “their positions as guides, mentors, and role models”
Last week Malvina Reynold’s “It Isn’t Nice” kept running through my head as I read the commentary on this incident. Now Bonnie Raitt’s singing “Let’s Give 'Em Something to Talk About.”
@CardinalFang - Why don’t you watch all of the videos and read the transcripts before condemning Christakis? They are contained within this thread.
Nick Christakis held essentially the same position at Harvard for four years, and Yale was happy to hire him. Maybe that says something about the difference between Harvard and Yale students.
Again, students are NOT suggesting the Christakises be fired from their ACADEMIC positions at Yale. According to wikipedia, Nicholas Christakis
The students’ position is that he shouln’t be master because he himself says (in the recording) that he has a different “vision” of what the role of a master is–and to him defending free speech is more important that making the residents of Silliman feel comfortable in the community in which they live.
@jym626 WAIT- didn’t you hear? According to the University of New Hampshire senior citizens is a biased term that needs to be stricken from that college campus instead you are to use “persons of advanced age” … so I hope you had fun at persons of advanced age day at the supermarket! ;))
I have read some comments where Erika has disenfranchised some of her residents by sending the email. If she hadnt sent it surely would have disenfranchised other students who thought otherwise. So if that was the case she was in a no win situation.
Prof. Christakis is a tenured professor, I believe, and if so can’t be fired from that job unless it’s for cause, or if the school is in financial difficulty (which Yale is not), etc… That’s a pretty high hurdle.
Now I would assume that Dean Holloway has the authority to remove him as head of Silliman College, if he so chooses, or force him to “resign”. I guess time will tell if that happens.
There are obviously some issues at Yale. If the “white girls only” incident really took place, I believe that’s nothing short of shameful. I can certainly see why Calhoun College might be a name some people take offense at (I’m agnostic on the issue: I won’t pretend I know enough to form a definite opinion). There can certainly be an atmosphere of cloying privilege in some circles at Yale (and elsewhere), according to a student from my HS and Yale freshman.
The Christiakis couple is not to blame for all of the above, and I have to side with them if only because I get the sense some people want to make scapegoats of them. I also happen to believe that they haven’t said anything which a self-respecting academic institution would consider grounds for dismissal - or, if they have, it’s not a matter of public record.
At my high school, we have professors of all stripes. One Chinese teacher is a diehard communist, the Economics faculty is right of Grover Norquist, and we have a sprinkling of anarchists. One History teacher, asked which way he’d voted on Scottish independence, told us that he didn’t believe in voting and had sent a blank ballot in after drawing a Richard on the back (“Alex Salmond will probably count that as a ‘yes,’” he added).
I have heard students take offense at statements some of our teachers have made. In such cases, students have invariably said so (giving their reasons, eloquently or otherwise), or spoken to higher-ups at the school when necessary. Never in my life have I seen a classmate try to shout down an opinion they disagreed with - including a blatantly racist statement some years back - and I’m concerned that a group of average high-schoolers is more capable of reasoned discussion and disagreement in a civil manner than at least a few students at Yale.
;))