Nicholas Damask has taught for decades at Scottsdale Community College in Arizona.
Recently, in a political ideologies course with a module on Islamic terrorism, he included in a quiz some questions about … Islamic terrorism.
One student complained, saying the questions were “in distaste of Islam.”
College officials immediately drafted an apology to the student for the professor to sign. They insisted Damask must promise to go through all his materials to make sure nothing else was “offensive.”
Enter the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education and the U.S. Constitution, and the college now is apologizing to the professor.
“I’m happy that the Maricopa Community College governing board has acknowledged the importance of the First Amendment and academic freedom, even into subjects that may be controversial – without that freedom of thought and inquiry, America just isn’t America anymore,” Damask said in a statement released by FIRE.
Scottsdale Community College is under the umbrella of Maricopa Community Colleges.
College officials even wanted Damask to meet with an Islamic leader to “review” the course content.
“The quiz questions asked about the context in which terrorism is justified by some in the Islamic religion, where in Islamic doctrine and law terrorism is encouraged by those who justify it, and who terrorists believe they are emulating, based on the material assigned in the course,” FIRE said.
In a letter raising First Amendment concerns, the college changed course.
“Colleges can’t take away a professor’s academic freedom rights because they want to stem criticism on social media,” said Katlyn Patton, author of FIRE’s letter.
MCCCD interim Chancellor Steven R. Gonzales has issued an apology.
“I apologize, personally, and on behalf of the Maricopa Community Colleges, for the uneven manner in which this was handled and for our lack of full consideration for our professor’s right of academic freedom,” he said.
Gonzales said the initial response was to online posts about the questions.
“The questions were taken out of context from a unit examining violent political and social movements, and the subject they addressed – the reliance of certain violent groups on religious texts as a justification for their actions – was within the scope of the course.”
People who commented on the controversy, who were not in the class, “made threats against the faculty member,” Gonzales said.
“I am troubled by what appears to be a rush to judgment in how the college responded to the controversy and the apparent failure to follow policy and procedure in addressing both the student’s concerns and the faculty member’s rights.”
Gonzales also announced an independent investigation and the formation of a committee “to champion academic freedom education and training and to resolve academic freedom disputes in the hope of ensuring this fundamental academic value is better understood and realized alongside our longstanding commitment to the value of inclusion.”
The questions were: “Who do terrorists strive to emulate? Mohammed. Where is terrorism encouraged in Islamic doctrine and law? The Medina verses. Terrorism is [blank] in Islam. Justified within the context of jihad.”
FIRE had warned the college that even the investigation of First Amendment-protected communications could itself be a violation of the First Amendment.
