Cedarville University Responds to American Association of University Professors (AAUP)
Media Advisory
June 10, 2009
We anticipate that the AAUP will recommend to its membership at its annual meeting this week that some form of adverse action be taken against Cedarville, as a result of the erroneous allegations contained in the AAUP's January 2009 report. This includes the possibility that Cedarville will be placed on a list of censured administrations. The recommendation of censure is simply a label the AAUP assigns to administrations at institutions – a disproportionate number of which are religious – that the AAUP believes do not comply with the AAUP's own policies and procedures. The AAUP's censured list includes such respected institutions as Brigham Young University, Grove City College, Catholic University of America, Tulane University, Hillsdale College, and Yeshiva University.
As you may recall, Cedarville University provided an initial response to the AAUP's report on January 15, 2009. As we anticipate this adverse action, we continue to reject the AAUP's report as flawed, biased, misleading, and fundamentally false. The following perspectives are relevant:
- Cedarville University is committed to biblical principles as evidenced in our mission and vision statements, By-Laws, Doctrinal Statement, Community Covenant, General Workplace Standards of Conduct, and Faculty and Staff Handbooks. Biblical principles – not an external body like the AAUP – hold us to the highest standards, guide our governing documents, and inform our understanding of academic freedom.
- Cedarville's policies and procedures comply with all state and federal law governing private and religious colleges and universities. The AAUP has no legal or contractual authority over Cedarville University, and any adverse action which might be taken by the AAUP would have no bearing on Cedarville's accreditation.
- In its report, the AAUP itself has repeatedly recognized Cedarville's commitment to confidentiality, and has acknowledged that the AAUP did not have access to the confidential details surrounding this personnel matter.
- The falsity of the AAUP's report stems from its lack of access to the confidential information surrounding this personnel matter, as well as its pre-determined conclusions consistent with the AAUP's demonstrated historical bias against religious schools.
We, therefore, reject the AAUP report as flawed, biased, misleading, and fundamentally false, both in the process used to prepare it and in the conclusions it makes.
