A Swedish lecturer in psychology at University of Lund has been forced to leave after protests from a small group of five students against a course he led. The course had been running since the 1980’s & encouraged students to confront themselves with uncomfortable opinions and argue against them.
From the linked article (translated by Google with minor edits by myself):
In a course evaluation from the spring semester 2017, 18 of 19 students responded that the course “a lot” or “very much” contributed to the student’s learning or development as a future psychologist.
“I think this has been the best course on the whole program,” writes a student in the course evaluation.
“It is one of the few courses we have had where I feel respectfully treated, considered competent and where I have experienced that the teachers have actually been keen on my learning”.
“I’ve had a whole new level of contact with my emotional life that gives me energy and courage to be heartfelt,” writes another.
But the course also has critics. Each semester, a group of students describe discomfort, shame, sexism, and resentment on the part of teachers. In the course evaluation from 2017, one student wrote: “Language strongly colored by sexism and linguistic exclusion of minority groups, such as gender non-binary persons, lowered my confidence in the management and made the collaboration more difficult”.
In an internal Facebook thread from the fall of 2019, a student invites other students “who also experienced the course as problematic or unpleasant” to contact the study director to bring about a change.
When Max Kaymak [took the course] in 2015, he felt that the atmosphere in the class changed. He remembers that it became more relaxed and he started talking to people he had not talked to before.
“At the [clinical] psychology program you are expected to be a third wave feminist and leftist. I put no value in it, but there must be room to express other opinions”, he says and continues:
“During this course, for the first time, we were forced to confront other perspectives. I realized that you can feel different but still meet and I think it is useful, especially for psychologists who treat people with sometimes disgusting opinions”, he says.
[A student we may call Sofia] was on the program’s Equality Committee and heard how other students experienced panic attacks, depression and suicidal thoughts in connection with the [course]. Now she feels the same.
“To me as a lesbian, the [course] was extremely stressful. The perspectives presented were sexist and homophobic and I reacted physically in a way I had never experienced before”, she says.
She gets panic attacks that last for months afterwards.
[Sofia] and four classmates went to the study director Jonas Bjärehed.
Thomas Nilsson, who is currently studying semester ten on the [clinical] psychology program, also went to the study director, but to show his support for the course. He does not believe that the criticism of the [course] is based on violations or sexism from the lecturers, but has ideological reasons.
“The reason why there will be such a fuss every time the [course] is running is primarily that it challenges an ideology about how to be and how to think, which is very strong in the [clinical] psychology program”, he says.
He talks about a repressive conversation climate and a small group with leftist political identity ideology that sets the norm for what one might think. They act as moral guardians, condemn and verbally attack students and teachers they disagree with.
“There are many who are Christian, right, liberal or conservative on the program but who dare not say it. They do not want to participate in discussions, because they cannot cope with the hatred”, he says and continues:
"It is extremely important that you can have a conversation about sensitive things, such as discussing the psychologically symbolic father or the father’s function. Claiming it as abusive makes learning impossible. The university must protect the discussions, and [this course] is the only course on the program that does so.
Jonas Bjärehed thinks […] that the students’ stories were reasonable.
“It was clear to me what I needed to do when the students explained what they experienced. What the teachers had said in that situation had not changed the students’ experiences or my assessment”, he says and continues:
“When students feel as bad as these students did, whether they are in a minority, we must act.”
[Johan Grant, responsible for the course] believes that it is becoming increasingly difficult to hold courses that go against certain habitual thinking and mean introspection for the students.
“The institutional interest in having a course that addresses sensitive topics and questions strong ideologies does not exist. It is believed that this protects the students, but it is the opposite”, says Johan Grant.
Instead, he feels that the conversation is silenced for ideological reasons, and that a small group of students who do not want to talk openly about sensitive issues, but put the lid on, give rise to an unreasonable, judgmental and closed conversation culture on the program.
“People assume that people are far more fragile than they are and develop an identity that is about protecting themselves and the environment from perspective. It is a major problem in the teaching of prospective psychologists”, he says.
On December 17 [2019], Johan Grant receives a call in which the course examiner, as well as the head of the department, Robert Holmberg, announces that he lacks confidence in him as a teacher for the [course]. Instead, he is referred to Jonas Bjärehed for “agreeing on other duties”. The call is short and the atmosphere tense.
Now major changes are expected of the course - the teaching structure must be changed and the [course] made voluntary. What happens to the [course] this fall, if it still exists, remains to be seen.
What is certain, however, is that Johan Grant has held the course for the last time. When his employment expires in June, eight years at the Department of Psychology in Lund are over.