To the Clark Community:

This past January, I appointed a committee to consider the question of Clark University adopting a policy of “institutional neutrality,” which I announced in a letter on February 1, 2024. At the heart of this question is whether the University should issue official statements on social and political events not directly related to Clark or to fundamental issues in higher education that could have bearing on Clark. Before now, we have had no clear guidelines or policy regarding this practice, leading to inconsistency and criticism about the potential undue influence institutional statements may have on free expression, academic freedom, discourse, and debate — all important values and principles core to our mission.

I have now received that committee’s final report. It recommends that as a general practice the University should, going forward, decline to make official statements on matters that fall outside the context of advancing or impacting our core mission as an academic institution, particularly social and political events. The committee finds that statements issued on behalf of the institution — as well as on behalf of specific schools, departments, or centers within the University — can inhibit and even undermine an environment in which all members of our community feel free to hold and express their views (consistent with other policies) without feeling they are “at odds” with their institution should their views differ from those set out in official statements.

What the committee did not recommend is that we frame our new policy as “institutional neutrality.” The committee felt strongly that a “neutral” stance is inconsistent with the fact that we are an institution rooted in and guided by values, making it impossible to actually be neutral. Instead, the committee recommends we label our new policy as “institutional restraint.” That is, that we acknowledge that the University, through its leaders, may have corporate views about external events, informed by institutional values, but that we will restrain ourselves from disclosing such views to ensure we foster an environment of unfettered discourse. The difference between these two concepts is more fully explored in the committee’s report.

I agree with the committee that what we call our policy may convey important meaning for some, as it serves as a proxy for the policy statement itself, and I also think it is important to avoid ambiguity. Given that the committee, as charged, rightly focused its work on the matter of institutional statements rather than broader institutional activities (such as community relations and investment practices, for example), the policy I am announcing today is framed accordingly. I believe it is most clear to say that Clark University has a Policy on Institutional Statements and the policy directs that, going forward, the University will not make any statements regarding social or political events. The new policy takes effect immediately.

Let me also remind members of our community of Clark’s Statement of Freedom of Expression and Community Values first introduced in 2019.

I want to thank the committee’s members for their service and dedication to thinking through this issue with care. I also want to thank all the many members of our community —  students, faculty, staff, alumni, and trustees — who shared their views on the subject throughout the course of the committee’s deliberations.

Sincerely,

David Fithian ’87