While the Academic Bill of Rights is being passed nationwide, so far N.C. State has stood firm in opposition, and students and faculty have strong opinions as to why.

Jeff Woodhead, a third-year graduate student in chemical engineering, has been involved with College Democrats since the first of this semester. He said he has been active in other political matters and always followed politics closely, so he felt like he should get involved on campus.

Woodhead said he was initially attracted to the issue of the Bill of Rights because he had been following similar things for a while, and David Horowitz, the spokesperson for the bill and founder of Students for Academic Freedom, spoke at his undergraduate university.

While it wasn’t officially a bill then, Woodhead said the same basic ideas were present and he had essentially made his decision on the matter then and there.

“That wasn’t my first encounter with it, but certainly one of the more prominent ones,” he said. “I’ve had a fairly strong opinion about it ever since I heard [Horowitz].”

Woodhead said he feels that the bill is often conflicting and is trying to disguise its actual purpose.

“If you just look at this students’ bill of rights, seemingly innocuous, look at the language in it, it’s just all very well-crafted language; and then you listen to the ideas behind it,” he said. “You listen to Horowitz speak or some of the stuff that Horowitz has written and the backing material to it … it really blows the top off of what this professor censorship act accomplishes, or is set to accomplish.”

Drew Ball, a junior in political science, is the president of College Democrats and said he, along with the group, agrees with Woodhead.

“We read through the book as a group and we kept finding places that it contradicted itself and showed itself for what it really is,” he said. “It’s completely biased and it’s attempting to look unbiased.”

Ball said that after the read-through, it was easy for the group to come to a decision.

“We all pretty much came to a consensus on it, which goes to show that when people take the time to really look at it and read through it they can really understand how ridiculous it really is,” he said.

Chair of College Republicans Adam Downing is a senior in computer engineering, and although he said he isn’t sure how actively College Republicans will be supporting the bill he does think that the group is generally in favor of it.

“It provides equality for all viewpoints and allows students to be treated equally in the classroom no matter where they stand or where they come from,” he said.

Nina Allen, a professor of botany and the chair of the Faculty Senate, said faculty senators had come to a conclusion about the Academic Bill of Rights and written a resolution on it a year before it even came up in Student Senate.

“It was because we suspected the Academic Bill of Rights was going to be pushed by various groups,” she said. “The resolution was unanimous.”

The Resolution on Academic Freedom made by the Faculty Senate reaffirmed the Senate’s commitment to providing a classroom in which students and faculty could have academic freedom in both inquiry and speech, free from any legislative measures that would hinder the pursuit of knowledge and education in a scholarly manner.

The resolution also pointed out the various measures in effect protecting students’ rights already and denied that the Academic Bill of Rights was necessary or beneficial for the University.

Allen pointed to teacher evaluations every year, along with extensive, detailed syllabi and faculty, student and administration evaluation as some measures already in place to protect students.

“I haven’t had instances brought to me, no examples, of why we need this,” she said. “[Students] need to come up with examples of what it is that concerns them. Then we can fix it.”

Woodhead said he agreed with this, pointing out that there are no complaints from students at NCSU on the Students for Academic Freedom Web site.

Ball said the College Democrats trust the decision of the faculty.

We have faith in our faculty, and we think this is a good school,” he said. “If they think it’s going to hurt our education, then we support them.”

He also said he felt the senators did a good job in reading through the bill and not just taking it at face value.

“As soon as you read all the way through it you realize it’s kind of silly, so I think that our senators are smart enough to see that, and they already caught it before it slipped through the cracks and passed,” Ball said.

Ball said that although the College Democrats are opposed to the bill, they are not actively working against it because they feel there is no need to draw attention to the issue.

“Professors being biased hasn’t been an issue on our campus, and we’re not trying to help them make an issue out of something that’s not there,” he said.

Benton Sawrey, the senator who proposed the bill in Student Senate, said he feels faculty and student aren’t giving the bill a fair chance because of its political nature.

“Professors and committee members turned this into a political debate even though the Academic Bill of Rights guaranteed them protection under this bill,” he said. “There were a lot of senators who were receptive to the idea but were afraid of politicizing it.”

Allen pointed out, however, that it isn’t an issue of politics for the faculty.

“That’s really why faculty get excited about this subject. Faculty want the freedom to teach what they know best,” she said. “You come to the University to learn, and you come to be exposed to all kinds of different ways of thinking. I’m all for being able to express what you are thinking. That’s called academic freedom. If you squelch thinking you are going to injure society.”

After a debate was held within committee, the bill was tabled indefinitely.

“They had their minds made up. They were unfair to the legislation,” Sawrey said. “It should have been debated in the Senate as a whole.”

Both Downing and Sawrey said they don’t think it will come out again this session, but think it is a possibility for next session.

“Right now we’ve got bigger fish to fry,” Sawrey said.

Woodhead said he suggests students make the decision for themselves, but before doing so make sure they are thoroughly informed.

“I really suggest to people to take that little red book they are passing out and read the entire thing, just to get a feel for exactly what’s going on,” he said.