Second Annual Meeting — Liz Stiff

Liz Stiff, chief communications officer for the Common Sense Society.

Second Annual Meeting: Bert Ellis Board-of-Visitors Update

Bert Ellis, co-founder and president emeritus of the Jefferson Council, and University of Virginia Board of Visitors member: Board of Visitors update.

Second Annual Meeting: Jim Bacon

Jim Bacon, executive director of The Jefferson Council: “How TJC is building a culture of pluralism at UVa”

Second Annual Meeting: Student Testimonials

Speakers:

Ann McLean, chair of the Jefferson Council’s Student Liaison Committee;
Lauren Horan, CR vice president of campaign;
Skylar Jackman; Young Americans for Freedom;
Ian Schwartz, College Republicans secretary;
Paul Deaton, Burke Society;
Nickolaus Cabrera, Young Americans for Freedom;
Vidar Hageman, candidate for student council president.

Second Annual Meeting: Connor Murnane

Connor Murnane, director of engagement and mobilization for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE): “Culture or Codes: Promoting Free Expression on Campus”

Second Annual Meeting: Bert Ellis Opening Remarks

Bert Ellis: co-founder of the Jefferson Council; president emeritus; and member of the University of Virginia Board of Visitors.

Second Annual Meeting: The Cavalier Daily Reports

by James A. Bacon

Well, the article could have been worse. The Cavalier Daily asked if a reporter could attend the 2nd Annual Meeting of the Jefferson Council. We had been none too pleased with the CD’s coverage of Bert Ellis’s nomination to the Board of Visitors, but we agreed. While the CD had demonized Ellis, we reasoned that a reporter observing a six-hour event with multiple speakers and questioners would hear a broad range of voices that would be hard to ignore.

And that’s kinda, sorta what happened.

The resulting story written by Avery Donmoyer focused mostly on a negative theme at the Annual Meeting — opposition to Diversity, Equity & Inclusion as practiced at the University of Virginia — rather than our positive emphasis on free speech and intellectual diversity. But the story’s sub-head hit the right note.

DEI frequently attacked at second Jefferson Council annual meeting
Jefferson Council members are engaging in a “fight for free speech culture”

Overall, the Jefferson Council comes across in the article as naysayers, not a group working toward a positive vision. But the article represents progress over past coverage. Donmoyer quotes speakers who provide rational reasons for their views on DEI, which is more than we’ve seen from the CD in the past. Continue reading

Second Annual Meeting: Glenn Loury

Glenn Loury. Photo credit: Bob Turner

Glenn Loury’s keynote speech at the 2nd Annual Meeting of the Jefferson Council last week was a hit. We have received an outpouring of praise for hosting Mr. Loury, as well as thanks for providing a platform for one of America’s most brilliant but insufficiently appreciated conservative intellectuals. We are delighted to inform Jefferson Council members that the good feelings were reciprocated. He sent us a message this morning:

My visit with the Jefferson Council of U.Va. was the most encouraging campus speaking engagement I’ve undertaken in years. I was delighted to see the assembled hundreds of alumni and friends of the University, coming together out of love of the institution and commitment to liberal values, to fight for what they know is right and best for the school. They’re pushing back — with passion, with humility and with determination — against the zeitgeist in the modern university world. They’re resourceful, well-organized and well-led. They’re bound to make a difference. I wouldn’t bet against them. GL

We will post Loury’s speech as soon as the video has been processed.

Second Annual Meeting: Allan Stam

The Jefferson Council will begin publishing video clips of the presentations made during our Second Annual Meeting of April 4, 2023, as they come available. The first video is of Allan Stam, a professor at the Batten School of Leadership, on the topic, “What’s at Stake: a National Perspective.”

How Orwellian Is “Student Conduct Software”?

by James A. Bacon

More than 1,300 educational institutions across the country use software developed by Charlottesville-based Maxient, which bills itself as the “industry leader” and “most trusted provider for incident reporting and behavior records management.” Clients include most of Virginia’s public institutions of higher education.

The recent revelation in the CollegeFix and Wall Street Journal that the nation’s universities maintain consolidated files on student “behavior” is troubling to many’ The phrase “student conduct software” conjures images of “Big Brother” college administrators compiling dossiers on students who commit microaggressions or otherwise transgress woke codes on speech and behavior.

While it is becoming clear (1) that most colleges have developed the capability to build such dossiers and (2) that many have integrated them with their “bias reporting” systems, concrete incidents of abuse have yet to surface. The fact is, little is known about how the software is being used. Only now are questions being asked.

The Cadet, the independent student newspaper at the Virginia Military Institute, has taken an important first step in finding out. The Cadet submitted Freedom of Information Act requests to all public universities to determine how Maxient is being used. Some institutions — Longwood University and Mary Washington University — were particularly forthcoming. Some were not. Virginia Commonwealth University refused to hand over any documents or answer any questions, referring The Cadet to the university’s website.

(Jefferson Council FOIA requests reveal that the University of Virginia-Wise has a contract to use Maxient software. The University of Virginia itself has no contract. We are endeavoring to find out if UVa uses “student conduct” software at all, either provided by a different vendor or programmed in-house.)

The Longwood and Mary Washington responses to The Cadet FOIA show the kinds of incidents that at least two public universities are putting into their “student conduct” databases. Continue reading