The University of California is proposing to change its nearly 70-year-old statement of academic freedom, in a move that would no longer bar faculty from expressing their political views.

Faculty members have a long history of offering students their opinions on the hot-button topics of the day. The change proposed by members of the academic senate would acknowledge that reality by removing phrases from its academic freedom statement that prohibit faculty from converting students to a particular point of view.

The change will bring the university more in line with the standards of academic freedom at other major universities.

But at least one nonprofit organization dedicated to fighting indoctrination is alarmed by the proposal, particularly in light of an incident at Cal last spring in which a graduate student instructor warned students in his course description that conservative thinkers should steer clear of the class.

The group NoIndoctrination.org believes the changes would wipe out protections against professors who lead one-sided lectures espousing extreme political biases.

"It's almost condoning using the classroom as a platform for indoctrination," said Luann Wright, founder and president of NoIndoctrination.org based in San Diego. "Professors need academic freedom, they need to be able to give their opinions, but we also believe that with these freedoms go classroom responsibility."

The current academic freedom statement is archaic because it says classroom discussion should be dispassionate and apolitical, said Gayle Binion, chairwoman of the Academic Council. It includes phrases such as "To convert, or to make converts is alien and hostile to this dispassionate duty."

"If we accepted that as our standard, we would not be able to offer a whole lot of courses we do offer," she said. "Some of the most interesting work in academia is political and passionate."

The faculty Academic Council will discuss June 18 whether to bring the proposed changes to the Academic Assembly for a vote in July or wait until later in the year so faculty can review them further.

The UC president would need to approve any changes to the statement.

UC's existing statement of academic freedom was issued by former university president Robert Sproul in 1934 and was added to the academic personnel manual in 1944.

It was relatively dormant until last year when the course description for a Palestinian poetry course taught by a graduate student condemned Israel's actions and warned students that "conservative thinkers are encouraged to seek other sections."

Neither the existing academic freedom statement nor the one proposed would tolerate a professor discouraging a person with a particular political persuasion from taking a course, said Binion.

But, she said, the existing academic statement is so outdated it didn't help the university in reviewing the case. UC would never tell professors they can't express their passion for a particular point of view as the current statement demands. What was of concern in the case of the Palestinian poetry course, and what the new statement would address, is whether the graduate instructor was open to students expressing other points of view.

The proposed statement will, for the first time, explicitly protect the academic freedom of students, Binion argues. It reads in part: "The university also seeks to instill in its students a mature independence of mind, and this purpose cannot be achieved unless students and faculty are free within the classroom to express the widest range of viewpoints within the norms of scholarly inquiry and professional ethics."

Under the proposal, the statement of academic freedom would no longer pledge to provide "facilities for investigation and teaching free from domination by parties, sects, or selfish interests."

Proponents of the change say students would still be protected from a professor who is trying to coerce or indoctrinate them by appealing under the Faculty Code of Conduct, which forbids professors from intimidating or harassing students.

But Thomas Wood, executive director of the conservative California Association of Scholars, thinks the academic freedom statement -- not the code of conduct -- should protect students from being punished for expressing opinions that differ from their professors'.

"There could be problems of political indoctrination in the classroom that don't rise to the level of harassment," said Wood, one of the authors of California's Proposition 209, which ended affirmative action in state admissions and hiring.

UC Berkeley political science professor Robert Price has passionate opinions about South Africa. But his job, he said, is to get students to understand the political dynamics of the country. He said he doesn't have a problem with either statement of academic freedom. But just because the proposed one doesn't explicitly bar indoctrination, doesn't mean it approves of indoctrination, he said.

"Where the evidence doesn't lead to a clear conclusion, one should recognize and acknowledge that," he said. "And recognize that other arguments are also possible."

ON THE NET

For more on the debate and proposed changes to UC's academic freedom statement go to www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/ or http://NoIndoctrination.org.