Last month, the University of British Columbia’s dean of arts was “thrilled” to present an interim report addressing the needs of her faculty’s future. It envisions an equity-centred plan and emphasizes themes including reconciliation and decolonization, justice, equity and inclusion. It denounces current evaluations of merit as outdated and ableist, foresees merit in alignment with decolonizing efforts, and urges that inclusion and equity practices must be integral to merit, promotion and tenure decisions.
This is a political agenda, not an academic one. If implemented it would entrench a vision from which departure would not be tolerated; indeed assessment, merit, promotion and tenure would depend upon adherence to it. The agenda is incompatible with academic freedom.
Some of the language in the plan should be noted. Central to the document is decolonization, which is not a term of self-evident meaning. It rests, too often, upon a simplified division of a large and diverse Canadian population into Indigenous peoples and settlers, diminishes the latter, and contemplates a wide range of measures some of which would undermine Canadian federalism.
The denunciation of current evaluations as ableist is also troubling. The dictionary definition is discrimination against the disabled — discrimination that has been greatly reduced by the commitment of people and money, in universities and other institutions, to provide better and more equal access to facilities and resources. Ablest may also describe assessments that reward abilities as historically measured in universities — by grades for students, and by research, teaching and community service for faculty. The case was not made that these are outdated and need to be replaced or supplemented by equity measures.
I have argued, in earlier columns, that forays by universities — as institutions — into politics are unwise.
A pluralist society features many differences about what good public policy entails, and universities should accommodate debate on them without committing their names to a side or sides in the debate. It is worth emphasizing and re-emphasizing that universities are about teaching and research and the institutional policies and supports that allow them to flourish. Among them are institutional independence and neutrality, which enable them to transcend differences in order to maintain wide and nonpartisan public support.
Our universities have fallen short here — sometimes issuing statements on issues of the day, sometimes siding, or appearing to side, with anti-Israeli protesters, and occasionally committing themselves on social justice issues. Into this mix comes the leadership of UBC’s arts faculty with the political agenda described here. Arts faculty members should say no to the plan, or the university’s senior administration should do so.
National Post
Peter MacKinnon has served as the president of the University of Saskatchewan, Athabasca University and Dalhousie University.