cu boulder

Fans of House of Cards, whose third season debuts on Netflix tomorrow, love and hate Frank Underwood for his amoral and relentless pursuit of self-interest, no matter whom he hurts.

The University of Colorado-Boulder administration is giving Underwood a stiff challenge in the amorality category for its utter indifference to either rape victims or students accused of rape.

Check out the terms of its settlement with a student who sued the school for violating his due-process rights after he was accused of rape, according to Colorado Daily:

The University of Colorado has agreed to pay a suspended male student $15,000 and will not disclose without a waiver the details of his disciplinary record — which includes convictions under the campus judicial process in a 2013 sexual assault case. …

The university will not reveal his identity to the public and agreed to provide John Doe with a positive reference.

John Doe agreed to withdraw from the university.

“In response to any question about whether Mr. Doe would be welcome back to the university, the university will respond in the affirmative,” CU officials write in the settlement agreement. “In response to any question about Mr. Doe’s academic standing at the university during his tenure there, the university will respond, ‘Prior to his withdrawal, Mr. Doe was a student in good academic standing.'”

Here’s what that means, says Samantha Harris at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education:

Scenario 1: CU does not actually think that Doe is a sexual offender or any kind of threat to other students, but it subjected him to an unfair process and found him responsible because it was under pressure from a federal investigation by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) into its sexual misconduct policies and practices. This would suggest that CU cares more about its own interests than about whether students are actually guilty of the offenses of which they are accused.

Scenario 2: CU does think that Doe is a sexual offender and has nevertheless agreed—by promising him a positive reference and agreeing to remain vague about his disciplinary record—to make it easier for him to go someplace else (and possibly commit another offense) in order to make this lawsuit go away. This would suggest that CU is willing to put students at other schools at risk of sexual assault from a known offender to further its own interests.

It’s just a business decision, the school says. Harris calls BS on that:

For those watching at home, yes, CU just called potentially clearing the way for an alleged rapist to continue his crimes on another campus “a prudent use of the university’s resources.” Please, tell us again how we can trust universities to serve as a victim-friendly alternative to the criminal justice system.

Read the Daily story and FIRE’s analysis.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Netflix

Another “John Doe” is suing another university for violating his rights.

The Denver Post reports that “his lawyers write in the complaint that CU’s ‘investigation was slanted in favor of Jane Doe and took her statements at face-value, while mischaracterizing John Doe’s statements.'”

The student’s lawsuit contends his civil rights were violated under Title IX, and that he was “wrongfully accused and suspended for three semesters after a night of consensual sex,” the Post reports.

The Post adds:

In the complaint against CU-Boulder, the male student’s attorneys write that investigators from CU’s Office of Student Conduct were employed to prosecute campus sexual assault, not to gather evidence in an unbiased way.

“When questioning John Doe throughout the process, their line of questioning was hostile in nature, more akin to cross-examination in tenor, and desired to (elicit) a confession, rather than an objective attempt to factually reconstruct an event,” according to the complaint.

CU officials have defended campus investigatory processes in the past as neutral and fact-finding in nature.

Add this lawsuit to the very long and continually growing list of complaints against universities for violating young men’s due process rights and railroading them after dubious and flimsy allegations of sexual assault.

Even the New York Times is getting on the bandwagon, reporting last week that a “database maintained by a group called A Voice for Male Students counted 11 lawsuits this year in which male students ‘wrongly accused of sex crimes found themselves hustled through a vague and misshapen adjudication process with slipshod checks and balances and Kafkaesque standards of evidence.'”

“At a moment when students who have been sexually assaulted are finding new ways to make their voices heard, and as college officials across the country are rushing to meet new government standards, a specialized class of lawyers is raising its voice, too. They are speaking out on behalf of the students they describe as most vulnerable: not those who might be subjected to sexual assault, but those who have been accused of it,” the Times reports. “To do so, they have appropriated the legal tools most commonly used to fight sexual misconduct and turned them against the prosecution, confronting higher education’s whole approach to the issue, which they describe as a civil rights disaster.”

