What is Academic Freedom?
In a piece posted yesterday on the website of the National Association of Scholars, Ashley Thorne and Steve Balch drew attention to a series of revisions to the Pennsylvania State University’s statement on Academic Freedom that the Faculty Senate at that institution has submitted to its President for final approval and implementation.
“These changes,” as they point out, “include the deletion of key passages that described the responsibility of the professor not to introduce unrelated controversial material into the classroom.” The 1987 version of the document, which followed in most respects the version adopted in 1950, stipulated that
It is not the function of a faculty member in a democracy to indoctrinate his/her students with ready-made conclusions on controversial subjects. The faculty member is expected to train students to think for themselves, and to provide them access to those materials which they need if they are to think intelligently. Hence, in giving instruction upon controversial matters the faculty member is expected be of a fair and judicial mind, and to set forth justly, without supersession or innuendo, the divergent opinions of other investigators.
No faculty member may claim as a right the privilege of discussing in the classroom controversial topics outside his/her own field of study. The faculty member is normally bound not to take advantage of his/her position by introducing into the classroom provocative discussions of irrelevant subjects not within the field of his/her study.
David Horowitz praised these provisions both in testimony he gave in 2005 to the Pennsylvania legislature and in his book The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America, arguing that by specifying limits to proper professorial conduct it connected freedom with responsibility and protected students against professorial abuse. Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), denounced these provisions earlier this year in his book No University is an Island: Saving Academic Freedom, and he welcomed the new statement proposed, which reads as follows:
Faculty members are expected to educate students to think for themselves, and to facilitate access to relevant materials which they need to form their own opinions. Faculty members are expected to present information fairly, and to set forth justly divergent opinions that arise out of scholarly methodology and professionalism.
In an e-mail to Inside Higher Education, Nelson wrote, “Penn State had one of the most restrictive and troubling policies limiting intellectual freedom in the classroom that I know of. It undermined the normal human capacity to make comparisons and contrasts between different fields and between different cultures and historical periods. The revised policy is a vast improvement.”
There is more to these changes than meets the eye. As Thorne and Balch point out, the language in the 1987 Penn State statement derives from the AAUP’s original Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure, which was promulgated in 1915. That in the revised statement reflects revisions introduced by the AAUP in 1940 and, more to the point, in 1994 and 1997. The two do not say in so many words that in recent years the AAUP has substituted license for liberty, but that is what they mean.
Are Thorne and Balch right? For my part, I think that they have a point. All too often what goes on in the classroom in our colleges and universities amounts to indoctrination and even hectoring. The old language served as a check on the vanity and self-righteousness to which we professors are prone. The new language may be unobjectionable in itself, but it lacks the clarity and specificity essential to constraint. It is far easier for a dean or department chair to determine whether a professor is pontificating outside his sphere of expertise than for someone not as expert as he is within that sphere to judge whether he has presented “information fairly” and “set forth justly divergent opinions that arise out of scholarly methodology and professionalism.”
What say you? Am I making a mountain out of a molehill?
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Absolutely not. My greatest aggravation as a university student was the classic course description "bait & switch" where the material taught bore no resemblance to the description in the course catalog.
I recall one course entitled something like "Communications In The Southern Hemisphere" which I thought might be good if I ever wanted to try my hand as a foreign correspondent. I was warned away from the course by a friend who told me that the professor spent an inordinate amount of the course talking about the inherent greatness of first nations cultures in the Southwest United States.
At least that was an elective course. The same professor lobbied to have his "Communications in History" class made compulsory. He got his wish making all the Communications Studies students a captive audience for his political rants that had nothing to do with communications or history.
At the very least, professors should be required to teach the actual subject matter of the course, as advertised. If you want to teach a class on native American cultures, advertise the class as such!
Edited on Dec 15, 2010 at 2:30pmOct '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
No, I believe your analysis to be spot-on. The revisions proposed by the Faculty Senate at Pennsylvania State University are quite clearly a back-door maneuver to give professors license to propagandize under the guise of academic freedom.
Within the context of my own decade of professional experience in academia (first as an MA-seeking graduate student, then as an adjunct instructor, and now as a Ph.D.-seeking graduate student), I have seen many professors abuse their authority not only by introducing irrelevant material into their lectures, but using their professional credentials as a platform to often attack the traditional cultures of the very states whose taxpayers, in part, subsidize their comfortable (in the case of those tenured or on the tenure-track) lifestyles. That is a situation which is morally unacceptable.
My view is that any position of instructorship - from an endowed chair down to that of a lecturer teaching a single course - is a public trust. As such, fairness and transparency should be absolute requirements. Regrettably, it seems that the Penn State Faculty Senate and the AAUP believe otherwise.
Edited on Dec 15, 2010 at 2:57pmMay '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Wrong question. Is "Academic Freedom" (or that matter the whole university experience) for the professor or the student?
