SXU, Dr. Kirstein reach closure after controversy
Xavierite, Nov. 20, 2002
By John Normoyle
Managing Editor
Capping off a whirlwind two-week period in which Saint Xavier University found itself in the national spotlight for all the wrong reasons, SXU President Dr. Richard Yanikoski and Dr. Peter Kirstein issued statements on Friday that will hopefully bring an end to this tense situation.
In his statement posted last Friday on the SXU website, Dr. Yanikoski had this to say about the controversy:
"During recent weeks Saint Xavier University has attracted national attention because a tenured professor of history sent a young Air Force Academy cadet some e-mail containing inflammatory, anti- military comments. Professor Peter N. Kirstein, an avowed pacifist, quickly apologized to the cadet and to the Air Force Academy for his e-mail message, but in the meantime thousands of other interested parties have taken offense.
From the beginning of this incident, Saint Xavier University has worked to achieve four objectives: (1) to make things right with the cadet and the Air Force Academy; (2) to respond compassionately to the anger and anguish aroused in so many quarters; (3) to counsel and discipline Professor Kirstein in appropriate ways; and (4) to ensure that teaching and learning at the University will continue unimpeded.
The following actions have been or will be taken to make things right with the cadet and the Air Force Academy: (1) Professor Kirstein sent a personal apology to the cadet and to the Air Force Academy. Subsequent correspondence between them has been open and respectful. (2) The University extended an official apology to the Academy's Superintendent, and as president of the University, I have agreed to accept an invitation to visit the Academy within the coming year. (3) Saint Xavier University will send a delegation to the Air Force Academy's upcoming Academic Assembly. (4) Campus officials have attempted to respond to all cadets, parents, and members of the Academy staff who telephoned or wrote to the University. Any omissions in this regard have been unintentional.
To respond compassionately to the large number of men and women who somehow received copies of Professor Kirstein's e-mail and thereby came to feel demeaned by his intemperate criticisms of the military, the University has done the following: (1) Faculty, staff and administrators throughout the University have fielded telephone calls during the past two weeks, in each case listening sensitively to complaints and advice. (2) We answered hundreds of e-mail messages personally, until the rising volume of correspondence made individual responses impossible. (3) We cooperated with the press in an ongoing effort to ensure accurate and responsible coverage. (4) We used web-page updates to summarize the University's response to this emerging situation. (5) We consistently admitted that Professor Kirstein's e- mail message was unwarranted and unbecoming a scholar.
By far the topic of greatest interest to most people has been the University's response to Professor Kirstein. After careful deliberation, I have decided to take the following actions on behalf of the University:
1. Effective on the afternoon of November 11, 2002, Professor Kirstein was relieved of his teaching responsibilities for the current semester and reassigned to other duties.
2. An administrative reprimand will be delivered to Professor Kirstein and placed in his personnel file.
3. While on sabbatical leave during the spring semester of 2003, Professor Kirstein will submit his teaching, scholarship, professional development, and service record to peer evaluation within the norms of the University's procedures for periodic review of tenured faculty. Professor Kirstein volunteered to have this review conducted earlier than it otherwise would have been.
4. Any future faculty contract(s) extended to Professor Kirstein will include a binding addendum specifically requiring him to adhere both to institutional policies and to the norms of the American Association of University Professors in matters relating to the proper exercise of academic freedom and extramural activities.
No additional information will be released by the University with respect to the above actions or other personnel matters concerning Professor Peter Kirstein. This is in accord with University practice.
Professor Kirstein and the University community deeply regret the incident that began this chain of events. Saint Xavier University remains committed to the pursuit of teaching and learning in a campus community where all are treated with respect, caring and justice and where academic freedom is enjoyed for purpose of promoting quality teaching, careful research, critical analysis, thoughtful discussion, and programs of direct service to metropolitan Chicago and beyond."
Dr. Kirstein's statement, which was originally sent to SXU faculty, stated:
"Dear Colleagues:
I would like to begin this statement by once again affirming that my e-mail communication to the Air Force cadet was wrong, impetuous, careless, and provocative. In my apologies to the cadet that were rendered quite early and prior to this becoming a national story I stated: "Let me say that I should have been more reflective in my response to your e-mail soliciting participation [in] the Academy Assembly. I do not know you personally and I did not mean to impugn your character. Clearly, more careful and thoughtful language would have been preferable..."
In another e-mail to the cadet I wrote this extended passage: "[I]t is apparent that you as a cadet at the Air Force Academy and myself a peace activist at a civilian university, have been able to...resolve this in a polite and professional manner. Perhaps our exchanges could be an object lesson for nations as well. I am proud of what we have accomplished together sir...I am sure you must be very accomplished to make it to the academy. I hope and expect you will serve the United States with honor and I hope you never have to use force against any people anywhere during your career as an Air Force officer." While quoting sparingly-to preserve his privacy-from his eloquent e-mails to me, the cadet concluded one with: "I truly hope that you will be able to attend the forum [at the Air Force Academy] and express your views there where they can be voiced in a setting designed for such a debate. These last two letters have proven to be a pleasure communicating with you."
