Dear Editor,
I refer to the allegations of wrongdoing against UG lecturer Mr Evan Radhay Persaud (‘UG students unhappy with outcome of lecturer probe’ SN, June 26). As a former union officer and student government representative and having sat on several hearings relating to allegations against academics in the US, I am familiar with the inquiry process as it occurs in American institutions. It does not seem to me that such a process is strictly adhered to in Guyana where the investigation and hearing are alleged to have been contaminated by bias.
The charge of victimization against Evan Persaud should be clear and specific, and the witnesses should be willing to give testimony to substantiate the charges or no charges should have been filed. There are cases in the US where after the faculty was cleared, the person accused successfully sought damages in a court of law.
It is not clear to me and colleagues in NY what the charges are against Mr Persaud. Simply stating that a faculty member held lectures or exams outside of campus or that he talked about sex in the classroom will not lead to any inquiry against a lecturer in an American college, much less disciplinary action. In fact, the dean or the president would laugh at the complainant. American professors can hold lectures and exams outside of the classroom and outside of campus providing there is agreement amongst the students, and accommodation is made for those who cannot attend such sessions. In addition, American professors are protected by academic freedom and can say virtually anything, including making sexual comments, and get away with it, even if they offend entire groups of people or students. The comments may be inappropriate or immoral, but a lecturer’s statements, unsavoury though they may be, are protected by free speech. I recall an African American professor at City College making incendiary comments against Jews with the College President taking disciplinary actions against him. When the Professor appealed against disciplinary action, the Faculty Senate President, a Jew himself and one of the most strident Zionist defenders of Jews, came to the defence of the African American Professor stating that although he detested what the Professor had said about Jews, he was protected by academic freedom.
When an allegation is made against a faculty member in the US, an inquiry is held to discover facts. If there is evidence, then a charge is filed and a date is scheduled for a hearing and the faculty is allowed union representation. The committee members must be fair and objective in the hearing process. The union rep must not pass judgment on the faculty member but defend him or her as a defence lawyer would in a court case.
In another case at CCNY, I and a few Haitian students (1980) when I was the student Science rep on the student government, complained to the Dean of Sciences about an Organic Chemistry Professor having affairs with female students. The dean quickly threw out our complaint saying that was a matter between consenting adults and not the college. When we complained that the female students involved got A grades while we received lower grades, the dean wanted evidence of a quid pro quo – or sex for grades. It is difficult to obtain evidence of victimization, even when one strongly feels he or she has been victimized with low grades.
Yours faithfully,
Vishnu Bisram
