The Bitterman saga: more opinions, but no new facts
The Des Moines Register ran an editorial today about Steve Bitterman’s firing (see also here) from Southwestern Community College in Red Oak. Bitterman says he was fired because he told students that the biblical “garden of Eden” story shouldn’t be interpreted literally (read: as accurate historical reporting); students say it was because he was hostile and derogatory toward them. The unsigned editorial takes Southwestern to task for their secrecy in this matter. Bitterman is talking, students are talking, but the administration is keeping quiet except for some bureaucratic doublespeak. The silence is deafening. The editorial reaches this conclusion:
For faculty and students, institutions of higher education should be havens for free inquiry into the most controversial topics. It’s outrageous if Bitterman’s expression of his interpretation of a biblical passage figured in his dismissal.
Yet, neither should anyone in America – in a classroom or elsewhere – be belittled for their religious beliefs. Giving free rein to discussion doesn’t mean condoning a lack of civility, or worse, harassment.
One thing, though, is crystal clear: This story sends a message to all college students in Iowa that if your instructor says something offensive, you can complain and maybe get the instructor fired.
That is a very dangerous message to send when it comes to higher education – a place where students should be exposed to new ideas and have their thoughts challenged.
In my estimation, those last two paragraphs are key. With all due respect to my students, whom I love, it’s galling to think that 18-year-olds would have that much power over a 60-year-old professor’s (even an adjunct professor’s) livelihood (if $1,700 per course—Bitterman’s wages—is a “livelihood”). (A related DMR editorial, signed by Andie Dominick, takes aim at the “helicopter parents” who took their complaints to the administration.) And it’s even more galling to think that a college would shield students from exposure to ideas contrary to those they already hold. That’s sort of the whole point. Education doesn’t happen when all that happens in reinforcement of your current ideas.
6 comments Christopher Heard | teaching and learning
Dr. Heard,
I did try to prevent this kind of event by having a disclaimer/discovery session at the beginning of the first class — warning that I had earned my reputation for being tough, but fair. I let them know I would occasionally toss out something I knew to be false, to see if anyone was listening. I would often put trick questions on tests as a means seeing if they were paying attention (but unknown to them I never counted wrong answers).
I demanded the highest standards, required them to show their work, and insisted they be able to defend their answers. Not in a confrontational way, although I am certain you could get a dissenting opinion from more than one student.
I agree with your heading, no new facts. You and I have also been adjunct faculty in the past, so there is some kind of solidarity there with Bitterman.
I hope that cooler heads will prevail, and he will be rehired — perhaps as a somewhat wiser teacher. I also hope the dean of students has had a serious talk with those involved — they did not show the school in a good light.
Just imagine the uproar if he’d been discussing pregnant virgins.
This says nothing good about those who run the college. It would also suggest that a degree from that institution is a thing of small worth.
By all means, he should sue.
Oh great, a new crop of bush appointees are graduating soon.
I’m sure there is more to the story that has come out. It’s kind of shocking that a teacher would be fired SOLELY based on a comment about the Genesis story. If I had to guess, I’d say the reasons go much deeper and that this is what would make the biggest headline.
I definitely do not agree that a professor, adjunct or not, should lose his job based on his opinion. Now, if that instructor was bashing his students for holding a dissenting view, then something should be done. I have a feeling there is more here than meets the eye, and I am equally certain that one could what few facts we have here and go whichever direction they want to go with them.
It’s pretty obvious that all parties involved have their share of poor behavior in this: offensive teacher, students uninterested in such, and an administration that wants to avoid any controversy that could effect their income. Each acted properly, in their own eyes. It’ll be interesting to hear more of the details, if they ever emerge.
In the end, unless one is a deliberately offensive and belittling instructor, there’s no danger. That seems to be the consistent report of the students, and should be taken seriously.