{"id":1863,"date":"2025-09-16T10:56:13","date_gmt":"2025-09-16T14:56:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/openlab.bmcc.cuny.edu\/inquirer\/?p=1863"},"modified":"2025-09-23T14:24:16","modified_gmt":"2025-09-23T18:24:16","slug":"what-is-academic-freedom","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/openlab.bmcc.cuny.edu\/inquirer\/2025\/09\/16\/what-is-academic-freedom\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Academic Freedom?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
Photo used by permission of Mateo Sancho Cardiel<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The BMCC 2024-2025 Academic Freedom Committee
\nJoshua Belknap, Academic Literacy and Linguistics
\nHollis Glaser, Speech, Communication and Theatre Arts
\nTudor Protopopescu, Academic Literacy and Linguistics
\nBrett Whysel, Business Management<\/span><\/h3>\n

Introduction (Hollis Glaser)<\/h2>\n

We are living in a time when academic freedom is under relentless assault by the United States government. The BMCC Academic Senate Academic Freedom Committee (AFC) felt it would be a good idea to explain to our community exactly what academic freedom is and how to protect it. Prior to the current United States Presidency, our committee was doing relatively routine work\u2013answering questions from faculty, investigating new educational technologies, advising faculty about how to ensure they are teaching the way they want to.<\/p>\n

But this past year, we have had to respond to incredible attempts by our own government to control what we teach, who we hire and how we speak. Below is an explanation of what it means to have academic freedom and how to protect it. Part of the mission of the AFC is to educate the BMCC community. So in that spirit, we hope you find this article useful. And if you\u2019re so inclined, we\u2019d love for others to join the senate and our committee.<\/p>\n

A thumbnail history of AF in the U.S. (Josh Belknap)<\/h2>\n

Academic freedom \u2013 the idea that scholars, researchers, and educators can engage in teaching and scholarship without the fear of censorship or retribution \u2013 is foundational to American higher education today, but in the U.S., academic freedom is a relatively recent development. Defined and codified by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)<\/a>, academic freedom in the U.S. has been shaped by the rise of the modern research university, the influence of German universities, which emphasized scholarly research, and an increasing awareness of the need to protect faculty from censorship and political interference. The AAUP’s 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure<\/a> remains a foundational document articulating the principles of academic freedom.<\/p>\n

Shared governance is another key component of academic freedom, and refers to meaningful faculty participation in institutional decisions including hiring, budget, institutional mission, program, curricula, etc. Shared governance in higher education is a collaborative decision-making process between various stakeholders (faculty, administrators, and governing boards), to shape institutional policies and procedures. According to the AAUP, in shared governance \u201cthe role of the faculty is to have primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process,\u201d whereas the role of governing boards is to ensure that institutional operations and fiscal solvency remain functional, and the role of the president is to guarantee communication between the stakeholders. The goal of shared governance is to foster a sense of mutual responsibility and ownership in the institution’s direction and success.<\/p>\n

An update of the AAUP declaration of 1915 is the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure<\/a>, jointly authored by the AAUP and the Association of American Colleges and Universities<\/a>. The authors of the statement declare that “teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject.” The statement also permits institutions to impose “limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims,” so long as they are “clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.” Academic freedom refers to the ability of educators, students, and educational institutions to pursue knowledge, conduct research, and operate independently without unreasonable (and hopefully without any) political or government interference. In short, the statement argues that students and educators should have freedom of inquiry, to have the right to search for truth and knowledge and to impart those truths and knowledge to others, including others in the academy as well as the general public, unfettered by political or ideological pressure.<\/p>\n

The extent of extra-mural speech and speech critical of administration (Tudor Protopopescu)<\/h2>\n

To what extent are academics free to criticize their administrators or to speak on matters that do not fall strictly within their area of expertise and do so outside the classroom? That is, to what extent is extra-mural speech protected, and how does this interact with the right to shared governance where this involves matters of institutional policy and decision?<\/p>\n

There are conflicting legal decisions concerning these issues which means that there is not yet a clear boundary between speech that falls under academic freedom and speech which does not.<\/p>\n

On the side of restricting academic freedom, a notable Supreme Court case is Garcetti v Caballos<\/em>. Garcetti v Caballos<\/em> concerned the demotion of a deputy district attorney for criticizing the conduct of a local sheriff. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect public employees who criticized their supervisor’s official acts and policies: “When public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, the employees are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.” Despite making an explicit exception for academic speech\u2014”there is some argument that expression related to academic scholarship or classroom instruction implicates additional constitutional interests that are not fully accounted for by this Court\u2019s customary employee-speech jurisprudence”\u2014Garcetti v Caballos<\/em> has been used as precedent against faculty employed at public universities which were disciplined or fired from their positions for criticizing policies or actions of their administrations.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, another notable case is Pickering v Board of Education<\/em>. This case concerned a public school teacher who was fired for writing a letter to a newspaper critical of the local school board’s decision concerning a bond issue. The court ruled that the teacher’s speech was protected because it concerned a matter of public concern. Pickering v Board of Education<\/em> has been subsequently cited as precedent in cases concerning academic freedom, notably in Austin v Demers<\/em> in which the court ruled that “teaching and writing on academic matters” by publicly employed teachers are governed by Pickering v Board of Education<\/em> rather than Garcetti v Caballos,<\/em> and hence is protected speech. Subsequently the court withdrew and superseded this decision with a new one which broadened the definition of protected academic speech to “speech related to scholarship or teaching,”.<\/p>\n

