The AAUP's statement firmly denounces mandatory use of trigger warnings. Administrators must not require teachers to "warn" students about potentially objectionable material
Friday, September 12, 2014
Trigger Warnings a Threat to Academic Freedom, Says AAUP
The AAUP's statement firmly denounces mandatory use of trigger warnings. Administrators must not require teachers to "warn" students about potentially objectionable material
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
This complaint from the AAUP identifies and articulates a portion of a problem that I have been struggling to articulate for a long time. It is a result of the desire on the part of our society to create an environment of emotional safety and comfort in a world that is too often brutal and desensitizing world. This desire and instinct, I believe, is a good and honorable one, but when intention is pushed forward without thought, it creates an environment where people fear offending individuals more than they fear the stagnation of ideas and education. Granted, this desire was not forced down anyone's throat, but I fear that the reaction by the AAUP will be interpreted as a sinister, rather than a well-intentioned, action. Let's hope it doesn't play out that way. (TLDR; Sometimes being educated causes discomfort, and without discomfort, I personally believe, we don't grow as individuals.
Aaah I'm kinda conflicted about this. On one hand, exposure to potentially controversial content, education and free speech are all wonderful and important, and things that are at the top of my "Stuff that we should protect and support" list.
On the other hand, a part of me feels like if a student has experienced a traumatic event and that PTSD symptoms can be triggered by specific content, then maybe we should be careful about that. The more I think about it, the more I think that protecting individual students is important but educating entire groups of students does take precedence. Which means that it's up to that student to go out of their way to research the material that they are asked to survey in class to see if it's something that would be too traumatic for them to read/watch. But then, should they be exempt from it for that reason?
Ultimately, I agree with Asa that academic, intellectual and individual growth are too valuable to be compromised by imposing trigger warning rules on professors. I guess I wish there was a solution for those students who might've needed those trigger warnings. Perhaps guidelines that encourage professors to be understanding and accomodating?
I agree with the AAUP that trigger warnings are detrimental to learning because it does create an environment that precludes a student to not be excited about learning. All students should have the chance to be excited to learn about a topic, whether it is controversial or not (or weather they are excited because it is controversial) without the teacher prefacing it with trigger warnings.
I do acknowledge what Camille is saying about teachers being understanding of the triggers and perhaps exempting students, but I worry that students would abuse this if teachers used it. They'd fake having a traumatic event to get out of doing the project. That would either work and be unfair for the rest of the students, or, if they get caught, ruin it for the students who actually have had a traumatic experience. I don't know how we could fix that.
What I do know is that parents can be brutal when they think their little Johnny has heard something that might offend him or be traumatic to him; weather or not it's true is irrelevant. There are plenty of parents out there who don't understand that their kids need to be able to learn and experience all subjects so they can learn and grow. It's really good that the AAUP has stopped the mandatory trigger warnings. I hope that some of the parents can be accepting of this and let the teachers teach what their kids need to learn.
I agree with the AAUP that mandatory trigger warnings are a threat to academic and intellectual freedom. The world is a pretty ugly place sometimes, and "protecting" students from even reading about tough subjects just negates the values of literature. Every important book that has ever been written has dealt with difficult, sometimes horrifying subjects, because literature is one of the ways that we learn how to deal with this. With that being said, there are always exceptions. If a student has legitimate PTSD and would be severely affected by a certain subject, they should address the issue with their professor. It is conceivable that it might not be a good idea to make a student who was recently raped read a book with a graphic rape scene in it. This is a decision that could only be made on a case-by-case basis, depending on the professor, the course, the book, and the student. I'm sure that some professors would be willing to make accommodations, and others would not- that's their prerogative as teachers, just as it is the student's responsibility to advocate for themselves if they do need special accommodations. There are certainly people who have legitimate needs for such things, but treating students as a whole as fragile flowers who must be protected from even the thoughts of terrible things is ultimately detrimental to the goals of education.
