Academic freedom#Academic Freedom Index

A minimal definition of academic freedom is that a teacher has a right to instruct, and a student has a right to learn in an academic setting unhampered by outside interference.[https://www.britannica.com/topic/academic-freedom Britannica website, academic freedom, article dated Mar 25, 2024] Other definitions include the right of teachers to engage in social and political criticism.

A broader definition of academic freedom incorporates individual, extramural and institutional components. Under this broader definition, an academic has freedom of expression without government interference, but this freedom is circumscribed by academic expertise and position. Academic freedom of speech is therefore narrower than a general freedom of speech. For example, a non-academic has the freedom of speech to criticize the efficacy of vaccines, but only has academic freedom to do so if they possess the prerequisite academic qualifications to do so. Unlike public speech, academic speech is also subject to quality controls by academic peers, for example through peer review.

Universities UK has defined academic freedom as "protecting the intellectual independence of academics to question and test received views and wisdom, and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions, without placing themselves in danger of losing their jobs or privileges",[https://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/latest/news/higher-education-sector-statement Universities UK website, Higher education sector statement on promoting academic freedom and free speech, article dated 20 Dec 2022] while the American Federation of Teachers has seen it as "based on the idea that the free exchange of ideas on campus is essential to good education".[https://www.aft.org/position/academic-freedom American Federation of Teachers website, Academic Freedom] Norwegian education sees it as a guarantee that research and teaching is "intellectually and morally independent of all political and economic interests", leading to openness, free enquiry and debate.[https://hkdir.no/en/guidelines-and-tools-for-responsible-international-knowledge-cooperation/academic-values-and-research-ethics/academic-freedom Norwegian Directorate for Higher Education and Skills website, Academic freedom, article dated November 28, 2023]

Historically, academic freedom emerged tentatively. In medieval Europe, academics who criticized church doctrine or acted in ways considered objectionable by the church could face repression. Similarly during the era when nation-states were emerging, academic could face sanction for acting contrary to the government.

Academic freedom began to gain institutional footing with the emergence of the modern research university. The Humboldtian model of higher education from the 19th century enshrined the basic ideas of academic freedom and diffused them to other countries. Wilhelm von Humboldt was a philosopher and linguist who was given the authority to create a new university in Berlin in the early 19th century. He then founded a university that adhered to two principles of academic freedom: freedom of scientific inquiry and the unity between research and teaching. According to Humboldt, the fundamental proposition underlying the principles of academic freedom was to uphold the view that science is not something that has already been found but as knowledge that will never be fully discovered and, yet, needs to be searched for unceasingly. The university he founded later became a model and inspiration for modern colleges in Germany and universities in the West.{{cite journal |last1=Muller |first1=Steven |title=Wilhelm von Humboldt and the University in the United States |journal=Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest |volume=6 |issue=3 |pages=253–256 |url=https://www.jhuapl.edu/Content/techdigest/pdf/V06-N03/06-03-Muller.pdf |access-date=5 April 2022}}

The concept of academic freedom was also formulated in response to the encroachments of the totalitarian state on science and academia in general for the furtherance of its own goals. For instance, in the Soviet Union, scientific research was brought under strict political control in the 1930s. A number of research areas were declared "bourgeois pseudoscience" and forbidden, notably genetics{{cite journal | first=Bentley | last=Glass |date=May 1962 | title=Scientists in Politics | volume=18 | issue=5 | page=3 | journal=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PgkAAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA3 | doi=10.1080/00963402.1962.11454353 | bibcode=1962BuAtS..18e...2G | url-access=subscription }} (see "Lysenkoism") and sociology.{{Cite journal|last=Greenfeld|first=Liah|date=1988-01-01|title=Soviet Sociology and Sociology in the Soviet Union|journal=Annual Review of Sociology|volume=14|pages=99–123|doi=10.1146/annurev.soc.14.1.99|jstor=2083312}} Marxist scientist John Desmond Bernal characterized this as part of the interdependence between "applied science" and "pure science".{{Cite book |last1=Kaldewey |first1=David |url=https://www.berghahnbooks.com/downloads/OpenAccess/KaldeweyBasic/9781785338113_OA.pdf |title=Basic and applied research: the language of science policy in the twentieth century |last2=Schauz |first2=Désirée |date=2018 |publisher=Berghahn books |isbn=978-1-78533-810-6 |series=European conceptual history |location=New York |pages=53–54 |language=en}}