A number of subsequent cases turn on the extent to which Garcetii v Caballos<\/em> applies in academic contexts. Some of the issues involved include whether such speech is “pursuant to official duties” or whether the speech is made towards the public or made on a matter of public interest. Other questions surround just what is related to “scholarship and teaching.” Different decisions have come down differently on these issues, and hence the line between protected and unprotected academic speech is, legally, unclear. Overall, rulings suggest that if the speech is made in a public setting and on a matter of public concern, then the speech is protected. One should also make sure to make it clear that one is not speaking as an employee “pursuant to official duties” and certainly not speaking for the institution.<\/p>\n

Nurturing Academic Freedom (Brett Whysel)<\/h2>\n

Academic freedom and shared governance are what enables us to support the goals of the university: the creation and dissemination of knowledge and truth, supporting human progress, national strength, and collective happiness. It is worth protecting, even strengthening. How do we do this?<\/p>\n

Understand it. <\/strong>Explore the resources and definitions at AAUP<\/a>, the PSC-CUNY commitment to Academic Freedom<\/a>, and read the BMCC Academic Freedom handbook<\/a>. Follow news and developments at the AAUP blog<\/a>, higher education magazines, and in the Academic Senate. Participate in panels and webinars. Reflect on past or current controversies involving academic freedom to sharpen your understanding of its boundaries and importance. Consider how your own teaching and research practices are supported and constrained by academic freedom. How would you respond if they were challenged by politicians, administrators, or others?<\/p>\n

Exercise it.<\/strong> In planning and executing your curriculum, use your academic freedom to its fullest by using a wide range of diverse, critical, and marginalized viewpoints to explore your discipline. Consider including the AAUP\u2019s syllabus language<\/a> in your syllabus. In your research, continue to expand knowledge, challenge orthodoxy, and address unexplored areas bravely. Explore the boundaries of academic freedom by reconnoitering areas of disagreement, uncertainty, and ambiguity. Cover current events when relevant to your course objectives.<\/p>\n

Risk-Manage it.<\/strong> Exercising academic freedome to its fullest can feel dangerous in the currently charged political climate. To manage these risks, develop a clear understanding of academic freedom and its boundaries, and build a strong support network through your union, governance bodies, and trusted colleagues. In the classroom, we can frame challenges as hypotheses to test, not positions to defend. In our research, we can get early feedback from trusted colleagues and preemptively address potential misinterpretations.<\/p>\n

Advocate for it. <\/strong>Actively and emphatically support other faculty as they exercise their legitimate academic freedoms. Promote dialog on academic freedom in department, senate, and union meetings. Sign petitions and support resolutions that support academic freedom. Speak up when academic freedom is threatened, bringing complaints and grievances as appropriate. Be an active member of PSC-CUNY, which is also here to support academic freedom. Mentor junior colleagues to know and exercise their rights. Support academic freedom in social and other media.<\/p>\n

Without academic freedom, our democracy, social, and scientific progress, and student success is threatened. Freedoms like these bring with them responsibilities to protect and nurture them. By having a clear sense of academic freedom, detailed plans for exercising them, and advocating for others using them, we meet these responsibilities, strengthen our country and its institutions, and better serve our students.<\/p>\n

Conclusion (Hollis Glaser)<\/h2>\n

We hope it\u2019s clear from the above explanations how extreme recent moves from our administrators and politicians are. The principles of academic freedom ensure that faculty oversee curriculum, instruction, faculty hiring and promotion, and that administrators have less say and politicians have no say in these matters. There may be unusual circumstances where an administrator may go against faculty wishes. However, if they do so, it is incumbent upon them to explain their decision. For example, let\u2019s say a college president decides to overrule a department\u2019s Personnel and Budget Committee and the department chair to rehire faculty. They have the right to do so but then must explain their decision.<\/p>\n

Or let\u2019s say the governor of a state doesn\u2019t like the way a department advertises a faculty position. In cases when politicians exceed their authority, the chancellery is obviously under extreme pressure. But they should consult with faculty, not make unilateral decisions. (See the AAUP response<\/a>)<\/p>\n

In these unusual circumstances, it is important that we act in unison, as Brett advises above, to join with our faculty senates and the PSC to counter these unprecedented violations of academic freedom. The current federal administration is finding endless ways to control colleges and universities, including changing our accreditation system. It is imperative that we all stay abreast of these developments.<\/p>\n

We also need to speak to more mundane but equally important academic freedom issues. First, often faculty feel their academic freedom is threatened by other faculty, especially those on committees that have required particular textbooks or methods of instruction. Academic freedom is considered to be a collective protection of faculty from administrators and government officials, not from other faculty. Having said that, the AAUP has stated that it is important for departments to rotate membership of committees making those decisions and for those committees to listen to opposing viewpoints.<\/p>\n

Another area of interest is in the classroom. With the new technologies (Zoom, AI, recording devices), faculty are often concerned that their words may be recorded and distributed, or their image might be replicated and distorted. Our best advice for these situations is to write in the syllabus the limitations you want in the classroom. For instance, state that students may not record without explicit permission from everyone in the class.<\/p>\n

Finally, if you think your academic freedom has been threatened or violated, get in touch with our committee (hglaser@bmcc.cuny.edu<\/a>). We will research the issue and advise you. You may also contact the PSC Academic Freedom Committee chair, Prof. Anthony C. Alessandrini (tonyalessendrini@gmail.com<\/a>). While the BMCC AFC is a good resource, if there is a clear violation, it will be the PSC AFC that will pursue it through legal means.<\/p>\n

We hope this has been a useful article. It is important that our entire community\u2013faculty, staff and administrators, understand the basics of academic freedom. It is one of the pillars of democracy and worth defending.<\/p>\n

References:<\/h2>\n