Not only has CC suspended Pryor, they have blocked him from making academic in the meantime.
.
This is often a moot point in practice as most 4-year higher-ed institutions IME clearly state in their applications that not being in good academic or disciplinary standing…such as being judicially suspended by the college precludes one from being eligible to enroll unless a special waiver is approved or more commonly, the poor academic/disciplinary standing status is lifted by the parent institution.
This was a standard practice for every college classmate I knew who was placed on academic or disciplinary suspension with the exceptions being ones who obtained special waivers to take courses. However, even in the latter case…those courses weren’t accepted for credit back at our college due in part to the fact they were taken during the suspension period.
Wow, doesn’t it stink when actions have consequences??
Yes, it stinks … especially when the consequences are completely out of proportion to the action.
And since when is it a college’s job to make a student into a nice boy? This was a mean thing to say, but just his opinion, not illegal, not threatening.
At my daughter’s school, I believe it is an honor code violation to use YikYak. School couldn’t control it so just banned it. If CC banned YikYak and he was suspended for using it, no matter what was posted, that is a different matter. Otherwise, I think this is a free speech matter.
If Colorado College was a government actor, I would agree. But it’s not.
I too question whether making what is effectively a mean comment warrants a 2 year expulsion. He did not threaten anyone with any physical violence. He did not single out any one individual and repeatedly harass them (to the best of our knowledge). He said something mean.
Incidentally, I am surprised at the length of the suspension as no one I knew of was suspended for more than a year. Even for offenses more serious which may come close to, but not meet the institution’s criterion for expulsion.
Not too long ago, one of the purported aims of sending one’s children off to college was to develop the moral/ethical character and reasonably polite* social skills alongside academics so they could get along and not be too offputting to others in the adult social milieu they will be entering after graduation.
This is clear in the historical and to some extent current mission statements of many 4-year colleges…especially private ones like Colorado College and if one examines graduation yearbooks from decades past.
- However, the definition of polite and good social skills have greatly changed since then and can change and evolve over time.
A few things:
- Apparently, surprise, surprise, there’s a back story: http://gazette.com/student-suspended-from-colorado-college-for-social-media-posts-speaks-out/article/1564644
- Colorado College is a private institution. "Free Speech" is not guaranteed there. " Private colleges, on the other hand, are not state actors, and thus, the First Amendment does not stop them from enacting speech-restrictive policies." http://www.researchgate.net/publication/228199951_Free_Speech_at_Private_Universities
I agree-- two years is way too long. But what he did was wrong, and hurtful. And as a private institution, they have the right to decide what is and what not is acceptable. Apparently, racism isn’t acceptable.
Quite a classy pair of roommates
This is exactly what the protesters at Yale wanted, the right to sanction any speech they disagree with. This suspension will severely limit his chances at getting a four year degree.
Oh look, yet another thread where people whine about free speech being censored when they have no idea what freedom of speech means. Yawn
Yep at a public college the suspension would be illegal and the student could sue for reinstatement and damages. I’d say he would be almost guaranteed to win if he were at a public u and if the comment alone were the only thing at issue . However Private colleges can do what they want. He’s SOL
I should also add that in the post-college adult world, one will be in similar situations where saying the wrong thing or communicating something in a disagreeable manner is likely to result in negative sanctions ranging from social ostracism to being outright fired from one’s job.
And none of that would be considered a violation of “free speech” due to underlying conditions of employment and the corollary right of others to exercise their “free speech” rights and those of association to criticize and even terminate the individual from a private firm or group of people or even the public sector in some cases*.
Interestingly, this reminds me of an older college classmate who was nearly tossed out of grad school for the abrasive abusive manner in communicating a point in a seminar class…even though the underlying point was one which the Prof AGREED with. Even so, the manner in which he communicated the point to other classmates in the course was such the Prof felt compelled to warn him he was in violation of the private U’s policies on treating university community members with civility and respect and a repeat will result in his expulsion.
The same abrasive argumentative manner which is similar in tone in many ways to those of the suspended student in OP story and his roommate also didn’t exactly serve him well in the workplace as it resulted in multiple firings and a spotty employment history which is hard to downplay or defend.
In short, the suspended student in OP story and moreso…his roommate may be well served to take some stock into considering whether continuing to act in the manner they did will serve them well in the post-college world in social and professional contexts.
- I.e. Public employee proselytizing to colleagues and customers/constituents on the taxpapyer's dime. A former supervisor and friend had a friend working in the Postal service who had a colleague who did this so blatantly and in a manner which generated multiple complaints from customers, colleagues, and concerns from the USPS legal counsel that it wasn't too long before said proselytizing postal employee was terminated. When said employee later tried suing for "wrongful termination", he ended up being laughed out of court by the presiding judge who pointed out the employee himself was in violation of the First Amendment separation of Church and State which he was bound to comply with as a condition of employment at the USPS during the hours he was on the taxpayer's dime.
Perhaps using University wifi? How else would they know? Their wifi, their rules.
The concept of free speech goes far beyond the First Amendment.
I was going to post the list of schools that earned FIRE’s red light rating but the list was too long.
Instead, here is a list of schools that earned the green light rating from FIRE for allowing free speech. Kudos to them.
Arizona State University
Black Hills State University
Carnegie Mellon University
Cleveland State University
Dartmouth College
Eastern Kentucky University
Mississippi State University
Oregon State University
Plymouth State University
Shippensburg University of Pennsylvania
The College of William & Mary
University of Florida
University of Mississippi
University of Nebraska – Lincoln
University of Pennsylvania
University of Tennessee – Knoxville
University of Utah
University of Virginia
Source: https://www.thefire.org/
I googled “Thaddeus Pryor Colorado” and found a photo of him on his LinkedIn page.
Why is it that not-particularly-hot guys feel entitled to denigrate the hotness level of women?
Rather than suspend him for 2 years, I think a more fitting punishment would be to let him stay on campus and deal with the social censure from his fellow students.
Honestly, Colorado College has 1000000000% blown this issue out of proportion. Sure, maybe some disciplinary action should have occurred. However, on another level, since when is an institution allowed to bar someone’s free speech privileges and why would it if it is allowed (via a contract, etc)? Why should we limit opinions, especially if the post is blatantly satirical? Even though I disagree with the defendant’s post, I believe that every single person, no matter their views (so long as it passes the clear and probable danger test), should be able to express themselves.
And this is only talking of the origination of the punishment. Suspension of two years is something for a crime much greater (honestly, at that point, I would probably want to be expelled). The disproportionality of this punishment sickens my stomach and I think that the appeal should go through and grant a pardon for his mild incident.
If your name is going to be in the media (and on CC) for doing something stupid, one should at least be smart enough to lock down your facebook better. B-)