Thread: Reflecting on issue of remote instruction in China Studies for students at US schools but now physically in the PRC, the approach I would lean toward is not one that seems to be widely discussed.

2/ Given the suddenness with which faculty and administrators in the US have come to face this issue, which has caught many off-guard, I think most ad hoc measures for the coming year are justifiable if they don’t set precedents. This thread is not a criticism of anyone.

3/ To see the issues at stake, imagine my colleagues in US history facing this dilemma: they have students who want to study US history in a jurisdiction where it is illegal to present it fully and accurately. Where, say, it’s illegal to discuss the role of racism in US history.

4/ Virtually all of my Americanist colleagues, who feel a deep moral commitment to teaching US history accurately, would not find a dilemma here at all. They would say first: Don’t put yourself in danger by taking my course in a jurisdiction where it could put you at risk. But,

5/ they would also say: There is simply no way I can teach you a censored version of US history, leaving out what it’s illegal for you to study. That would be unethical, misleading, contrary to the basic principles of historical study, at best useless, at worst harmful.

6/ They would further say: This impasse cannot be finessed. Neither student safety nor historical integrity can be sacrificed one inch. The best solution is to take this course in person in a future year. The unfortunate next-least-worst solution is to not take the class at all.

7/ In other words, most US historians I know would point-blank refuse to teach a sanitized version of US history to accommodate a state agenda that made certain areas illegal in service of a historical narrative that was false by omission but convenient for those in power

8/ Yet the subtext of some of what I’ve read on this topic is that scholars of Chinese history should compromise by allowing students physically in the PRC to take their courses, but without having to download, read, or discuss ‘sensitive’ content.

9/ In practical terms, I think there are a few implications of this position. First, most university administrations would not allow instructors or depts. to refuse to teach students physically located in certain legal jurisdictions. That would require a university-level policy.

10/ In this sense, it’s better for universities to say, ‘we follow PRC local laws in the sense that you cannot access this content from the PRC’ rather than, ‘we follow PRC local laws by de facto forcing instructors to alter course content to safeguard students in the PRC.’

11/ Worth stressing here that this is not an IT issue and there’s no technical solution. US schools might find ways to shield class participation passing over PRC networks (readings, student work, Zoom, etc.), but they could never guarantee this, so that changes nothing.

12/ Final point is that it is fundamentally impossible teach History that’s safe for students in country that does not accept academic or speech freedom, full stop. Schools need policies saying that students physically in such jurisdictions cannot safely take any courses, period.

13/ That’s unfortunate, but there’s simply no technical solution or other fudge available. PRC limits on academic freedom may be an unstoppable force, but if the academic integrity of US schools is not an immovable object, then the US academic world is in deep trouble.