Assembly LX: Free Speech, Free Expression and Free Inquiry at Yale
Friday, April 26 through Saturday, April 27, 2002
Sample Class Report

Mike Dickerson, 1960 AYA Class Delegate

Please note that in writing this report, I have plagiarized extensively from program materials provided to the delegates. It is daunting enough to have to write to a class of such intellectual achievement as ours without taking advantage of such well written material.

The assembly examined the intellectual and historical foundations of Yale's policies on free speech, while also focusing on presentations by current students and faculty about how people at Yale today actually decide what is said, written, and examined.

Yale's policy on free speech is expressed in the Woodward Report, adopted by the Yale Corporation in 1975 and amended by the Adair Report in 1989. The Woodward Report is an ardent and eloquent statement of the pre-eminent importance of free speech in an academic institution. Adopted at a time when the value of free expression was widely questioned and its exercise significantly compromised on many campuses, the Woodward Report is a defense not only of the right to speak, but also of the opportunity to hear and to learn from the expression of others.

On Friday, the delegates convened for a short report from the AYA Chair, Maureen O. Doran '71 MSN who covered AYA initiatives on:
1. New on-line services including an on-line Alumni Directory, a redesigned web site and online career services and networking area.
2. Reunion overhaul
3. Outreach to professional schools
4. Outreach to personal interest groups such as the alumni chorus and minority alumni.

The incoming AYA Chair, Phil Boyle and AYA Vice Chair Ed Dennis were introduced.

Our first general meeting consisted of an Assembly Town Meeting dealing with the issue of the Alumni Fellow election to the Yale Corporation. Maureen Doran explained the history of Rev. David Lee's petition candidacy and the process that led to the nomination of Ms. Maya Lin. What I took away from the Town Meeting was a feeling that the AYA leadership had dealt with the situation extremely carefully and did their best to create a dialogue with the assembly to discuss those decisions and get the delegates' feed back. The issues as I understood them were that in asking for petition signatures, Rev. Lee did not disclose his financial backing from the local unions nor the purportedly adversarial agenda he would bring as an Alumni Fellow to the Yale Corporation. The Alumni leadership felt an obligation to disclose these discrepancies. I am satisfied that the AYA leadership exercised their responsibilities carefully and gave everyone an opportunity to express their views or ask questions.

At the Information Session Luncheon, I learned about Administration and Budgets. In particular, our group received a detailed explanation of the labor contract negotiations going on and the Administration's efforts to minimize the public discord that usually surrounds them. Most notable of those efforts was the hiring of a facilitator for contract training and bargaining for approximately $500,000. I think that we were all impressed with the quality of the Yale personnel and their professionalism in dealing with the budget and its issues.

The first assembly session was "Of Values and Priorities: History and Practice of Free Speech at Yale." Gaddis Smith and Dean Richard Brodhead, giving an historical and present day perspective on free speech at Yale, treated us to their usual superb lectures. They are an absolute delight to listen to and the time spent going to the assembly would have been worth it for only these two talks. Afterward someone suggested that their lectures be made available through various Yale media. I hope that happens and you get to hear or read their comments. Just one example, it would have never occurred to me to think that Yale was founded on the antithesis of free speech. The message then was "study, learn and be quiet." (My words.) It is clear that Yale's policy now is to bend over backwards to encourage freedom of expression.

On Saturday morning President Richard Levin commented on the role of free speech at Yale and provided a general update on University affairs. Here are some of my notes from that session.

After September 11th, they did everything possible to encourage full debate about the tragedy and the surrounding issues.

There are several academic initiatives designed to bring science at Yale to the top levels of academic standing.

Yale has begun a new "World Fellows Program" bringing potential leaders (ages from 20 to 40) from around the globe to study together. The first group had 500 applications from 110 countries.

A Yale College curriculum review will focus on opportunities for undergraduates to capture the benefits of the entire University.

President Levin is struggling with how to eliminate early admission for high school seniors without creating a competitive disadvantage. He is seeking an opinion on whether or not it is legal to talk to other colleges about abandoning early admission.

There is a need to expand the undergraduate student body and that will probably mean two more residential colleges later in the decade.

I ended my notes on his presentation with the words, "An American Institution educating global leaders."

The second assembly session was "Principles in Practice: Student Perspectives on Free Speech at Yale." I attended the breakout session "Unspoken Words: Tacit Constraints on Free Expression at Yale." Five Yale seniors (four women and one man) who are also experienced student counselors shared their conversations about various social and cultural pressures on students. The general message was that constraints on free expression come not from any rules or formal codes, but from the desire to conform, be accepted or to avoid being a lightning rod for controversy. Again, here are some of my notes.

Students frequently make incorrect assumptions of knowledge by someone's appearance. The example given was from someone who was from Ghana being expected to be an expert on African American studies because of her color.

The students are squeamish (their word) about talking about race. White students censor themselves.

There is a stigma against talking about religion.

Women can talk openly about experimenting sexually but in doing so have offended lesbian students.

The campus is politicized to the left by a margin of 8 to 1 according to this panel. "It's hard to be anything but a liberal in the dining room." One can be ostracized for taking the middle ground! There is social pressure to take a side and an extreme position. "Don't know how to be a Republican on this campus."

It takes a lot of discipline to see both sides of an argument. (Not much has changed there has it?)

Students don't know the right words to use when talking about subjects. Being politically correct is a moving target. Examples: Instead of freshmen and freshwomen they use the word frosh! The word "gay" is being reinvented to mean something positive for the campus homosexuals.

Pre-orientation for some of the frosh minorities encourages self-segregation. They make their first friends within the minority group and are less apt to branch out quickly to other students.

Finally, "It's a daunting place to come into!"

The 1960 Class Council had a meeting at the Yale Law School, which prevented me from attending Free Speech Day at Yale and the Community Service Summer Fellowship Luncheon. Free Speech Day was billed as a kind of "Hyde Park at Yale" where alumni could see for themselves the range of opinions and depth of passions held by current Yale students. The Class Council meeting rescued me from that experience.

The Final Assembly Session was "Hard Cases: Faculty and Issues of Inquiry." My breakout session was "Collaboration and Cooperation: Academics and the World of Commerce." Dr. Robert Levine, Professor of Medicine and Lecturer in Pharmacology, and Director of the Law, Policy and Ethics Core of Yale University's Center for Interdisciplinary Research on AIDS led the session. If there was a conclusion, it was that collaborations between academics and industry bring problems, such as conflicts of interest and of commitment, but they also enhance the capabilities of individual faculty members to educate and to do scholarly research, as well as contributing in important ways to accomplishing the mission of the university. Institutional Review Boards deal with all of these issues on almost a case-by-case basis. It's hard to imagine anything getting done in an environment of such oversight, but it's obvious that it is increasingly necessary.

In summary, the AYA Spring Assembly was successful in its mission to examine free speech, free expression and free inquiry at Yale. The alumni were educated rather than just entertained and participated in the discussions with students, faculty, administrators and AYA leaders. My second session as Class Delegate was again a very positive experience.

I am most appreciative of the opportunity to serve you and Yale as Class Delegate.