Civil rights disaster indeed. Until campuses stop trivializing rape, more and more lawsuits like this will be filed.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

Campus leaders at the University of Colorado Boulder are leaning against renaming two newly renovated campus residence halls “Nowoo3” and “Houusoo,” saying the English versions of the Native American words will be “more easily recognized and referenced” by pretty much everyone.

CU spokesman Ryan Huff said this week that university leaders stand by an earlier proposal to name the buildings Little Raven and Niwot halls. But the CU Board of Regents recently delayed a decision on the matter as emotions run high and officials voice concerns about hurt feelings and cultural sensitivity.

“I think we need to treat this very delicately,” said Steve Ludwig, a Democratic member of the CU Board of Regents, reports The Daily Camera. “We might not make everyone happy, but I’d like to just double check and make sure.”

Huff, the campus spokesman, said in an emailed statement to The College Fix that “while some faculty members expressed their preference to use the Arapaho language, the CU Boulder administration has remained committed to the original proposal of using the English spellings.”

He added the original names are “more easily recognized and referenced” by students, faculty, emergency responders and campus visitors.

Last year it was decided that the newly remodeled Kittredge Central was to be renamed Little Raven Hall, and likewise Kittredge West was to become Niwot Hall. Chief Niwot and Chief Little Raven are Arapaho chiefs known for their peaceful methods in dealing with early American pioneers and settlers.

But those names apparently did not go far enough.

The dorms were tapped to be re-renamed last winter to Nowoo3 and Houusoo after the CU Planning Board approved the proposal in the wake of ethnic studies professors and others on campus pushing for the name change.

“While the orthographies might initially seem foreign or hard to understand to non-Arapahos and non-Natives, choosing to spell Nowoo3 as Niwot would be equivalent to spelling Charles de Gaulle’s name phonetically (Sharl duh Gahl), which is culturally chauvinist and clearly primitivizing in a Native American context,” a letter to the planning board had stated.

Professors affiliated with the CU Boulder Native American and Indigenous Studies department were not happy about the “Anglicization” of the chiefs’ names, the letter stated. According to these professors, anglicized or phonetic spellings of the chief’s names are not sufficient enough in honoring their memory, The College Fix reported in December.

“Neither phonetic spellings (Hosa, Niwot) nor literal translations … of these options seems culturally sensitive and attuned to the unique political status of Native Americans and Arapahos in Colorado, specifically,” the letter stated. “Houusoo and Nowoo3 were the names these pivotally important and pacifist-oriented chiefs were known by, and we should honor them in their own languages in their own home (i.e., Boulder).”

Thomas Lifson of American Thinker criticized the decision at the time, and said the professors may have crossed the line of cultural sensitivity and into the realm of ridiculousness, despite good intentions.

But not everyone is thrilled with campus leaders’ leanings to use the English language.

“We need to reframe the way we think about our academic endeavor,” Penny Kelsey, an associate professor of English and ethnic studies, told The Daily Camera. “We’re here through the grace and permission of the Arapaho and Cheyenne people. This is their traditional territory and this, in fact, would be honoring them to use their language.

“Wouldn’t it be sad if students came here for a four- or five-year education and they weren’t able to learn two words, two proper names, in the indigenous language? Let’s set the bar a little higher.”

College Fix reporter Andrew Desiderio is a student at The George Washington University.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Wally G./Flickr

A story in the Daily Camera on Tuesday described how some “CU Boulder alums” are upset about the school’s upcoming “Football 101 For Women” clinic. The story then proceeds to quote three feminist alumni who are insulted at the very idea!

Yeah, because every woman can easily articulate the difference between a 3-4 defense and a Cover 2 defense.

