Johns Hopkins University leaders today articulated the university's position on the issuance of official public statements. Committing to a "posture of restraint," they noted that university statements should be made "only in the limited circumstances where an issue is clearly related to a direct, concrete, and demonstrable interest or function of the university."
President Ron Daniels, Provost Ray Jayawardhana, and the deans of the university's nine academic divisions and the Sheridan Libraries addressed the topic in a message to Hopkins faculty earlier today.
While the university has traditionally taken a constrained approach to issuing statements, today's message commits more fully and publicly to a policy of restraint.
University leaders are often called on to make institutional statements addressing a broad range of global, national, and local issues. These requests, they note, "are usually grounded in a sense of connection to the values and purpose of our university and our common humanity."
The number of such requests has increased in recent years on a broad range of topics—human rights violations, acts of discrimination, incidents of targeted violence and military conflicts, changes in health regulations and natural disasters, among others. But the practice of issuing statements on these topics can be at odds with the university's function as a place for open discourse and the free exchange of ideas.
"The very idea of an 'official' position of the university on a social, scientific, or political issue runs counter to our foundational ethos—articulated most clearly in our Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom—to be a place where competing views are welcomed, challenged, and tested through dialogue and rigorous marshalling of evidence," they wrote. "The university is the site, more than any other institution in our society, where the process of truth-seeking through intense and open contestation is given pride of place. Although institutional statements may feel warranted, consoling, or, at times, even necessary to guide the university through difficult moments, experience has shown that they can be counterproductive, and even at odds with our core mission."
Among the related considerations, university leaders added, these statements can create a perception that there are approved, broadly held institutional views on political or social issues, views that don't always align with those held by some members of the Hopkins community. Additionally, statements may seem performative or insufficient, with the potential to "excuse the absence of meaningful action to bring the community together in challenging moments, take up difficult questions, and learn, discuss, and debate together in a mutually respectful and supportive manner." They may also unintentionally suggest that "the only, or best, avenue for engaging with issues is to make public statements, obscuring that there are more effective ways to make change in the world."
The dedication to restraint applies to university statements from the president, provost, and deans. It does not apply to individual faculty members in their scholarly or personal capacity. In fact, one intent of the commitment is to extend the broadest possible scope to the views and expressions of faculty, bolstering faculty in the exercise of their freedom to share insights and perspectives without being concerned about running counter to an "institutional" stance.
Moving forward, in considering whether and when to issue a statement, university leaders will determine whether the issue clearly pertains to the "direct, concrete, and demonstrable interest or function of the university." Determinations will ultimately fall to an internal working group including senior members of the president's and provost's staff.
Johns Hopkins will also respond to tragedy and controversy in other ways that more closely align with JHU's strengths and mission of "creating knowledge, engaging with ideas, and bringing discoveries and care to the world." This includes creating educational programming that addresses difficult topics and, when appropriate, offering direct support for those most affected, university leaders said.
"Ours is an extraordinary institution, a place furthered by the courageous interrogation and boundless discovery of our colleagues. The project of the university as an institution is to create the conditions for that exploration, discovery, and engagement—even for controversial or disquieting ideas," they wrote. "Against that overarching and foundational goal, we believe that the policy of restraint to which we are now committing ourselves is timely, principled, and critical for the continuing relevance and mission of our university."
Posted in University News, Politics+Society
