The 1940 AAUP statement on Academic Freedom follows. I don't think the AAUP 
will be seen as being overly conservative on this point. The notes pertaining 
to each of the numbers are included below. The notes refer to refinements made 
to the principles in 1970. The document, including info on tenure and other 
processes can be found at: http://www.aaup.org/statements/Redbook/1940stat.htm 
<http://www.aaup.org/statements/Redbook/1940stat.htm> . I would say Academic 
Freedom, as discussed by the AAUP, is somewhat less than Rob's concept of "the 
ability to say and study whatever is desired without interference from outside 
sources."

"ACADEMIC FREEDOM

a.      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; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an 
understanding with the authorities of the institution. 
        
        
b.      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.[2] Limitations of 
academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should 
be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.[3]
        
        
c.      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.[4] 

[2] The intent of this statement is not to discourage what is "controversial." 
Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire 
statement is designed to foster. The passage serves to underscore the need for 
teachers to avoid persistently intruding material which has no relation to 
their subject. 

[3] Most church-related institutions no longer need or desire the departure 
from the principle of academic freedom implied in the 1940 Statement, and we do 
not now endorse such a departure. 

[4] This paragraph is the subject of an interpretation adopted by the sponsors 
of the 1940 Statement immediately following its endorsement which reads as 
follows: 

        If the administration of a college or university feels that a teacher 
has not observed the admonitions of paragraph (c) of the section on Academic 
Freedom and believes that the extramural utterances of the teacher have been 
such as to raise grave doubts concerning the teacher's fitness for his or her 
position, it may proceed to file charges under paragraph 4 of the section on 
Academic Tenure. In pressing such charges, the administration should remember 
that teachers are citizens and should be accorded the freedom of citizens. In 
such cases the administration must assume full responsibility, and the American 
Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges 
are free to make an investigation.

Paragraph (c) of the section on Academic Freedom in the 1940 Statement should 
also be interpreted in keeping with the 1964 "Committee A Statement on 
Extramural Utterances" (Policy Documents and Reports, 32), which states inter 
alia: "The controlling principle is 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 for his or her position. Extramural 
utterances rarely bear upon the faculty member's fitness for the position. 
Moreover, a final decision should take into account the faculty member's entire 
record as a teacher and scholar."

Paragraph 5 of the Statement on Professional Ethics also deals with the nature 
of the "special obligations" of the teacher. The paragraph reads as follows:

        As members of their community, professors have the rights and 
obligations of other citizens. Professors measure the urgency of other 
obligations in the light of their responsibilities to their subject, to their 
students, to their profession, and to their institution. When they speak or act 
as private persons they avoid creating the impression of speaking or acting for 
their college or university. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends 
upon freedom for its health and integrity, professors have a particular 
obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public 
understanding of academic freedom.

Both the protection of academic freedom and the requirements of academic 
responsibility apply not only to the full-time probationary and the tenured 
teacher, but also to all others, such as part-time faculty and teaching 
assistants, who exercise teaching responsibilities." 

Rick

 
Dr. Rick Froman
Psychology Department
Box 3055
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

________________________________

From: Rob Weisskirch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tue 7/25/2006 12:04 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: [tips] On academic freedom



TIPSfolk,

Thanks for directing me to this article on academic freedom (thanks, Miguel).  
Generally, I like Stanley Fish's columns when they appear in the Chronicle of 
Higher Ed.  However, I can't help but think that Fish's conservatism has now 
overtaken him.

Academic Freedom is exactly that--the ability to say and study whatever is 
desired without interference from outside sources.  Taking an unpopular view is 
exactly in the sights of academic freedom.  However, I don't think someone can 
discuss
academic freedom without talking about political correctness at the same time.  
The question is:  Are some subjects avoided because of the nature of the topic?

Too few of us in academe have grown fearful of speaking out--mostly, I believe 
because pusillanimous administrators who will sacrifice one professor over 
public image.

Recently, our campus invited the venerable David Horowitz to our tiny campus 
(Mr. Student Bill of Rights).  The sparsely attended event did, however, make 
me think.  Is it wrong to tell one side?  Or, to give a minority view?  To 
counter popular
wisdom?  You can read about this event in 
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23357.  It's sad to me that 
students lack the intellectual wherewithal to compose a counter argument. 

My 2 cents.

Rob Weisskirch, MSW, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Human Development
Department of Liberal Studies, Building 82C
100 Campus Center
California State University, Monterey Bay
Seaside, CA 93955-8001
(831) 582-5079
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english 
<http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0<=english> 



<<winmail.dat>>

---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english

Reply via email to