Should professors persuade or present? Classroom neutrality questioned in Colorado

By Cory Gaines | Commentary, Colorado Accountability Project

The article at bottom details how an adjunct professor specializing in queer studies at Colorado Mesa University resigned over a dispute involving classroom neutrality.

I’ll leave it to you to read up on the dispute and come to your own decisions about the facts in the matter. From my take on the article, it seems that there might be something of a disagreement as to exactly what was said and what happened.

I am also open to any civil comment you’d like to add. Please feel free to toss in your two cents on the issue, whether we agree or not.

Again, without saying what the professor here did or didn’t do, let’s examine two different versions of how a class discussion could go.

Contrast the following:

–A queer studies class begins with a professor berating anyone that voted for Trump, discussing how churches are wrong if they don’t allow gay, lesbian, or transgender clergy/parishioners, and spends the remainder of the semester doing the similar. Any material that strays from her orthodoxy is down-graded.

–A queer studies class begins with a professor acknowledging her own views on Trump, churches vis a vis gay, lesbian, or transgender clergy/parishioners, but acknowledges that others have different views and different views are welcome. She grades work, even work that doesn’t hold to her views, based on how well a contention is reasoned, expressed, and what sources back it.

The former is not okay. The latter is.

Education is about learning and a part of that involves (one way or another) challenging the beliefs you have now. This might manifest in you having to reconsider the intuitive belief that a heavier object will fall faster than a lighter one. It might manifest in challenging your beliefs about people being openly gay and clergy and/or being in a gay marriage and a parishioner (support or oppose).

You cannot challenge yourself or be challenged without you or someone else pushing on your current beliefs. Without that challenge, you cannot undertake any education about same.

The education may not ultimately change your views, but I don’t weigh education on whether it changes your beliefs. What I would hope for (and what I want for anyone that undertakes to study) is that you could fairly and honestly express the views counter to yours; that you be informed as to views different than yours and the basis for them.

This is the standard I would hold educators to as well. I do not expect educators to be neutral in the sense that they are beige-bland. Teaching that way is not teaching in the sense I outline above. It’s a failure of teaching.

I do expect educators to be fair, and to be able to fairly articulate other viewpoints along with the reasoning behind them. I expect them to run a classroom open to all, with respect for all.

For years those expressing viewpoints that the PC police and others disagreed with were told to shut up if they expressed their views. Many often faced some form or another of censure, actual penalty, or social penalty. I am glad to see that easing now. It ought to have never started.

Cancel culture exists on both sides. I understand the temptation to turn around and do to them what you did to me, but the absurdity of someone else’s behavior doesn’t excuse or justify equally absurd behavior on my part.

I am not sure what happened in the case at Colorado Mesa University. I won’t comment on it because I wasn’t in the room when it happened. Reading the article (and the letter to the editor in the student paper the professor wrote) I could see it happening a number of ways.

It could be a rabid professor who went beyond challenging students into shaming them.

It could be a student wanting to capitalize on the recent change in tone around the US to embarrass Colorado Mesa University.

It could be one of nature’s rarest birds: a conservative snowflake.

Whichever it was, I would hope for calm, non-reactionary assessment of what happened in that particular classroom, something I’m not sure happened.

Going forward at Mesa, and in other classrooms with other professors, I hope for a return to the values of education, the values we should all embrace about open discussion with respect.

If we want our universities to actually educate people, we can’t afford to waste energy on a tug of war.

https://www.thecollegefix.com/colorado-queer-studies-professor-resigns-after-told-to-remain-neutral-in-class/

In what appears to be a settlement, Dan Gibbs’ ethics violation is dismissed. What do you think?

Back in late 2025, I’d written about an ethics complaint against Department of Natural Resources head Dan Gibbs relating to some swampy ties between him, his wife, her employer, and a wolf reintroduction contract.

There was (and I said this back then) little evidence in my mind that Gibbs was involved in any frank corruption. I also don’t think he or his wife benefited in any way from this contract.

I did think, however, that Gibbs was shoveling out the crap in his response to the complaint. What Gibbs did was not honest, even if it wasn’t illegal.

I have an update on that ethics complaint to share. Per the second link below, it was dismissed by Colorado’s Independent Ethics Commission recently.

I’ll take a quote from way down at the bottom of the article, because I think it best summarizes the outcome here. Quoted with link intact:

“Gibbs and Defend Colorado told the ethics commission in January that they had reached a settlement on the complaint and requested its dismissal. In February, the commission held a hearing where the parties presented the settlement and motion to dismiss, which was ultimately issued on March 18. In the dismissal, the ethics commission acknowledged that Gibbs should have responded ‘Yes’ to the disclosure question, noting that he ‘discovered “early on” in his tenure that (the Department of Natural Resources) contracted with Keystone.’ ‘The parties have agreed that moving forward, (Gibbs) will consult with legal counsel prior to making ethics disclosures related to his executive director duties,’ it concludes.”

This strikes me as a reasonable outcome. I would have gone further. Perhaps a more emphatic response about Gibbs’ BS answer in response to being called out would have been in order, a response from the dude who appointed him about his behavior (Polis) would have been in order, but this is within bounds (if a bit light).

What do you think? Do you think the settlement is appropriate? What role (if any) do you think the governor should take here?

READ THE FULL COMMENTARY AT COLORADO ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.