Why Did a UCLA Instructor With a Popular Free-Speech Course … – The Chronicle of Higher Education

Keith Fink, an adjunct who teaches a UCLA course on campus free speech, says even though his students love him, top administrators couldnt stand the fact that he criticized them in the classroom. His department leaders say hes not as good a teacher as he thinks he is.

But according to Mr. Fink, the tale is far more troubling. Mr. Fink, a conservative, says he was pushed out in large part because of his political beliefs and because one of the courses he taught a popular class on campus free speech dared to criticize UCLAs own actions.

With campus free speech emerging as a hot-button national issue, Mr. Finks continuing struggle with his university has struck a chord. Campus Reform, the conservative news outlet, has championed him in a series of articles; Tucker Carlson, the Fox News host who regularly rails against campus liberalism, has made him a guest.

On Tuesday, June 27, Mr. Fink received a letter from Laura E. Gmez, interim dean of the College Division of Social Sciences, informing him that he would no longer be employed at UCLA once his contract ended, on June 30. "After a thoughtful and comprehensive academic review, it has been determined that your teaching does not meet the standard of excellence," Ms. Gmez wrote. (She did not respond to a request for comment from The Chronicle.)

The letter marked the latest development in a monthslong saga pitting Mr. Fink against several administrators: Ms. Gmez; Kerri L. Johnson, chair of the communication-studies department; and Greg Bryant, the departments vice chair.

Keith A. Fink and Associates

Keith Fink: "The fact that I use current events at UCLA as teaching examples to illustrate free-speech principles likely bothers the administration, often because their campuswide emails run afoul of the First Amendment and directly or indirectly trample on students free-speech rights."

"The fact that I use current events at UCLA as teaching examples to illustrate free-speech principles likely bothers the administration, often because their campuswide emails run afoul of the First Amendment and directly or indirectly trample on students free-speech rights," said Mr. Fink, who was out of the country and responded to questions by email.

He has drawn the ire of administrators in other ways, too, he said. According to Mr. Fink, his conservative political beliefs have always been at odds with those of most other people on the campus. And then there was his lawyerly campus activism: On occasion he has assisted UCLA students who faced campus disciplinary or legal proceedings.

Past department leaders had supported him and "thwarted off attempts by the school to undermine or fire me," Mr. Fink said.

In July 2016, Ms. Johnson became department chair. She said she couldnt speak for her predecessors, but stressed that "in no way has Mr. Finks politics been part of any classroom decision or any academic-personnel decision."

"As a top research university in the United States," she said, "we value and celebrate a diversity of opinion."

The trouble began in January, when Mr. Fink was scheduled to teach his campus free-speech course, a popular class that frequently filled up a large lecture hall. (UCLAs academic calendar is divided into four quarters, and January marked the start of the winter quarter.)

Ms. Johnson also told him his spring-term class had been moved into a smaller lecture hall, with only 170 seats, Mr. Fink said. She "offered no concrete explanation" for the changes, he said.

Ms. Johnson disputes all of that. She said the size of the free-speech class "was not changed from his prior enrollments." Mr. Fink had asked that his course be expanded, she said, but she had decided not to increase the size of any of the departments courses until she could review them individually.

Given that he had only one teaching assistant, 200 students was already more than ideal, Ms. Johnson said, adding that she wasnt involved in the decision to move his spring-quarter course to a different room.

In the meantime, starting during the winter term, Mr. Fink was subject to a review that all lecturers go through after theyve taught for 18 quarters. Faculty members who pass the review which involves an evaluation and a vote by their departments tenure-stream faculty members, and a final decision by the colleges dean are promoted to "continuing lecturer."

Mr. Fink had concerns about the process from the beginning. He said he had been asked to provide a list of people he believed should be excluded from the process because they couldnt objectively evaluate his teaching. He named Ms. Gmez and Ms. Johnson, his own chair, because they had tried "to arbitrarily reduce my class size." He added that Ms. Johnson disliked him and his political views.

He also named Mr. Bryant, the vice chair, as well as several other administrators and "all faculty members" in eight departments and programs across the university, including the departments of African-American studies, Asian-American studies, and gender studies.