As a woman, I am not ashamed to admit that most men who grew up watching, playing – and in some cases living and breathing – football, know more about the intrinsics of the game than I do.

But one woman, a talent agency VP, called the clinic a “slap in the face.” Another “brand strategist and lifelong athlete,” chimed in with: “It seems very medieval or backwards.” Said the third feminist, a LGBTQ activist:  “Being a woman, I know I need some education in football, but I also have several male friends who need education in football. I don’t think we stand alone.”

OK, that last comment is at least a coherent response. But ultimately, is it so wrong to offer women a class that, let’s face it, many if not most could benefit from? As someone who has watched NFL games nearly every Sunday for the last umpteen years, of course I get the basics, but so much of the nuances of the game and its complexity are over my head.

Being a strong woman is also being willing to admit when you don’t know something. And why do feminists always have to presume to speak for all women?

CU athletic department spokesman Dave Plati told the Daily Camera the university has hosted the class since the mid-1990s and has never received complaints about it. Many other campuses across the nation offer similar clinics, including Notre Dame and the University of Southern Mississippi.

“You won’t hear about the very basics of the game, such as a touchdown is worth six points,” Plati told the Camera.

The three-hour class includes a film study, and it taught by Coach Mike MacIntyre and other CU football coaches.

“The ladies really enjoyed it, it gives them more knowledge of the game,” MacIntyre said in a newsletter advertising the clinic, according to the Daily Camera. “They’ll learn a lot about the game, and they’ll be able to meet our staff. Some will know a lot about football, and some won’t, but either way it really helps them watch and understand the game and understand what our players go through.”

Sounds like fun – and educational – to me.

Jennifer Kabbany is editor of The College Fix. ( @JenniferKabbany )

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

A “social climate” survey recently released by the University of Colorado found that while most students and faculty feel respected in general, when it comes to their political affiliation, they often feel attacked.

Underscoring those findings, nearly two-thirds of faculty across the CU system as a whole, which includes four campuses across the state, described themselves as “liberal,” while only about 13 percent called themselves “conservative.”

The survey also found only 6 percent of CU Boulder professors identify as Republicans, while 41 percent identify as Democrats.

This disparity – a seven-fold one – is not sitting well with Sue Sharkey, a Republican who sits on the Board of Regents for the University of Colorado system.

In an interview with The College Fix, Sharkey said universities “are better places if they promote a diversity of thought across the political and philosophical spectrums, and if they engage in spirited discussion that reflects varied viewpoints.”

While there were positive findings among the survey, what worried the board, Sharkey said, is that significant numbers of students said they experienced prejudice or discrimination “sometimes” or “frequently.”

In addition, particularly on the flagship Boulder campus, many students said they are not respected when it comes to their political affiliations and political philosophies.

Even more troubling, she said, an average of 61 percent of students across all University of Colorado campuses said they would not know how to report a complaint of discrimination.

“It is my hope with the policy we have in place, any student who experiences discrimination will report to the non-discrimination and harassment office at the university,” Sharkey said.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of University of Colorado students and faculty reported they have not faced any type of discrimination, and Sharkey added that evidence of discrimination against conservative students and faculty has been mostly anecdotal.

But Sharkey said a lack of philosophical or political diversity on campus “denies students a rich and deep knowledge of ideas and thought, as well as an understanding of where, or why these ideas were born.”

“To be in an echo chamber of ideas, and opinion, is not education,” she added.

As for what actions the Board of Regents may take to curb the disparity between the numbers of Republicans and Democrats on campus, Sharkey says it’s too early to speculate on such endeavors.

“We need to process the results and prioritize action steps,” she said. “We intend to begin the process soon among the Board of Regents and our campuses.”

The study found that 96 percent of students agree that faculty members provide a respectful learning environment, and 94 percent of students said professors are tolerant of diverse opinions in the classroom.

Sharkey, whose position is elected from the 4th Congressional District of Colorado, said she is proud that the university is working to create an environment that induces learning, not discrimination.

