A couple of weeks ago Stanley Fish described the case of a physics professor at the University of Ottawa who faces "dismissal with cause". He announced on the first day of class that he was giving everyone in his course an A+, and he changed a course on physics and the environment a course encouraging political activism. He regarded insubordination as his job and believed that academic freedom entitled him to do as he pleases.
In a post the following week, Fish argues
In the United States, the 1940 Statement on Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure from the American Association of University Professors is generally taken as one of the best expressions of the principles of academic freedom and the justification for it. And what does it have to say?
In a post the following week, Fish argues
[S]ince it is the job of the academy to transmit and advance knowledge, there should be no pre-emptive anointing or demonizing of any particular viewpoint or line of inquiry; not because such pre-emptings would be an assault on truth, but because they would impede the doing of the job. Free inquiry means free in relation to the goals of the enterprise, not free in the sense of being answerable to nothing.Those who hold to an expansive view of academic freedom will find his conclusion satisfying. But in addition to the practical matter of what courts have decided on the issue,1 there's the issue of principle about what academic freedom is.
In the United States, the 1940 Statement on Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure from the American Association of University Professors is generally taken as one of the best expressions of the principles of academic freedom and the justification for it. And what does it have to say?
Well, among other things:
So the AAUP comes down firmly on Fish's side of the argument, and I agree.
Academics have a special responsibility to encourage the "free search for truth and its free exposition." With that responsibility come privileges: the privilege to pursue a line of research wherever it leads, the privilege to teach our subject in ways consistent with our scholarly understanding of it, and the privilege to speak as citizens without fear of reprisal from the college or university at which we work.
Those privileges are the sum and substance of academic freedom, and we are entitled to them only insofar as we encourage the "free search for truth and its exposition."
1Fish teaches law, and provides references to several cases in his column. I won't attempt to review them.
- Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties.
- Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.
- College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution. (emphasis added)
So the AAUP comes down firmly on Fish's side of the argument, and I agree.
Academics have a special responsibility to encourage the "free search for truth and its free exposition." With that responsibility come privileges: the privilege to pursue a line of research wherever it leads, the privilege to teach our subject in ways consistent with our scholarly understanding of it, and the privilege to speak as citizens without fear of reprisal from the college or university at which we work.
Those privileges are the sum and substance of academic freedom, and we are entitled to them only insofar as we encourage the "free search for truth and its exposition."
1Fish teaches law, and provides references to several cases in his column. I won't attempt to review them.
Leave a comment