Cornell gives Student Assembly a firm ‘no’ on trigger warning mandate

Cornell University has roundly “rejected” a Student Assembly resolution that would have required faculty to provide trigger warnings about classroom content that students may consider “traumatic.”

FIRE wrote Cornell last week urging the university not to adopt such a requirement, which would violate faculty academic freedom rights and chill speech. In their strong defense of academic freedom released this morning, Cornell’s president and provost do just that.

“We cannot accept this resolution, as the actions it recommends would infringe on our core commitment to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, and are at odds with the goals of a Cornell education,” wrote Cornell President Martha Pollack and Provost Michael Kotlikoff in their response to the proposal posted on the Student Assembly’s website. They further cite the untenable impact the resolution would have not just on faculty, but on students:

Such a policy would violate our faculty’s fundamental right to determine what and how to teach, preventing them from adding, throughout the semester, any content that any student might find upsetting. It would have a chilling effect on faculty, who would naturally fear censure lest they bring a discussion spontaneously into new and challenging territory, or fail to accurately anticipate students’ reaction to a topic or idea. And it would unacceptably limit our students’ ability to speak, question, and explore, lest a classroom conversation veer into an area determined “off-limits” unless warned against weeks or months earlier.

The message echoes much of what we told the university in our letter last week, urging it to reject the Assembly’s request.

The President and Provost appear to agree with FIRE’s assessment that such a policy would hinder student learning, telling the Student Assembly in today’s message that “[l]earning to engage with difficult and challenging ideas is a core part of a university education: essential to our students’ intellectual growth, and to their future ability to lead and thrive in a diverse society.”

Being able to tolerate a variety of ideas — even those with which students disagree or find upsetting — is important not just for a student’s education, but their mental health. Research suggests trigger warnings may not only fail to achieve their intended purpose, but could have the opposite effect — making students feel less confident in their ability to learn about difficult subjects.  

In their statement, President Pollack and Provost Kotlikoff accurately describe the university’s strong free speech and academic freedom promises, make clear that they will defend those policies, and urge students to see the benefits of open debate on contentious issues.

“Believing you can be hurt by words can become sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy,” FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff told the New York Post. "People are very resilient, but if you tell them they’re not, that can really undermine their resilience.”

Cornell’s statement highlights the disservice students do to themselves by advocating for trigger warnings or permission to “opt out” of learning about upsetting content, as doing so “would have a deleterious impact both on the education of the individual student, and on the academic distinction of a Cornell degree.”

Of course, students are free to advocate for any policies, even ones that are misguided or against their own interest. But as FIRE noted in our letter to Cornell, these requests — including the Student Assembly’s unanimously-passed resolution — leave us concerned about whether there is a healthy free speech culture at the university. 

In their statement, President Pollack and Provost Kotlikoff accurately describe the university’s strong free speech and academic freedom promises, make clear that they will defend those policies, and urge students to see the benefits of open debate on contentious issues.

Cornell’s message is clear: By rejecting the Student Assembly’s call for censorship, the university is committed to ensuring a diversity of views continues to be heard. But that commitment must extend beyond policies and statements, into action. If Cornell wants to remain a distinguished university, it cannot simply reject calls for censorship. It must take steps to enlighten students on the counterproductivity of making those calls in the first instance.

FIRE defends the rights of students and faculty members — no matter their views — at public and private universities and colleges in the United States. If you are a student or a faculty member facing investigation or punishment for your speech, submit your case to FIRE today. If you’re a faculty member at a public college or university, call the Faculty Legal Defense Fund 24-hour hotline at 254-500-FLDF (3533). If you’re a college journalist facing censorship or a media law question, call the Student Press Freedom Initiative 24-hour hotline at 717-734-SPFI (7734).