The recent article "College grapples with meaning of 'bias'" (The Dartmouth, March 5) might lead some to draw inaccurate conclusions about the work that I and others have been doing. I wish to clarify my position and the work many on campus have been doing to address bias incidents. The article accurately notes that I e-mailed a report about a disturbing incident to campus administrators and staff as well as a group of student leaders. The goal of that email was to provide accurate information to the community and to mediate the potential impact of the incident. However, it is misleading to suggest that "relatively little else happens" and inaccurate for readers to assume that these actions automatically represent judgments that will limit anyone's right to express a controversial opinion or any effort to stifle free speech. The communication protocol I described to the reporter is not a part of the College's disciplinary system. It is a means of providing accurate information to members of the community, and I hope, a helpful resource for dispelling rumors.
The communication protocol is a result of many years of student, community and alumni/ae concern and was developed under the Community Action Network. The committee's members represent many areas under the Dean of the College's Office and work with students and student leaders. The protocol focuses on promoting education and prevention, timely and accurate communication and coordinating responses to incidents. This is all done to create a stronger campus safety net that protects free speech when we are addressing incidents that may otherwise polarize our campus and inhibit dialogue. Our efforts are not in isolation: A number of campuses in the United States are currently developing comprehensive and systematic approaches for addressing bias incidents.
Students have played an important role in developing features of the communication protocol. The Diversity Affairs Council of the Student Assembly has been an important partner in gathering data to develop the protocol. I have spoken twice to the Student Assembly in the past two years to provide a progress report, and I recently met with Palaeopitus senior society to review our work. Last fall we provided an orientation session about the features of a bias protocol for Undergraduate Advisors, and in the past two years we reviewed the features of a protocol with students at OPAL-sponsored Diversity Peer Program retreats. We are planning to do similar work with athletes at a retreat this summer. Over 250 students have been introduced to features of the protocol for comment.
In all of the meetings that introduced the protocol to students and staff, my colleagues and I reviewed and discussed distinctions in the definitions of bias incidents and hate crimes. We have also explained that effective and appropriate responses to bias must honor legal and constitutional standards, especially those that protect freedom of expression.
It is important to recognize that bias comes in many forms and falls on a broad continuum from protected actions and expressions to unprotected actions and expressions. At one end of the continuum, bias includes unprotected actions such as hate crimes (crimes whose penalties are increased when the crime is proven to be motivated by hate); towards the other end of spectrum are acts of discrimination, exclusion, offensive actions and expressions, stereotyping, etc. Bias can also be expressed and received in favorable and contradictory ways. For instance, a company that favors Dartmouth grads may be viewed as practicing appropriate networking to some but by others as practicing elitism and discrimination. A demeaning joke about an ethnic group may be tongue-in-cheek fun inside a group of trusted friends yet an appalling insult to strangers.
An inappropriate charge of bias can make free speech a casualty. That is why the protocol focuses on improving communication and focuses on the protection of speech and dialogue. Conversely, we also understand that being passive when hurtful and/or divisive actions arise is unacceptable in a community that values civility and free speech. I believe we can best mediate disputes if we help people to understand how to address bias incidents effectively.
I hope this letter illuminates the amount of careful work that the entire community has been doing to encourage appropriate responses to controversial messages such as the one described in the previous article in The Dartmouth.