The list was advisory, not binding, Ms. Johnson said. Also, she said, she didnt learn of Mr. Finks political affiliation until after she had decided not to increase the course size. Mr. Fink then wrote her an email saying he felt he was being targeted because of his conservative views. "Ive never told him what my politics are," she said.

He's never come to any meeting or any function that we've ever had. Nobody knows him.

Mr. Bryant sat in on Mr. Finks campus free-speech course nevertheless and wrote an evaluation. "I didnt want to write the letter," the professor said, "but a lot of people said no" to the task.

The evaluation "was riddled with lies and misrepresentations," according to Mr. Fink. He said Mr. Bryant had taken issue with his decision to single out particular students, saying that doing so created an unwelcoming learning environment.

Mr. Fink provided The Chronicle with declarations from two students in which they said they had developed close relationships with the faculty member and had no problem being identified one as a member of the campus Republican club, the other as a reporter and columnist for the student newspaper.

But thats not why the class was unwelcoming, Mr. Bryant said. "He makes students uncomfortable to talk because hes pretty aggressive back to them" if he disagrees with their point of view, he said. And Mr. Finks use of the discussion-based Socratic method in a large lecture hall "doesnt really work," Mr. Bryant said.

He was pushing his own views harder than I think he should.

"I believe Mr. Fink clearly has a right to express those views, especially in a class on the topic of free speech," he wrote in the evaluation, "but as a teaching technique, I feel like the more he belabors his points about UCLA in particular, the more he undermines his credibility and objectivity as an instructor."

Mr. Fink acknowledged that his provocative style might feel intimidating to some students. "But a university shouldnt be a safe space," he said.

Student evaluations of the free-speech course Mr. Fink taught this year provided by Andrew Litt, a recent UCLA School of Law graduate who served as Mr. Finks teaching assistant for two years and worked in his law firm mostly paint a picture of Mr. Fink as an engaging teacher and his course as stimulating and interesting.

This class was the best class I have taken at UCLA.

The departments final report, provided by Mr. Litt, stated that the review "skewed toward a favorable view of Mr. Finks teaching effectiveness," but said faculty members had raised concerns "about the climate fostered within the classroom" and the rigor of his assessments.

He's a good speaker, but that's not all it takes.

Ultimately, the nine voting faculty members deadlocked: Three voted to promote him to continuing lecturer, three voted not to, and three abstained. Ms. Gmez, the interim dean, then declined to promote him.

"The bar is incredibly high," Ms. Johnson said of the review. There is another lecturer in the department who is well qualified to teach a course on campus free speech and may do so in the future, she added.

Mr. Litt didnt believe the review process had been fair: "If you look at his record within the department, its very difficult, if not impossible, to make credible arguments that hes not excellent."

Mr. Fink said he may teach at another institution in the future, but in the meantime he is working with the universitys faculty union to file a grievance. He also plans to establish a nonprofit group that will provide free legal services to UCLA students and professors who feel their rights have been violated.

The spat illustrates what Mr. Fink describes as an intolerant culture at the university. "UCLA pays lip service to the notions of academic freedom and viewpoint diversity," he said, "but theres an implied understanding among the schools leaders that this really only applies if your views align with theirs."

That message has spread thanks to a steady stream of reports by Campus Reform, which has chronicled each step of the saga. A sample of the eight articles the website has published about Mr. Finks situation includes "UCLA still targeting conservative profs free speech course," "Conservative prof subject to biased review committee," and now "UCLA fires Fink with little explanation."

UCLAs administrators said the outrage is much ado about nothing. Mr. Finks case was "handled by the book," Mr. Bryant countered, and his views were not an issue. "My personal opinion about free speech is actually similar to his," he said.

"He just cant believe that people would not think hes an excellent teacher based on the reviews of students," Mr. Bryant added. "Theres more to it than what the students think."

Sarah Brown writes about a range of higher-education topics, including sexual assault, race on campus, and Greek life. Follow her on Twitter @Brown_e_Points, or email her at sarah.brown@chronicle.com.

Read more:
Why Did a UCLA Instructor With a Popular Free-Speech Course ... - The Chronicle of Higher Education