Courtesy www.sxu.edu
Dr. Peter N. Kirstein.
Even though the principal parties, including the Air Force Academy Academic Assembly, reconciled within days of my initial e-mail, I recognize that its extraordinary distribution deeply and appropriately offended tens of thousands of people both within and outside the military. I also fully understand that this e-mail has placed enormous burdens and strains on everyone at this institution where I have served with pride for twenty-eight years. While I have been sustained by so many collegial expressions of personal support, I know many of you have been dismayed and disappointed over my communication and the furor it engendered. I know quite well, due to my two weeks of daily contact with the administration, that they have been subjected to enormous pressure; they have been forced to expend an inordinate amount of energy and that it has been disruptive of their schedules and commitments. They did not deserve this.
I am at fault. I feel absolutely saddened, remorseful, and devastated that my actions could have caused so much pain and disruption for so many. I have throughout my career been involved in a variety of exchanges over issues that have great personal meaning for me. Never did I think.
Again, never did I think that my actions would cause so many to suffer so much hardship and difficulty. I take full responsibility for my actions-and even though the unfolding events could not have been anticipated-I intend to do everything I can to make amends.
I pledge to you that my unwarranted communication won't be repeated. I pledge to you that as I continue to speak out and express strongly held views on matters of peace and justice, I will be acutely aware that my message must not be vitiated by the tone. I pledge to you that I will continue to publish, present papers, teach with enthusiasm and joy, and continue to serve with all my abilities an institution that I love and unwittingly betrayed. I feel a heavy burden and a great responsibility.
All I ask is your understanding and forgiveness as I face the future with greater humility and a renewed determination to serve with pride and dignity Saint Xavier University.
-Peter N. Kirstein
In an exclusive interview with The Xavierite on Monday, Dr. Yanikoski talked about conversing with students through e-mail over the last two weeks and his willingness to speak with them.
"I told my administrative team, the vice presidents, that if at any point the students began to express a desire for a more open discussion of this I would do it, but I would not initiate it," said Dr. Yanikoski "My goal actually was to see to it that this not be a distraction for students and for all the other people that are pursuing their normal interests here at the University.
"The sabbatical next semester was a scheduled sabbatical," continued Dr. Yanikoski, "Barring a completely unexpected revelation of some kind, Dr. Kirstein will be back in class next fall and I don't expect there to be any future issues at all."
Dr. Yanikoski went on to say, "There are several unfortunate aspects to this whole incident as it began. As I now get more perspective on it two weeks later and say,
'What really happened here?' What really happened here is that a professor, a respected professor, during an off-moment, sent an uncharacteristically harsh e-mail response to someone outside of the University. That someone shared it with a couple of friends, whose parents then spread it all across the country. The important thing is not the reaction of all those other people. That no question was a burden on the University, but that's not the fundamental issue. The fundamental issue is, what does Saint Xavier stand for with respect to education and the treatment of students? What we say we stand for and we strive always to achieve is that we will educate honestly, we will treat people as our vision statement says-with respect, caring and justice.
"This particular e-mail message did not fit those criteria and so it is objectionable and Dr. Kirstein knows that and has apologized in various places in several different ways for having done that. But to the extent that his normal teaching and the teaching of other faculty here strives always to be intellectually honest while also very respective and supportive of students-that's what makes me proud of this institution. I know that in any institution with more than 5,000 students and with several hundred faculty, that there are individuals and days and circumstances where things don't go perfectly. That's the human condition. But to the extent that as an institution we are committed to keep pushing in the direction of intellectually honest, stimulating instruction coupled with a genuine care and concern and desire to support the students, this institution will just get better and better.
"This incident was a test not only of the particular e-mail message sent by a particular professor but also of our institutional resolve to do it right-not just now, but every day and every year and in the future. It's a constant challenge, but the fact that we are so deeply committed to it is what makes me proud to be President and it's what I hope the students feel like we will continue to get better and that we are already quite good."
The firestorm began shortly after Dr. Kirstein was contacted in late October by an Air Force Academy cadet regarding the annual Academy Assembly. The Assembly is in essence a Political Science forum in which attendees debate important political issues. Dr. Kirstein responded to the cadet and noted his disdain for what he termed "aggressive baby-killing tactics of collateral damage," allegedly used by the military.
The response message from Dr. Kirstein was widely circulated among military websites in the United States. Several e-mails and phone calls poured in to various members of the SXU community from people who were outraged at Dr. Kirstein's comments. The controversy made it onto the pages of the Chicago Sun Times, Chicago Tribune and the Wall Street Journal. Several Chicago-area television and radio stations carried the story once it had been reported in the papers.
"This began as an e-mail exchange between two individuals," said Dr. Yanikoski, "Neither of whom, as far as I know, gave permission for that e-mail exchange to be sent all over the country. Neither, as far as I know, was asked if they wanted it to be a newspaper story and so forth. This engulfed them in a manner that was entirely unanticipated, both by Dr. Kirstein at this end and the Air Force cadet at the other end."