Education is important. That is a given. Not only does it widen one's perspectives and worldly outlooks, it increases potential job opportunities, and amplifies the amount of respect a person is given. However, by no means is Education the most important thing. I strongly believe in the idea that health is always the number one priority. If a person isn't healthy, much less matters. Therefore I think it's ridiculous that one wouldn't be warned about PTST triggers. Furthermore the desire of the faculty to warn students about potential triggers should have nothing to do with their fear of potential charges, and everything to do with their desire to protect the health and sanity of their students. While academic and intellectual engagement is important, it is by no means even comparable to the necessity of health or mental sanity. If somebody could potentially experience a relapse or go through an emotional turmoil because of an academic trigger it is NECESSARY that the students be made aware of this possibility so they can make the decision for themselves if they feel comfortable being exposed to that. Mental health is just as important as physical health and I think it is about time people start taking it more seriously and treating it as such.
I agree with the AAUP, mandatory trigger warnings seem counterintuitive to the academic setting. Professors should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they need to warn their students, and not because they want to avoid getting trouble, but actually because they care about their students. Additionally, if someone does have PTSD, they should know what triggers them and ask the professor about the content of the class and/or inform the professor of their situation. Warning the entire class just so people don't feel uncomfortable seems very counterintuitive. It's unfortunate how society is becoming in some ways.
Like Camille, I'm conflicted about this. Education is important and students shouldn't have to be concerned about what is ok and not to say in class. The last time I was concerned about what not to say in class was a few years ago in high school. However, i also think it is important to take into account everyone's comfort, even the teachers'. Students and teachers all can go through traumatic events that they don't want to revisit. Even if they haven't, I can understand how some people wouldn't find it comfortable to talk about certain topics based on moral beliefs. However, without controversial and difficult topics being discussed in class, how would the class as a whole grow and learn to the highest extent?
Ultimately, I think the professors and students need to find a common ground at the beginning of a class.
I need a lot more information to form an opinion on this. On the surface I agree with what they are saying. I think forcing teachers to do this is likely to get the in way of education and is unnecessary most of the time. But that’s most of the time not all of the time. It definitely has no place in college. If by the time you are in college you can’t read an article because t offends you there is probably something you need to deal with that is not the fault of the professor. I feel the same way about high school although it is definitely more debatable. Before high school though I could see it being applicable. If you are going to show something graphic to middle-schoolers you should probably warn them first. Trigger warning have a place but it is not in higher education.
First, I think there's a huge difference between letting students know that a film being shown in class has a rather graphic rape scene, and that they may want to close their eyes/leave the room etc., and providing a trigger warning about, for example, discussing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict because it "may be hard". I basically trust professors to understand and respect that difference, and if they don't seem to be able to, perhaps sensitivity training on a case-by-case basis may be helpful. Ultimately though, life doesn't have trigger warnings and it cannot be the society's job to buffer the individual from unpleasant or even traumatic discussions. I sympathize with people suffering from PTSD and don't want to make their lives needlessly difficult or traumatic, but if we keep preemptively making accommodation the standard, students cannot grow as people or as academics.
I personally believe that trigger warnings are unnecessary in education, but that being said, there are people who need them. Most of our society has be desensitized to gore and violence through the film and TV industry. People have the ability to laugh at movies like Saw 4 and Cabin In The Woods (don't judge me). With what is shown in movies, why is gore such a problem?
I took a forensics class once, and he gave one warning: "This class is full of dead people. If you cannot handle it, drop the class." It was a fair warning because the pictures became gorier as we went through the year.
That being said, emotional triggers can sometimes be missed. Survivors of sexual assault can be triggered by things that no one would thing of, for example: someone getting ticked off and tapping their finger, or pictures of tall buildings with dark alley ways in between them. It's impossible to protect everyone from possible triggers. It is still a nice gesture when people try, but it doesn't particularly work.