File:Michael Polanyi.png

Michael Polanyi argued that a structure of liberty is essential for the advancement of science.{{cite book |first =Michael|last =Polanyi|title=Personal Knowledge|year=1958|publisher =Edwin Mellen Press|isbn=0-7734-9150-3}} In 1936, as a consequence of an invitation to give lectures for the Ministry of Heavy Industry in the USSR, Polanyi met Bukharin, who told him that in socialist societies all scientific research is directed to accord with the needs of the latest five-year plan. Demands in Britain for centrally planned scientific research led Polanyi, together with John Baker, to found the Society for Freedom in Science.{{cite journal |doi=10.1007/BF01102181|first =William|last =McGucken|year=1978|title=On Freedom and Planning in Science: The Society for Freedom in Science 1940–1946|journal=Minerva|volume=16|issue=1|pages=42–72|s2cid =143772928}} The society promoted a liberal conception of science as free enquiry against the instrumental view that science should exist primarily to serve the needs of society. In a series of articles, re-published in The Contempt of Freedom (1940) and The Logic of Liberty (1951), Polanyi claimed that co-operation among scientists is analogous to the way in which agents co-ordinate themselves within a free market. Just as consumers in a free market determine the value of products, science is a spontaneous order that arises as a consequence of open debate among specialists. Science can therefore only flourish when scientists have the liberty to pursue truth as an end in itself:

{{blockquote|

[S]cientists, freely making their own choice of problems and pursuing them in the light of their own personal judgment, are in fact co-operating as members of a closely knit organization.

Such self-co-ordination of independent initiatives leads to a joint result which is unpremeditated by any of those who bring it about.

Any attempt to organize the group ... under a single authority would eliminate their independent initiatives, and thus reduce their joint effectiveness to that of the single person directing them from the centre. It would, in effect, paralyse their co-operation.

}}

Proponents of academic freedom believe that the freedom of inquiry by students and faculty members is essential to the mission of the academy. They argue that academic communities are repeatedly targeted for repression due to their ability to shape and control the flow of information. When scholars attempt to teach or communicate ideas or facts that are inconvenient to external political groups or to authorities, they may find themselves targeted for public vilification, job loss, imprisonment, or even death. For example, in North Africa, a professor of public health discovered that his country's infant mortality rate was higher than government figures indicated. He lost his job and was imprisoned.Robert Quinn (2004). " Items and Issues: [http://www.ssrc.org/workspace/images/crm/new_publication_3/%7B5cebcead-2d60-de11-bd80-001cc477ec70%7D.pdf Defending 'Dangerous Minds] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100626011312/http://www.ssrc.org/workspace/images/crm/new_publication_3/%7B5cebcead-2d60-de11-bd80-001cc477ec70%7D.pdf|date=2010-06-26}}.'" Social Science Research Council. Vol. 5 No. 1-2.Ralph E. Fuchs (1969). "Academic Freedom—Its Basic Philosophy, Function and History," in Louis Joughin (ed)., Academic Freedom and Tenure: A Handbook of the American Association of University Professors.{{Update inline|date=March 2024|reason=These sources (and all others over 20 years old) probably fit better in historical background section}}

The fate of biology in the Soviet Union is cited by Jasper Becker as a reason why society has an interest in protecting academic freedom. Also it is important to make the distinction between science and pseudoscience, on the border of this lies the case of a Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko rejected Western science – then focused primarily on making advances in theoretical genetics, based on research with the fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) – and proposed an approach to farming that was based on the collectivist principles of dialectical materialism. (Lysenko called this "Michurinism", but it is more popularly known today as Lysenkoism.) Lysenko's ideas appealed to the Soviet leadership, in part because of their value as propaganda, and he was ultimately made director of the Soviet Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Subsequently, Lysenko directed a purge of scientists who professed "harmful ideas", resulting in the expulsion, imprisonment, or death of hundreds of Soviet scientists. Lysenko's ideas were then implemented on collectivised farms in the Soviet Union and China. Famines that resulted partly from Lysenko's influence are believed to have killed 30 million people in China alone.Jasper Becker (1996). Hungry Ghosts: Mao's Secret Famine. New York: Free Press. Chapter 5: False science, false promises. "All over China in 1958...real scientists were imprisoned or sent to do manual labor. In their place, thousands of untrained peasants carried out 'scientific research.'" (p. 63). "For twenty-five years, Trofim Denisovitch Lysenko ruled over Soviet agricultural scientists list a dictator. Those who opposed him were shot or perished in labor camps..." (p. 64)

