Humanities and Teacher Education Division Writes Official Statement on Weisman Censorship – Pepperdine Graphic

Report on Institutional Censorship and its Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals at Pepperdine University

1.0 Incident Summary

In early October, senior administrators at Pepperdine University censored artwork and subsequently closed the “Hold My Hand in Yours” exhibition at the Frederick R. Weisman Museum of Art. In response, on November 3, the faculty of the Humanities and Teacher Education (HUTE) Division of Seaver College issued a formal statement to university leadership, including President Jim Gash, Provost Jay Brewster, and Dean Lee Kats. The statement declares full support for a preceding statement by the Fine Arts Division, which condemned the administrative actions.

2.0 Impact on Sustainable Development Goal 4: Quality Education

The administrative decision to close the museum exhibition directly contravenes the principles of SDG 4, which aims to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

• Disruption of Educational Programs: The HUTE Division confirmed that the Weisman Museum is an integral component of its curriculum, with multiple instructors regularly incorporating its exhibitions into their courses.
• Impediment to Research: The closure impacted a Cross-Disciplinary Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Research (CDIUR) project that was featured in the exhibition, undermining student and faculty research opportunities.
• Violation of Target 4.7: By censoring artistic expression, the administration limits students’ exposure to diverse cultural perspectives, hindering the acquisition of knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, human rights, and an appreciation of cultural diversity as outlined in SDG Target 4.7.

3.0 Contradiction of Sustainable Development Goal 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The faculty’s demands for transparency and accountability highlight a perceived failure of institutional governance, which is central to SDG 16, focused on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

1. Lack of Institutional Transparency: The faculty’s call for transparency points to a violation of SDG Target 16.6, which advocates for the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.
2. Infringement on Fundamental Freedoms: The act of censorship and the subsequent closure of the museum represent a restriction on artistic and academic freedom, which are fundamental freedoms that SDG Target 16.10 aims to protect.
3. Erosion of Institutional Integrity: Such actions undermine the university’s role as a strong and just institution, capable of fostering open dialogue and critical inquiry essential for a sustainable society.

4.0 Faculty Response and Call to Action in Alignment with SDG 17

The unified response from the Humanities and Teacher Education Division and the Fine Arts Division exemplifies SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals. This collaboration demonstrates a commitment to upholding the core principles required to achieve broader sustainable development objectives within an academic institution.

5.0 Demands and Recommendations

The faculty coalition has presented a clear set of demands to the university administration, which are essential for realigning institutional practices with global sustainability and educational standards. The core demands are:

• Transparency: A clear explanation for the decision to censor and close the exhibition.
• Accountability: Acknowledgment of the negative impact on students, faculty, and the university’s academic mission.
• Renewed Commitment: An institutional reaffirmation to uphold and protect artistic and academic freedom, ensuring alignment with SDG 4 and SDG 16.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 4: Quality Education

• The article directly addresses issues within an educational institution, Seaver College at Pepperdine University. The closure of the Weisman Museum is described as having “deeply impacted our students and faculty.” The use of the museum as an educational tool (“Several HUTE instructors regularly integrate the Weisman Museum into their courses”) and for research (“a CDIUR (Cross-Disciplinary Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Research) project that was featured there”) highlights the direct link between the administration’s actions and the quality of education provided.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• This goal includes the protection of cultural heritage. An art museum and its exhibitions are vital components of a community’s cultural life and heritage. The article discusses the “removal of the ‘Hold My Hand in Yours’ exhibition from the Weisman Museum,” which represents a failure to protect and promote cultural expression within the university community.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The core of the faculty’s statement is a call for better governance within their institution. They demand “transparency, accountability, and a renewed institutional commitment to upholding artistic and academic freedom.” This directly relates to the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions. The act of censorship and the subsequent protest are matters of fundamental freedoms and institutional justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Targets under SDG 4: Quality Education

1. Target 4.7: “By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for… appreciation of cultural diversity and of culture’s contribution to sustainable development.”
   • The integration of the Weisman Museum into courses is a practical application of this target, allowing students to appreciate culture. The censorship and closure of the exhibition undermine this educational goal by restricting access to cultural expression and dialogue.

Target under SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

1. Target 11.4: “Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage.”
   • The university’s art museum is a custodian of cultural works. The administration’s decision to censor artwork and shut down an exhibition is in direct opposition to the principle of safeguarding and promoting cultural expression.

Targets under SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

1. Target 16.6: “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.”
   • The faculty’s statement explicitly calls for “transparency, accountability” from the Pepperdine administrators (President Gash, Provost Brewster, and Dean Kats). This demonstrates a perceived lack of these qualities in the institution’s decision-making process regarding the museum.
2. Target 16.10: “Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.”
   • The central issue is the violation of “artistic and academic freedom,” which are fundamental freedoms essential for a thriving academic community. The closure of the exhibition also denies students, faculty, and the wider community access to the cultural information and expression contained within the artwork.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for SDG 4 Targets

• Implied Indicator: Policies on academic and artistic freedom. The call for a “renewed institutional commitment to upholding artistic and academic freedom” implies that the existence and enforcement of such policies are a key measure of educational quality and institutional integrity.
• Implied Indicator: Integration of cultural resources in curricula. The article mentions that “Several HUTE instructors regularly integrate the Weisman Museum into their courses.” Progress could be measured by the number of courses and research projects that utilize such cultural resources, which is currently being negatively impacted.

Indicator for SDG 11 Target

• Implied Indicator: Number of cultural exhibitions supported versus censored. The “removal of the ‘Hold My Hand in Yours’ exhibition” serves as a negative data point. A positive measure of progress would be the number of exhibitions successfully and freely held.

Indicators for SDG 16 Targets

• Implied Indicator: Mechanisms for institutional accountability and transparency. The demand for “transparency, accountability” suggests that the processes by which the administration made its decision were opaque. An indicator of progress would be the establishment of clear, transparent governance procedures for such matters.
• Implied Indicator: Verified cases of violations of fundamental freedoms. The censorship of the artwork is a specific case that could be tracked. A reduction in such incidents would indicate progress towards protecting fundamental freedoms within the institution.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article. In this table, list the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), their corresponding targets, and the specific indicators identified in the article.

Source: pepperdine-graphic.com