The last several years have seen a substantial growth in threats to academic freedom across the United States, driven by legislators (state and federal), donors and organized alumni or parents, corporations, and, most recently, by the executive branch of the federal government.
The AAUP has long been at the forefront of defining and defending academic freedom. Much of what is covered below is drawn from AAUP documents and reports. Selected statements, reports, and policies dealing with academic freedom, as well as with other key issues, are published in the AAUP’s Policy Documents and Reports.
Academic freedom is the “freedom of a teacher or researcher in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in his or her academic field, and to teach and publish findings without interference from administrators, boards of trustees, political figures, donors, or other entities. Academic freedom also protects the right of a faculty member to speak freely when participating in institutional governance, as well as to speak freely as a citizen.” (https://www.aaup.org/issues-higher-education/academicfreedom/faqs-academic-freedom)
Academic freedom is a right of anyone who engages in teaching or research at a college or university, whether they are tenured/tenure track faculty appointments, RTE or non-tenure teaching professors or instructors, or staff with research or teaching responsibilities.
Academic freedom rights also apply to students, in their right to invite whomever they would like to hear from to campus, to organize groups on topics of interest, and, within the guidance and strictures set by faculty, in conducting research.
It has several interrelated elements:
- teaching: freedom to discuss all relevant matters in the classroom: eg, select the materials, determine the approach to the subject, make the assignments, assess student academic performance, and maintain an educational environment. Threats to academic freedom in teaching can include subtle guidance about what to teach or how to teach it as well as overt institutional restrictions or pressure. Examples might include deciding not to assign a book for fear of it being perceived as controversial, being told to change the name of a course in order to obscure its content and avoid complaints, being advised not to teach certain concepts, being advised not to bring up certain issues in class, vetting of a course’s content for “controversial” material or for “balance” by an educational policy committee, choosing to teach one course over another out of worry for professional or personal consequences, etc.
research: freedom to explore all avenues of scholarship, research, and creative expression and to publish the results of such work. Threats to academic freedom often take the form of seeking to influence, distort, prevent, or suppress research. This can include pressure or encouragement to modify any aspect of your research to avoid controversy, to please donors or not upset internal or external actors. Examples might include institutional leaders telling students that they should not undertake research that would “put a target” on Cornell’s back, heightened administrative hurdles for undertaking some forms of research relative to others that you experience as unrelated to the integrity of the research process or the safety of participants, being threatened with retaliation for pursuing certain research topics or publishing certain findings, etc. - intramural speech: freedom from institutional censorship or discipline when addressing matters of institutional policy or action. Universities and colleges are unique spaces in American life. For them to pursue their public missions of education and research, they must have a much greater measure of internal self-governance than most organizations. Shared governance, of faculty and even students and staff, has accordingly been the hallmark of colleges and universities for centuries. Shared governance occurs in designated institutions – assemblies, the Faculty Senate, institutional committees – but also through the participation of any individual or collective group in addressing matters of institutional policy or action.
- extramural speech: freedom from institutional censorship or discipline when speaking or writing as citizens. One of the more visible flashpoints for threats to academic freedom occurs when someone associated with a University expresses an opinion or otherwise participates in political life and is targeted for doing so, whether by external or internal actors.More difficult to assess, however, is the degree to which people feel hesitant to participate or change their patterns of participation out of fear of institutional retaliation or professional consequences.
Academic freedom at Cornell is protected as part of Cornell policy, and through institutional protections of:
1. tenure, job security, and appropriate due process: AAUP Guidelines: “the termination of a tenured appointment–or of a term appointment before it expires–must be preceded by a hearing before an elected faculty committee, at which the administration bears the burden of demonstrating adequate cause.” This also implies faculty control over disciplinary measures below termination.
2. faculty governance: academic freedom protects individuals, but is regulated by collectives – the overlapping communities that determine what constitutes disciplinary competence and ethics. Educational policy, courses of study, and course content must reflect the fact that disciplinary competence is held by the Faculty. Faculty engage in shared governance not just through the assemblies or institutional committees, but through any individual or collective address on matters of institutional policy or action.
Cornell’s policy statement:
Cornell University respects and is committed to fundamental principles of academic freedom and rights of freedom of speech and expression as set forth in the following Statement and in other Cornell policies. Freedoms to engage in research and scholarship, to teach and to learn, to express oneself and to be heard, and to assemble and to protest peacefully and lawfully, are essential to the function of the University as an educational institution.
The University’s Statement of Core Values affirms the fundamental nature of Free and Open Inquiry and Expression:
We are a community whose very purpose is the pursuit of knowledge. We value free and open inquiry and expression—tenets that underlie academic freedom—even of ideas some may consider wrong or offensive. Inherent in this commitment is the corollary freedom to engage in reasoned opposition to messages to which one objects.
The University affirms the importance of extending to all students and employees the core values of free and open inquiry and expression and recognizes employees’ right to communicate freely outside of the scope of their Cornell employment in their capacity as private citizens. As stated in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) 1940 Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure, “Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition.”
The University endorses the Faculty Statement on Academic Freedom and Responsibility adopted by the University Faculty on May 11, 1960, which provides:
Academic Freedom for the Faculty means: Freedom of expression in the classroom on matters relevant to the subject and the purpose of the course and of choice of methods in classroom teaching; from direction and restraint in scholarship, research, and creative expression and in the discussion and publication of the results thereof; to speak and write as a citizen without institutional censorship or discipline.
Academic freedom is valued very highly at Cornell, and the University Faculty defends it tenaciously; nevertheless, the same University Faculty is disinclined to see the concept abused. Academic freedom does not imply immunity from prosecution for illegal acts of wrongdoing, nor does it provide license for faculty members to do whatever they choose.
The University recognizes that academic freedom also encompasses the freedom to address any matter of institutional policy or action whether or not as a member of any institutional governance body. The University further affirms that “a faculty member’s expression of opinion as a citizen cannot constitute grounds for dismissal unless it clearly demonstrates the faculty member’s unfitness to serve. Extramural utterances rarely bear upon the faculty member’s fitness for continuing service. Moreover, a final decision should take into account the faculty member’s entire record as a teacher and scholar.” See AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure, with 1970 Interpretive Comments, note 6.
Cornell Chapter of the AAUP 