Education is traumatic. If all your education succeeds to do is re-enforce your narrow view of things, then it is, by definition, not educational. Trigger warnings are a dismaying sign of our culturally and politically divided times, and a general lack of critical thinking capacity on the part of our leaders and citizens. What we are talking about, here, are ideas, after all. We're not talking about forced labor. If a student is incapable of participating in the presentation and discussion of an idea, any idea, no matter how foreign or repulsive to them, then they have no place in a classroom. Of course they have every need to be in the classroom, but better they are absent than their presence limit opportunities for the other students. Trigger warnings demean the institution and degrade the quality of discussion possible therein. The basis of education is critical thinking: the ability to consider and idea or problem, break it down into its constituent parts, and evaluate its merit based on the most comprehensive understanding you can muster. As a student, educator, or legislator, if you can't seem to figure out this basic skill, please step aside and find something productive to do with your lives. We have quite enough ignorance in the world as it is.
This article has articulated so many ideas that i've failed to really communicate in the past. I've always felt so mixed about trigger warnings on the internet. While I do feel that some types of trigger warnings can be valuable, (i.e. rape trigger warnings in an entertainment context) I worry about how a society would operate completely protected from the tragic reality that exists in the world. I feel like a certain level of exposure is necessary for development, however, I do understand that a certain level of trauma that is experienced creates a huge desire to not have to face those realities ever again.
The AAUP does not seem to understand the point of a trigger warning. The point is not to avoid the subject altogether, but instead to alert the students of the fact that things they may find distressing will be discussed in the class, thereby giving them the option of either not taking the class, avoiding the class on the day that topic will be discussed, or just giving them the chance to mentally prepare themselves for the distressing topic. To me, it is the theatrical equivalent of warning of strobes, or distressing topics like suicide or nudity. This seems symptomatic of the idea that metal issues are less important, or more made up, than physical ailments. We see no problem with warning of strobe lights or fog machines, which could possibly cause epilepsy or asthma attacks, but we have problems with warning of things like suicide or rape, which can set off flashbacks, anxiety attacks, depressive episodes and other issues. A trigger warning does not mean we cannot talk about the topic in question. It is just a warning so people can decide for themselves whether or not they feel strong enough on that day to attend the discussion. The only benefit I see to not trigger warning is if, for some reason, the teacher wished to surprise the class with a discussion or showing of a distressing topic. As someone who was once sent into a depressive episode because I was unexpectedly shown a performance about someone contemplating suicide, even a warning about what is going to happen can give the viewer time to brace and prepare themselves, which can make all the difference.
There's nothing I hate more than the constriction of educational content because of potential trigger warnings. If the teacher knows how to explain said 'triggering material' in a manner that demystifies and de-horrorizes it, there should be no problem. Schools are supposed to and should be objective; children receive all the bias they could ever want at home or among friends. I'm very glad the AAUP has come out with statements like these, because for the longest time all I have seen in the news are articles about the PA protesting against the material or content in '1984' or 'The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn'. It's nice to finally see an article that advocates the "defense of academic freedom and unrestricted speech", as the article summarizes.
I agree with the AAUP that giving students trigger warnings for any sort of "objectionable" material they may want to introduce in discussion, impedes intellectual growth. There are so many things in the world that are uncomfortable and challenging to talk about, but that doesn't mean that they should be off limit, especially in the classroom. Allowing students to pick and chose when to have challenging discussions is a disservice to them and to their education. I do think that students should be able to speak to professors about not participating if there are extenuating circumstances, but there shouldn’t be a blanket policy for everyone.
This is definitely a very controversial subject, right down to my own opinion on it. I am very torn between the belief that the classroom should be a comfortable place to learn and the feeling that we have begun to shelter our students a little too much.
In high school, there were certain subjects I had to be very careful about discussing when leading Gay-Straight Alliance meetings. Many of the students in the club used it as a form of support when struggling with issues many LGBTQ students face in high school: bullying, depression, and a few instances of suicidal thoughts or attempts. As head, it was my job to collaborate with our faculty sponsors on what was appropriate or inappropriate to discuss/show during club meetings. There was a very fine line, we found, between things that ought to be shown for the education of our members and things that simply would have been too much of a trigger for the students in the club.
I think the same fine line exists in a normal classroom experience: if it is important to the education of the people in the room, then it ought to be shown, you just have to be sure to warn the students in the room of any potential triggers, because these things can be very serious.
Post a Comment