I agree with Ronda. Dr. Johnson’s letter confirmed that the university took it seriously as part of a larger systemic concern about profiling. May I point out there was another aspect to this - the perceived sense of safety that our
vulnerable workers have on campus. It’s really critical that they feel confident in the ability of the institution to respond to their concerns in a timely manner.
Lyn Bartram
Professor | School of Interactive Arts + Technology
Director | Vancouver Institute of Visual Analytics
Simon Fraser University | Surrey
250, 13450 102 Ave., Surrey, B.C. V3T 0A3
T: 778.782.7439 | M: 604.908.9954 | www.sfu.ca/~lyn
“Be kind, be calm and stay safe” -Dr. Bonnie Henry, BC Provincial Health Officer
From: Ronda Arab <ronda_arab@sfu.ca>
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 11:22 AM
To: James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca>, "academic-discussion (academic-discussion@sfu.ca)" <academic-discussion@sfu.ca>
Cc: Office of the President <pres_office@sfu.ca>
Subject: Re: President Johnson's letter
I did not read that as suggesting that President Johnson did not accept the findings of the report. My reading on the seeming discrepancy was that the incident raised a lot of concerns
about racism that need to be taken seriously, whether or not the incident involved racial profiling.
Dr. Ronda Arab
Associate Professor of English
Simon Fraser University
pronouns: she/her
From: James Fleming <james_fleming@sfu.ca>
Sent: 16 March 2021 11:02:48
To: academic-discussion (academic-discussion@sfu.ca)
Cc: Office of the President
Subject: President Johnson's letter
Dear Colleagues,
Last Thursday, Joy Johnson emailed all SFU faculty, staff and students, re: the campus security incident that took place on December 11th, 2020. President Johnson’s email contained (1) a link to the summary version
of the independent external review she commissioned into the Dec. 11th incident. And (2) her own commentary on the results of the review. I am troubled by what seems to me an inconsistency, on a very important point, between (1) and (2).
Conclusion 10 (a) of the review summary states: “there is no evidence” that “racial profiling” contributed to the Dec. 11th incident. This seems to me very welcome news—indeed quite a relief.
President Johnson, however, seems to see it differently. She states that the Dec. 11th incident “has reinforced concerns about racism on our campuses.”
I frankly do not understand how a non-racist incident can reinforce concerns about racism.
Conversely, if President Johnson holds to the view that the Dec. 11th incident was indeed generated by racism, that would seem to mean she rejects Conclusion 10 (a) of the external review.
This is not an occasion for ambiguity. In my opinion, President Johnson should clarify her remarks—for the benefit of all SFU faculty, staff, and students. She should tell the university whether she accepts, or
rejects, Conclusion 10 (a) of the external review.
Sincerely,
JD Fleming
Professor, Department of English
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby/Vancouver,
British Columbia,
Canada.