May '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
I agree with you, Dr. Rahe, that the old wording was preferrable, but even there the rub was in defining "controversial." At the state school I attended, lauding the New Deal was not controversial in the slightest, while assigning blame for the Cold War to the USSR was deeply controversial.
Go to Hillsdale. That's the answer.
Oct '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
For some reason I just thought of one of my introductory Biology courses during my undergrad. At that time I was what one would consider a "Young Earth Creationist" (now as a grad student in Biology, I fully believe in Evolution and a Christian, my views being very similar to those of Francis Collins).
I have to commend my two Professors at the time. When I or another student would challenge them, often times very foolishly with a great deal of ignorance on the matter, they never once resorted to derision of any sort, but rather took our objections seriously, taking the time to fully explain everything and bring in additional material to do so.
I can't say I had the same experience in a Woman's Studies course I took my senior year (I was already accepted into grad school at that point and took it to "explore" what was really taught in such courses). There the most ridiculous propaganda was forced upon us and challenges to the dogma were met with dismissal and derision.
In one instance, the faculty respected my academic freedom and used theirs in the proper manner. The other was clearly an abuse.
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Scott Reusser: I agree with you, Dr. Rahe, that the old wording was preferrable, but even there the rub was in defining "controversial." At the state school I attended, lauding the New Deal was not controversial in the slightest, while assigning blame for the Cold War to the USSR was deeply controversial.
Go to Hillsdale. That's the answer. · Dec 15 at 3:43pm
What can I say? That is where I have gone.
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
In general, my sense is that science programs -- except perhaps where the subject being discussed is climate change -- are in better shape than the humanities and social sciences.
Jul '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
The fact that you have to say "I fully believe in Evolution" means that you accept it on faith and perhaps is not as scientific as you thought.
Regarding Professor Rahe, I do not find your statements overblown. In my experience, many students see through the miasma of the overbearing professor. When I teach a course that requires a paper to be written with revisions, the first paper invariably is from a leftist slant (often wrong) "Why organic chemistry is bad for everyone everywhere at all times." Then they get their grades back with my comments. The second iteration is much better. But they operate from the position that if they write leftist pabulum, they'll get a good grade. That undoubtedly is the result of preachers rather than teachers.
Aug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
The University of California faculty senate voted to make basically the same set of changes in 2003.
Also, it's "National Association of Scholars" not "National Organization of Scholars."
May '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Excellent point.
Also, is a degree meant to represent knowledge or wisdom? Classical universities overtly sought to shape young adults into honorable leaders of society. Modern universities aspire to be knowledge factories. Granted, a history program should have very different goals than a biology program.
And isn't judging whether or not a student's submission is acceptable a subjective exercise? I'm reminded of the judge's famous statement about pornography: "I know it when I see it." Academic freedom requires professors with qualities that cannot be codified.
Aug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
chadn737: For some reason I just thought of one of my introductory Biology courses during my undergrad. At that time I was what one would consider a "Young Earth Creationist"...
I have to commend my two Professors at the time.
Despite the face that Richard Dawkins puts on in public, I've heard from some evolution non-believers who took his Evo Bio course that he was surprisingly fair. That he reminded the rest of the class that the doubters did the useful job of pointing out the holes in the theory, which would improve the theory in the long run. And so on.
It's nice to know that some of the folks who are famous partly because of the arrogant attitude they choose to cultivate in public aren't always so arrogant in person.
Oct '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Michael Tee
The fact that you have to say "I fully believe in Evolution" means that you accept it on faith and perhaps is not as scientific as you thought.
You are wrong. I once made exactly the same sorts of arguments, so I know how much they boil down to symantic BS. There is a very broad usage of the words believe and faith. The context of which I use it here is equivalent to "knowing" it and "accepting" it. And for those who think there is no rigor in biology, really don't know the methodologies or the state of the field. Population biology (backbone of evolutionary biology) or systems biology, are both primarily mathematical with as many mathematicians as biologists. The earlier players in molecular biology were primary physicists and the techniques used are quantitative. As for Physics being somehow more concrete and less speculative, 99% of Theoretical Physicists spend their time teasing apart billions of different string theories that have no physical relevance under the collective assumption that it is true because it is "elegant."
But none of this is pertinent to the post, so I'll leave it for another discussion.
Edited on Dec 15, 2010 at 5:50pmAug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Michael Tee
When I teach a course that requires a paper to be written with revisions, the first paper invariably is from a leftist slant (often wrong) "Why organic chemistry is bad for everyone everywhere at all times."
What??? Organic Chemistry bad? For everyone? Everywhere? Everywhen? What could that possibly mean?
Organic Chemistry is a fact of life... What do these papers mean by "bad"?
I'm curious.
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
anon_academic: The University of California faculty senate voted to make basically the same set of changes in 2003.
