Ryerson students won’t be seeing an anti-discrimination statement on course outlines next fall, despite recent race-related problems that have been cropping up and reported on campus.
On March 3 the course management review committee passed the new policy that directs what professors must include in course outlines.
The outlines are used to explain to students course structure, processes, and objectives and also include acceptable behavioural conduct.
The failure to require a portion of the school’s anti-discrimination policy be included in outlines has upset some students.
Chris Wright, a student and co-chair of Positive Space Ryerson, is disappointed with the decision. Positive Space Ryerson is a group of students, faculty and staff who aim to create a safe, inclusive work environment for the Ryerson community regradless of gender or sexual identity.
Wright is graduating this year and says he only ever heard one professor state that the class would be taught from an anti-oppressive perspective.
Over his years at Ryerson Wright, who is gay, says he has witnessed many homophobic and sexist remarks in his classes. In one instance it was during a class discussion and the teacher did nothing to stop it.
The policy does say that course outlines are to refer to the Student Code of Non-Academic Conduct in regard to behaviour.
Wright says this is too vague.
“A mention of the discrimination and harassment prevention policy sets a tone for the semester and establishes a safe and positive learning environment,” Wright said.
Wright would like to see a simple statement that says the professor is teaching from an anti-homophobic, anti-racist and female-positive perspective, and state that he/she would not tolerate comments or discussion that did not respect that policy.
“Including this statement will proactively prevent such statements like the ones I’ve had to hear in the past.”
Diane Schulman, vice-president academic and chair of the course management review committee, said that the committee didn’t have an anti-discrimination statement amended to the policy because there was no motion for such a thing made before the meeting.
“It wasn’t raised by anyone on the committee,” she said.
President Sheldon Levy said if the matter were to go before the school’s senate he would be “very supportive” of it.
“I think any vehicle we can use to get the message across about the importance of having an open, diverse, tolerant, welcoming, etc. community that is anti-racist is a good thing,” Levy said. “No one should feel that this community is sending them away making them worried about their safety or feeling unwelcome.”
The new policy outlines the required information standard for course outlines including prerequisites, policy on missed classes, and cellphone etiquette. It also states the mandatory information about plagiarism and rules for submitting work to an electronic plagiarism detection service.
Ann Whiteside from Discrimination and Harassment Prevention Services (DHPS) agrees that having an anti-discrimination statement on course outlines would be beneficial
for students.
“A statement would make the existing policy come alive in their classes and not just be some policy sitting in a book never getting used,” she said.
Whiteside said that it would send a message in regards to the climate on campus. This would be a step forward in making sure students know where to go if they experience discrimination.
In the last few weeks there have been four incidents of hate-related graffiti. Two of the instances were anti-Semitic, one was anti-Iranian, and the third homophobic. Also, as reported last week in The Ryersonian, the school’s office of discrimination and harassment saw a 250 per cent increase in human rights complaints based on race and ethnic origin during 2007-2008 compared to 2004-2005.
Wright says he is disappointed he won’t get to see an anti-discrimination statement implemented while he’s a student.
The next review for the policy will be in 2014. However Schulman said an earlier review is possible if it is necessary.