Sociologist Ruth Pearce argued that the concept of academic freedom exists to protect scholarship from censure by state or religious authorities, and not to defend intolerance.{{cite journal |last1=Pearce |first1=Ruth |title=Academic freedom and the paradox of tolerance |journal=Nature Human Behaviour |date=2021 |volume=5 |issue=11 |page=1461 |doi=10.1038/s41562-021-01214-5|pmid=34795420 |s2cid=244409335 |url=http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/252353/2/252353.pdf }}

A large-scale empirical study, covering more than 157 countries over the 1900-2015 period, links academic freedom to the quality and quantity of patents filed in a given country. David Audretsch and colleagues estimate that academic freedom has declined over the last decade for the first time over their century-long observation period, resulting in at least 4% fewer patents filed. The study claims to be the first to link academic freedom to economic growth through an innovation channel.{{cite journal |last1=Audretsch |first1=David B. |last2=Fisch |first2=Christian |last3=Franzoni |first3=Chiara |last4=Momtaz |first4=Paul P. |last5=Vismara |first5=Silvio |date=2023 |title=Academic freedom and innovation: A research note |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4384419 |journal=SSRN |page=1 |arxiv=2303.06097 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.4384419 |s2cid=257482554 |ssrn=4384419}}

Academic freedom has also been identified as a leading indicator for whether a government will become more or less democratic.{{Cite web |last=Laakso |first=Liisa |date=2022-08-17 |title=Academic freedom and democracy in African countries: the first study to track the connection |url=https://theconversation.com/academic-freedom-and-democracy-in-african-countries-the-first-study-to-track-the-connection-186579 |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}}

File:2024 Academic Freedom Index map.png

In 2020, V-dem institute partnered with Scholars at Risk to create the first index of Academic freedom. The index provides retroactive ratings for countries going back to 1900 that are also updated yearly.{{Cite journal |last1=Spannagel |first1=Janika |last2=Kinzelbach |first2=Katrin |date=October 13, 2022 |title=The Academic Freedom Index and Its indicators: Introduction to new global time-series V-Dem data |journal=Quality & Quantity |language=en |volume=57 |issue=5 |pages=3969–3989 |doi=10.1007/s11135-022-01544-0 |issn=0033-5177 |pmc=9559165 |pmid=36259076}} The index estimates academic freedom using five categories that follow the UNESCO definition:

• freedom to research and teach
• freedom of academic exchange and dissemination
• institutional autonomy
• campus integrity
• freedom of academic and cultural expression

As of 2025, Academic freedom overall around the world has been in retreat since 2013.{{Cite journal |last=Lott |first=Lars |date=2023-12-18 |title=Academic freedom growth and decline episodes |journal=Higher Education |volume=88 |issue=3 |pages=999–1017 |language=en |doi=10.1007/s10734-023-01156-z |issn=0018-1560|doi-access=free }}{{Cite web |last=Balme |first=Stéphanie |date=2025-03-05 |title=Academic freedom and democracy under siege: how a Nobel peace prize could help defend them |url=https://theconversation.com/academic-freedom-and-democracy-under-siege-how-a-nobel-peace-prize-could-help-defend-them-251494 |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}} Causes cited have included authoritarianism as well as political polarization{{Cite web |last=Packer |first=Helen |date=2024-03-07 |title='Stark decline' in academic freedom: four in 10 face restrictions |url=https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/stark-decline-academic-freedom-four-10-face-restrictions |access-date=2024-03-08 |website=Times Higher Education (THE) |language=en}}{{Cite web |last1=Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Institute of Political Science |last2=V-Dem Institute |author-link2=V-Dem Institute |date=March 7, 2024 |title=Academic Freedom Index: Update 2024 |url=https://academic-freedom-index.net/research/Academic_Freedom_Index_Update_2024.pdf |publisher= |type= |via=}} and populism.{{Cite web |last1=California |first1=University of |last2=Irvine |title=Study highlights key social forces shaping worldwide academic freedom trends |url=https://phys.org/news/2024-02-highlights-key-social-worldwide-academic.html |access-date=2024-03-07 |website=phys.org |language=en}}