Also, it's "National Association of Scholars" not "National Organization of Scholars." · Dec 15 at 4:21pm
Right you are. I will edit the piece.
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Aaron Miller
And isn't judging whether or not a student's submission is acceptable a subjective exercise? I'm reminded of the judge's famous statement about pornography: "I know it when I see it." Academic freedom requires professors with qualities that cannot be codified. · Dec 15 at 4:26pm
It is certainly not subjective in the precise sense. If one judges in an intelligent manner, it is by no means arbitrary. A badly written, badly argued paper is what it is, and a well-informed critic can show in detail that it is badly written and badly argued. When a math question is posed, there may well be only one right answer. When one asks a student to write an essay on an historical question, there may well be more than one possible approach that is thoughtful, informative, fruitful, and revealing. But it is not hard to identify an essay that is none of the above and to show that it is none of the above. What is required in a judge is what Pascal called esprit de finesse as opposed to esprit de geometrie.
Jul '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
chadn737
You are wrong...There is a very broad usage of the words believe and faith. And for those who think there is no rigor in biology, really don't know the methodologies or the state of the field. Population biology (backbone of evolutionary biology) or systems biology, are both primarily mathematical with as many mathematicians as biologists. As for Physics being somehow more concrete and less speculative, 99% of Theoretical Physicists spend their time teasing apart billions of different string theories that have no physical relevance under the collective assumption that it is true because it is "elegant."
Quite. It is always helpful as a neophyte in biology to insult someone who you have never met whose history you don't know as to their knowledge of the state of the science in a given field despite his decades of experience in it.
Population biology by mathematicians! Ha! You mean statisticians. Quite different.
You can take a biochemistry text from 20 years ago and find that most of it is wrong. Biology has a shorter half-life. Not so the Laws of Thermodynamics. Elegant, those...by definition.
Scientists have no belief in Boyle's Law. It just is.
Jul '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Michael Tee
When I teach a course that requires a paper to be written with revisions, the first paper invariably is from a leftist slant (often wrong) "Why organic chemistry is bad for everyone everywhere at all times."
What??? Organic Chemistry bad? For everyone? Everywhere? Everywhen? What could that possibly mean?
Organic Chemistry is a fact of life... What do these papers mean by "bad"?
I'm curious. · Dec 15 at 5:23pm
Oh, organic chemistry makes polymers which are bad for the environment because they don't decompose the way the idealists want. Or organic chemists make medicines which end up in waste streams and kill the spotted trout and cause babies to be born with genetic defects. Or organic chemists make dyes and adhesives, which are in runoff and kill the tsetse fly. Or organic chemists make pesticides, which thin the egg shells of the Baltimore Oriole, and cause children to have three arms. There's plenty out there. I haven't mentioned chemical plants which are designed to make organic chemicals that undoubtedly harm the environment...
Aug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Michael Tee
chadn737
Population biology (backbone of evolutionary biology) or systems biology, are both primarily mathematical with as many mathematicians as biologists.
Population biology by mathematicians! Ha! You mean statisticians. Quite different.
I believe chad did mean math, not statistics. There's a lot of game theory and other formal modeling in EEB. For example, concepts like "evolutionarily stable strategy" aren't stochastic and thus are math not stats.
Oct '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Michael Tee
Quite. It is always helpful as a neophyte in biology to insult someone who you have never met whose history you don't know as to their knowledge of the state of the science in a given field despite his decades of experience in it.
Insult?
So far you ignored the point of my original comment in order to play a game of semantics with my word choice on a topic of no relevance.
You then throw a hissy fit when I DARE to disagree with you (God forbid right?) and make some vague claim of insult because of it. At the same time you directly insult me by calling me a neophyte and then follow this up by bragging about yourself.
Awesome, thanks for completely going off topic and making me remember why I limit my online engagement.
I am not about to play along so that you can continue to stroke your ego. Maybe someone else here will oblige.
Edited on Dec 15, 2010 at 7:44pmAug '10
Re: What is Academic Freedom?
Michael Tee
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Michael Tee
When I teach a course that requires a paper to be written with revisions, the first paper invariably is from a leftist slant (often wrong) "Why organic chemistry is bad for everyone everywhere at all times."
What do these papers mean by "bad"?
Oh, organic chemistry makes polymers which are bad for the environment because they don't decompose the way the idealists want. Or organic chemists make medicines which end up in waste streams and kill the spotted trout and cause babies to be born with genetic defects. Or organic chemists make dyes and adhesives, which are in runoff and kill the tsetse fly. Or organic chemists make pesticides, which thin the egg shells of the Baltimore Oriole, and cause children to have three arms. There's plenty out there. I haven't mentioned chemical plants which are designed to make organic chemicals that undoubtedly harm the environment...
Uhh... If they're so uncomfortable with human beings synthesizing organic compounds, what exactly are they doing in an organic chemistry class (which I presume is the class for which students would write such papers)?