Unless a student is a raving racist or a completely out of touch conspiracy theorist, the student should never be worried about being browbeaten because of political views when sitting down with an instructor.

At some point in your college career — if you haven’t already — you are going to have to visit the office of an instructor for one reason or another. For some, particularly incoming freshman or the shy and timid type, this can be a daunting experience.

As a former teaching assistant, I encoutered many a timid student, so I speak from experience.

Like any student, I too have traversed the halls of acedemia. But since I was once a TA, I have spent significant time in the halls that actually house the faculty offices. A disturbing phenonmenon I noticed was that many of those faculty office doors were festooned with political cartoons, slogans and articles — many of which took particularly strident partisan political stances.

I think politicizing one’s office at a university is completely inappropriate. My view on this has nothing to do with the political views espoused. Rather, I am concerned about the effect such politicizing may have on young, impressionable students. After all, the primary function of an instructor is to educate students, to open young minds and give them the tools to make their own informed opinions.

Another function is to help, prod and even nurture their students, not indulge publicly (and thus professionally) in personal political crusades. Plastering one’s office door with highly charged political material is doing just that — and it is not appropriate.

Faculty who indulge in office door politics should realize that not all of their students share their political views. Indeed, there is a risk — perhaps small — that some students might be made to feel uncomfortable, or even intimidated, by faculty whose office doors are festooned with material that heaps scorn and ridicule on the values or political views that the student may hold dear.

It is par for the course to discuss current events, politics and other loaded and sensitive topics in the humanities, for example.

For argument’s sake, let’s imagine that an ultra-right-wing professor (I know, a conservative professor in the humanities sounds like an oxymoron, but let’s just pretend) gave an assignment dealing with the war in Iraq — a war he supported. Or maybe the assignment was about abortion. Let’s also imagine that one of his students holds an opposing view. Let’s further pretend that this student decided to visit the instructor in order to get feedback and guidance regarding her paper.

The minute she arrives at Professor Schmo’s office, she encounters stridently right-wing, conservative political cartoons and articles that lambaste her own views mercilessly. Perhaps she finds herself intimidated before she’s even opened her mouth? Maybe she worries that she might be ridiculed because of her views, which stand in sharp opposition to the views of her instructor? Or worse, maybe she’ll begin to question her own ability to develop sophisticated opinions on important, complex issues. After all, sage Schmo — far more educated than she — obviously disagrees with her. Perhaps, then, she is wrong and he is right?

Or, maybe she begins to worry that Schmo may quietly dislike her as a person? Again, she was opposed to the war in Iraq and she is pro-choice; professor Schmo’s office door literature makes it clear where he stands on the war, and that he thinks abortion is murder.

Does that mean he would consider her a murderer, or supporter of murder? She wonders about this. Worse, she worries that she could be penalized grade-wise because of her opposing views.

Professor Schmo might be professional to a T when it comes to dispassionately grading a student on the merit of their work — and nothing else — but if the student doesn’t know this, and if the student’s mind is filled with all sorts of worries and anxieties owing to an instructor’s office door literature, then a terrible wrong has been committed.

Unless a student is a raving racist or a completely out of touch conspiracy theorist, the student should never be worried about being browbeaten because of political views when sitting down with an instructor.

Yes, students should be challenged, their minds opened to new ideas, but they should not feel coerced in the process. Plastering an office door with strident political messages is subtly coercive, or maybe not so subtle? Either way, it has no place in academia.

The flipside to the above argument is also important: Faculty members have a right to freedom of speech, to express their views. Nevertheless, they would do well to keep in mind the unique role they play in the intellectual development of their students. They are educators, not indoctrinators.

As spring semester revs up, let this be food for thought for faculty members who have already politicized their office doors or are thinking about doing it.

As for the students: Never be intimidated by your instructors. Instructors are there for you, not the other way around. If you have dissenting views, that is OK.

A good instructor, of which UWM is richly endowed — will not mind, nor will he or she hold it against you.

> Comments