{{See also|Academic freedom in the Middle East}}

The concept of academic freedom as a right of faculty members is an established part of most legal systems. While in the United States the constitutional protection of academic freedom derives from the guarantee of free speech under the First Amendment, the constitutions of other countries (particularly in civil law systems) typically grant a separate right to free learning, teaching, and research.File:Academic freedom in china chart 1900 2023.png |postscript=. To reproduce, select Country=china, Indicators=Academic Freedom Index}}|300x300px]]

File:Self-censorship in a Chinese academic journal.png as it could cause trouble with the "authorities".|300x300px]]

Academic freedom has been severely limited in China.{{Cite web |date=May 2002 |title=Academic freedom in China |url=https://www.proquest.com/openview/bb6bb1425bcbf5404ec07c5746fe9395/1.pdf?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=41824 |website=Academe (magazine) by the American Association of University Professors |page=Vol. 88, Iss. 3, : 26–28}}{{Cite book|chapter-url=https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137040107_14|doi = 10.1057/9781137040107_14|chapter = Intellectuals, Academic Freedom, and University Autonomy in China|title = University Governance and Reform|year = 2012|last1 = Zha|first1 = Qiang|pages = 209–224|isbn = 978-1-349-34276-1}}{{Cite journal|doi=10.1017/heq.2018.22|title=The Paradox of Academic Freedom in the Chinese Context|year=2018|last1=Zha|first1=Qiang|last2=Shen|first2=Wenqin|journal=History of Education Quarterly|volume=58|issue=3|pages=447–452|s2cid=149712417|doi-access=free}} Academics have noted an incentive not to express 'incorrect' opinions about issues sensitive to the Government of China and the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP).{{cite magazine|last1=Fish|first1=Isaac Stone|date=2018-09-04|title=America's Elite Universities Are Censoring Themselves on China|url=https://newrepublic.com/article/150476/american-elite-universities-selfcensorship-china|magazine=The New Republic|access-date=2020-12-29}}{{cite web|last=Redden|first=Elizabeth|date=2018-01-03|title=Scholars and politicians raise concerns about the Chinese government's influence over international academe|url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/01/03/scholars-and-politicians-raise-concerns-about-chinese-governments-influence-over|access-date=2020-12-29|website=Inside Higher Ed}} These efforts have been effective in causing academics to self-censor and shift academic discourse.{{cite web |last=Wong |first=Matteo N. |date=2020-04-23 |title=The End of the Harvard Century – Magazine |url=https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/4/23/harvard-china-scrutiny/ |access-date=2020-12-29 |website=The Harvard Crimson}}

In December 2020, the Associated Press reported that China was controlling scientific research into the origins of COVID-19 under direct orders from CCP general secretary Xi Jinping. According to the report, an order by China's State Council required all research to be approved by a task force under their management, saying scientific publication should be orchestrated like "a game of chess", warning that those who publish without permission will be held accountable.{{cite news |title=China clamps down in hidden hunt for coronavirus origins |url=https://apnews.com/article/united-nations-coronavirus-pandemic-china-only-on-ap-bats-24fbadc58cee3a40bca2ddf7a14d2955 |work=AP NEWS |date=30 December 2020}}{{Cite web|url=https://apnews.com/article/united-nations-health-ap-top-news-virus-outbreak-public-health-3c061794970661042b18d5aeaaed9fae|title = China delayed releasing coronavirus info, frustrating WHO|website = Associated Press|date = 20 April 2021}}

According to National Public Radio, from 2013 to 2017, at least 109 universities in China issued their first charters affirming the CCP leadership.{{Cite web |last=Feng |first=Emily |date=January 20, 2020 |title=Chinese Universities Are Enshrining Communist Party Control In Their Charters |url=https://www.npr.org/2020/01/20/796377204/chinese-universities-are-enshrining-communist-party-control-in-their-charters |access-date=July 15, 2024 |website=npr.org}} In 2020, Shanghai's Fudan University removed freedom of thought from its charter following the December 2019 revision of the school charter to emphasize loyalty to the CCP.

