Instructor Interview
Below, Prof. Alex Byrne and Prof. Brad Skow describe various aspects of how they taught 24.150J Liberalism, Toleration, and Freedom of Speech in the fall semester of 2023.
OCW: The topic of this course has lately acquired new salience on university campuses, with widespread student protests arising out of the Israel-Gaza war. What is it like to teach about free speech in those circumstances?
Brad Skow: The students in the class were all very pro free-speech, and were quite willing to discuss difficult topics—that’s the kind of student the class attracts, I suppose. This even though some of them had quite strong opinions about some topics, and there was some disagreement. So the larger context didn’t affect this particular classroom much.
Alex Byrne: Yes, that was one great thing about the class, its dynamic aspect. Not a week went by without something relevant popping up. Unfortunately that’s lost in translation to OCW.
Brad Skow: If there was a change, it was that Alex and I think the class is even more important than it might have been before. (As it was created partly in the aftermath of the Dorian Abbot affair, we thought it was quite important before!)
OCW: In their work for this course, students are forbidden from using ChatGPT or any other generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools at any point. Can you tell us about the rationale for that policy, how well it has worked, and what you think the future holds for student use of generative AI in classes such as yours?
Brad Skow: The rationale was, we didn’t want students using ChatGPT to write their papers for them. We didn’t have much of a way to enforce the rule, other than eyeballing what they turned in. But none of it seemed egregiously AI-generated.
Alex Byrne: For what it’s worth, I’m pretty confident they did not use AI.
Brad Skow: As for what the future holds, it’s hard to say.
Alex Byrne: I suspect there’s a trend back to in-class written exams.
OCW: What pedagogical value do you see in the in-class debate?
Brad Skow: A liberal society works only if citizens are able to engage with those who disagree respectfully, and without raising the emotional temperature. The debate is a chance to practice that skill.
Alex Byrne: It never ceases to amaze me how easy this is to pull off, if you set expectations appropriately.
OCW: What would you like to share about teaching 24.150J that we haven’t yet addressed?
Brad Skow: We cover some “heterodox” topics in the class that I don’t think are covered anywhere else at MIT (but I could be wrong about this—haven’t investigated closely). For example, conservative arguments against gay marriage, liberal arguments in favor of immigration restrictions, arguments for and against permitting pornography. I think it’s a valuable feature of the class, that it’s a place where students may discuss, rationally and in an academic context, certain controversial topics they may care a lot about. Universities should provide places for this sort of thing, but rarely do (and indeed have become more and more averse to allowing certain topics even to be raised).
Curriculum Information
Prerequisites
None
Requirements Satisfied
- General Institute Requirement (GIR): Humanities Requirement
- Communication Intensive in the Major
- 24.150J can be applied toward a Bachelor of Science in Philosophy, but is not required.
Offered
Every fall semester
Assessment and Grading
Students’ grades were based on the following activities:
- 10% Participation in class discussions
- 15% First essay (1500 words)
- 15% Revision of first essay
- 15% In-class debate
- 20% Second essay (1500 words)
- 25% Final essay (2000 words)
Student Information
Enrollment
Fewer than ten students
Student Background
All the students were second- third- and fourth-year undergraduates, mostly science or engineering majors. Two of the students were cross-enrolled from other institutions (one from Tufts and one from Wellesley). None of the students were from MIT’s School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences (SHASS).
How Student Time Was Spent
During an average week, students were expected to spend 12 hours on the course, roughly divided as follows:
Lectures
- Met twice per week for 1.5 hours per session; 26 sessions total; mandatory attendance.
Out of Class
- Outside of class, students completed assigned readings, prepared answers to the in-class questions that served as a basis for discussion, prepared for the in-class debate, and wrote and revised the three assigned papers.
