SMU faculty wrong on Bush library

WASHINGTON -- The faculty at another major U.S. university is sticking its nose where it really doesn't belong, continuing a disturbing trend that seems to be gaining momentum at the expense of coherent administration. The next step may just be doing away with boards of trustees and the professionals they hire to run these multibillion-dollar enterprises.
Faculty members at Southern Methodist University in Dallas have begun to complain about the possibility that the George W. Bush presidential library may be built on "their" campus. According to recent press reports, the good professors complain they weren't consulted about this. They have several objections to the arrangement and are demanding a quick response from the university president before any deal is signed. Or what?
The academicians are concerned that association with the Bush family might taint the university's reputation as a place of political independence and freedom of thought despite the fact that Laura Bush is an SMU graduate and the school has a long association with the Bush family. The selection of a site for the library is not final by any means, but after looking at both several universities, including SMU and Baylor, as potential locations, the search committee reportedly has settled on SMU, one of the nation's prestige private schools.
The university administration put the best face it could on the situation, announcing that it welcomed the free and open discussion about the impact of locating the library there. But when push comes to shove, trustees and administrators who are responsible for the institution should act uninfluenced by those they have hired to bring daily enlightenment to the student body -- the classroom teachers, if there are any left, who spend time in the lecture halls rather than handing off that assignment to graduate assistants while they work on their personal "scholarship" projects.
SMU may be one of those places where professors do actually engage in hands-on teaching despite the publish-or-perish demands of modern academia where upward mobility depends on things other than classroom excellence. This, of course, makes the situation even more disturbing because it reveals a trend toward political and philosophical bias that leaves one with an uneasy perception of what is being taught. One can only wonder whether the same concern would be expressed about a more liberal U.S. president.
Johnson's library
Not terribly far away in Austin, the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library seems to coexist nicely with the University of Texas. At Stanford University, the relationship between the faculty and administration and the Hoover Institution, while not always easy, certainly has done nothing to harm the university's reputation as a citadel of academic freedom. If anything, the generally conservative Hoover Institution has enhanced the more liberal university's position as a leader in unfettered scholarship.
What is disturbing about the SMU faculty's stance is that it represents a growing trend toward academic anarchy. That may sound strong, but what else would one call the faculty attacks on Harvard president Larry Summers that forced him to resign over political incorrectness or the outrageous actions of the faculty and students at Gallaudet College for the deaf that forced weak-kneed trustees to oust the new president because she believed in modern methods to enhance hearing?
I am not suggesting that faculties should not be heard. They have a stake in the institutions. But their disagreements with policy should be kept in perspective. In reality, professors have very narrow turf interests, which they are prone to defend at the expense of the overall good. Because they spend most of their time with captive audiences of young people, they often tend to approach contemporaries outside their community with some disdain.
University administrators, on the other hand, are answerable to a board of trustees and must have a broad overview of the institution and the leeway to make decisions that are best for its welfare.
Those who administer this fine school should make sure a beneficial proposal isn't waylaid by misguided political correctness.
Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service.