When asked to comment on the disparity of political affiliation among students and faculty, CU’s VP for Communication Ken McConnellogue said in an email to The College Fix that the university is not responsible for the disparity among faculty.

“The law forbids hiring on the basis of protected class status,” he said. “So we could no more ask a job applicant’s political persuasion than their sexual orientation.”

College Fix contributor Andrew Desiderio is a student at The George Washington University.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Wally G./Flickr

A recently released social climate survey has found that there are seven times as many Democrat professors as Republican ones at the University of Colorado – Boulder.

Specifically, 5.7 percent of CU Boulder faculty members who took the survey identified as Republican, while 40.6 percent of professors stated they’re Democrats. The rest either identified as Independent (25.2 percent), other (10.7 percent) or declined to state (17.9 percent).

In total across the four campuses within the University of Colorado system, only 9 percent of faculty identified as Republican while nearly 42 percent identified as Democrat, the survey found. The rest either identified as Independent (24 percent), other (7.8 percent) or declined to state (17.3 percent).

A total of 9,301 participants took the survey – or more than 12 percent of the University of Colorado community, according to the pollsters who administered the University of Colorado Social Climate Survey, launched last year by the University of Colorado Board of Regents.

Specifically, the pollsters said the survey was taken by 1,984 faculty members, or 13 percent of total faculty; 2,247 staff, or 28 percent; and 5,070 students, or 10 percent of the student body.

When asked how they’d describe their political philosophy, nearly 60 percent of the faculty described themselves as “liberal,” while only about 13 percent called themselves “conservative.” About 14 percent said they were moderates, while the rest claimed “other.”

The survey was launched last fall by concerns among some Regents that the system’s academics are heavily influenced by left-leaning scholars, and that a diversity of opinions – especially conservative ones – are not allowed to flourish. They made those claims based on a large swath of anecdotal evidence.

For Regent Sue Sharkey, a Republican, the survey confirmed there is reason for alarm.

“Where is the diversity in our political affiliation or political philosophy among faculty?” Sharkey said, reports the Daily Camera. “That is a really small number, so that’s a concern. And the same with our students. As a Republican, that concerns me.”

When it came to students systemwide, 17.1 percent identified as Republican while 28.2 said they were Democrats, and coming in at first place – nearly 30 percent described themselves as Independent.

In addition to the flagship Boulder campus, the system includes the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs; the University of Colorado, Denver; and the Anschutz Medical Campus.

The survey found that most students felt the four colleges offered a “respectful learning environment” and that professors are “tolerant of diverse opinions in the classroom.”

Administrators touted these results in a campus press release, saying: “The University of Colorado has a tolerant, respectful social climate … though some areas present opportunities for improvement.”

Nevertheless, the survey found that “although in the minority, significant numbers of students, faculty, and staff, particularly students on the Boulder campus, disagreed with the premise that they are respected regardless of their political affiliations and political philosophies.”

When asked if they’ve had professors who used class time to express their own social or political beliefs completely unrelated to the subject of the course, 3 percent of students systemwide said frequently, 18.3 percent said sometimes, 35 percent said rarely, and the rest replied never.

Asked whether the University of Colorado has diversity among its students, faculty and staff when it comes to political affiliation, 65 percent of students agreed, while only 44 percent of the faculty did. But when the question was narrowed to ask specifically about whether there is diversity among professors when it comes to party affiliation, only 49 percent of students said yes, while 44 percent of faculty did.

As a result of the survey, regents are “asking the campuses and system administration to analyze the data and report on any efforts being made to address findings of concern,” CU officials state.

Meanwhile, to counter the fact that the faculty heavily leans liberal, CU Boulder has createdVisiting Scholar in Conservative Thought and Policy program.

Jennifer Kabbany is associate editor of The College Fix. ( @JenniferKabbany )

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Wally G./Flickr