Officials from Columbia University’s Ad Hoc Grievance Committee released the results of an internal investigation March 31 pursuing allegations of intimidation by professors in its Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures program, finding no evidence of anti-Semitism or intimidation.
Results from the report come from an investigation beginning December 2004, when administrators at Columbia were confronted with a film created by the pro-Israeli David Project in October 2004, called “Columbia Unbecoming.” The film highlights the testimony of 14 Jewish Columbia students who claim professors had menaced their views.
The film was initially presented privately to Columbia administrators but later released publicly when students realized the university would not act.
In a statement, university President Lee C. Bollinger called the report a thoughtful and comprehensive review that deserved Columbia’s full attention.
“The Committee’s work and report help sustain our trust in the absolutely critical norm of peer review,” Bollinger said. “[It] calls upon those of us in the community of scholars to put aside personal and political views and conduct objective evaluations of scholarship and teaching.”
The committee, advised by famous First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, also investigated allegations against two specific professors in Columbia’s MEALAC department. The most serious of those, was made against Joseph Massad, a non-tenured professor accused by Columbia student Deena Shanker.
Shanker claimed in a testimony to the committee that Massad yelled at her after she asked if it was true Israel sometimes gives warning before bombing certain areas and building so as to avoid collateral damage.
“At this, professor Massad blew up, yelling, ‘If you’re going to deny the atrocities being committed against Palestinians, then you can get out of my classroom’,” Shanker said.
According to the findings, Massad has denied ever asking a student to leave the class.
Additionally, teaching assistants and an undergraduate also do not remember Massad’s outburst.
Still, the committee found it was believable Massad had become angered to a question and responded in turn and called the event inconsistent with a professor’s scholarly obligations.
Those included, “‘[an obligation to] show respect for the right of other[s] to hold opinions differing from their own,’ to exercise ‘responsible self-discipline,’ and ‘to demonstrate appropriate restraint.'”
While, many have pointed to anti-Semitism, others have designated the incidents at Columbia as a matter of academic and political correctness.
Rabbi Charles Sheer, former director of Hillel’s Columbia chapter, said he did not consider the events at Columbia to be related to anti-Semitism, but more so to how the Middle East was being taught at Columbia.
“It’s being taught from an advocacy position and not a pure academic one,” Sheer said.
More precisely, Sheer cited that some MEALAC professors cancelled class to allow students to allow a pro-Palestinian rally at which they were speaking.
“Encouraging students to come to this rally as if the department was supporting the cancellation of class to support [a pro-Palestinian agenda],” Sheer said. “You couldn’t do that for Hillel or pro-Israeli rally either.”
While many have focused on the anti-Semitism issue, Abrams pointed out the study was not intended to act on any issue of anti-Semitism, though it is mentioned in a single line.
Rather, Abrams said the real meaning of the investigation was to bring light to an absent mechanism for students to hold grievances and to make it clear there were limitations on faculty academic freedom.
“The committee made it clear as a general matter … it’s very important for faculty to teach in a way they think best,” Abrams said. “But they ought not do it and many not do it in a way that amounts to harassment.”
