Charles Sturt University Vice-Chancellor Andrew Vann has lashed out at an independent report condemning his institution as the second-most ‘hostile to intellectual freedom’ in the country.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It follows the release of an Institute of Public Affairs audit that ranked Charles Sturt University among the most opposed to ‘free speech on campus’.
University were ranked in accordance with a new Hostility Score system, developed by the right-wing Melbourne thinktank, which measures the aggregate number of problematic policies and actions at each university.
Under this system, Charles Sturt University was scored 15 points, 21 points behind leader University of Sydney and one point ahead of third-placed James Cook University and Monash University.
IPA research fellow and report author Matthew Lesh believes universities policies that ‘prevent’ free speech are “chilling”.
“It is impossible to freely debate ideas without potentially hurting feelings or sometimes causing offence,” he claimed
In his report, Mr Lesh listed Charles Sturt University’s Anti-Racism Policy among five ‘worst’ policies on campus, alleging it forbids the use of ‘sarcasm’.
Professor Vann has since rejected the report’s assessment in a statement, arguing the term ‘sarcasm’ is not used in that policy.
“The Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) report is factually inaccurate,” he said.
“It says that the Charles Sturt University Anti-Racism policy forbids ‘sarcasm’ when that word is not used in the Policy.”
Rather, the term ‘sarcasm’ is used in Part F of Charles Sturt University’s Harassment and Bullying Prevention Guidelines which states ‘bullying behaviours may include but are not limited to abusive or offensive language, insults, ridicule, sarcasm or intimidating remarks.”
Professor Vann also took aim at the report’s criticisms of the university’s inclusion of Indigenous knowledge in the curriculum.
“It seems to us rather than promoting free speech, the IPA is dictating to universities what is acceptable to include in curriculum which is the very antithesis of what the IPA claim to promote,” he said.
“The University is proud of this commitment which we view as essential for graduates who will work with substantial numbers of Indigenous people as many of our graduates will.”