Hong Kong academia expressed concerns about the impact of the 2020 Hong Kong National Security Law on academic freedom in Hong Kong.{{Cite web |last=McLaughlin |first=Timothy |date=2021-06-06 |title=How Academic Freedom Ends |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/06/china-hong-kong-freedom/619088/ |access-date=2024-07-19 |website=The Atlantic |language=en}} As of 2025, it ranked in the bottom 20% worldwide for academic freedom according to the Academic Freedom Index.{{Cite web |date=2024-03-13 |title=Hong Kong sees fall in academic freedom amid ongoing crackdown |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/studies-03132024131600.html |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=Radio Free Asia |language=en}}

In an August 2021 study, Jue Jiang from the University of London argued that academic freedom in China is impaired by the CCP's system of student informants, who are recruited and encouraged to watch and inform on their professors on university campuses.{{Cite web |last=Jiang |first=Jue Jiang |date=August 30, 2021 |title=Academic Freedom in China: An Empirical Enquiry through the Lens of the System of Student Informants (Xuesheng Xinxiyuan) |url=https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3913971 |access-date=July 20, 2024 |website=SSRN|ssrn=3913971 }}

Central European University was forced to leave Hungary after its academic freedom deteriorated under Victor Orban.{{Cite web |last=Pils |first=Eva |last2=Svensson |first2=Marina |date=2019-10-07 |title=Academic freedom is under threat around the world – here’s how to defend it |url=https://theconversation.com/academic-freedom-is-under-threat-around-the-world-heres-how-to-defend-it-118220 |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}} In 2020, students protested the overhauling by the government of the University of Theater and Film Arts.{{Cite web |title=Thousands march through Budapest for academic freedom – DW – 10/23/2020 |url=https://www.dw.com/en/hungary-thousands-march-through-budapest-demanding-academic-freedom/a-55380527 |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=dw.com |language=en}}

As of 2025, India ranks in the bottom 10-20% of countries globally.{{Cite web |title=India in Bottom 10-20% Bracket on Academic Freedom Index, Ranks 156th Globally |url=https://m.thewire.in/article/education/india-in-bottom-10-20-bracket-on-academic-freedom-index-ranks-156th-globally?utm=relatednews |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=thewire.in |language=en}}

Protections for academic freedom for research, teaching and other activity "to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions" without being disadvantaged, are provided in Section 14 of the 1997 Universities Act.{{cite web|url=http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/act/pub/0024/index.html |title=Universities Act, 1997 |website=Irishstatutebook.ie |date=1997-05-14 |access-date=2020-12-14}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2025}}

Academic freedom in Israel is taken from "the Law of the Council for Higher Education".[https://he.wikisource.org/wiki/%D7%97%D7%95%D7%A7_%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%A6%D7%94_%D7%9C%D7%94%D7%A9%D7%9B%D7%9C%D7%94_%D7%92%D7%91%D7%95%D7%94%D7%94 The Law of the Councile for Higher Education], 1958: Paragraph 15 (he). Paragraph 15 in which it states that "a recognized institution is free to all its academic and administrative matters, within the framework of its budget, as it sees fit. In this paragraph, 'academic and administrative matters' – includes: determining a research and teaching program, appointing the authorities of the institution, appointing teachers and promoting them, determining a teaching method and study, and any other scientific, educational or economic activity". It seems that the paragraph is worded in a clear and comprehensible way even for laymen. The body that is supposed to guard academic freedom, as well as maintain an adequate academic level in the higher education institutions, is the Council for Higher Education – hereinafter "The Council". This council consists of academics who serve as professors at universities, and public figures, with the Minister of Education as the head of the council.

At the disposal of "The Council" is an executive body called the "Committee for Planning and Budgeting", which mainly deals with the matter of universities budgeting and establishing relevant procedures and guidelines for budget and salary matters. Another body that is supposed to guard academic freedom is the "Committee of the Heads of the Universities", which is a voluntary body, but has an influence on the work of the Legislature and "The Council ". Through their employee committees, and through the personal activity of each of them, these bodies can try and influence the preservation of academic freedom.

In general, it can be said that the essential academic freedom, the one aimed at the freedom of teaching and research, was preserved, and the government neither interfered nor tried to interfere in these contents. Its way of influencing this matter is by providing incentives for teaching in this or that way, or for research in certain fields, and this is through grants. The fact that the government finances a significant percentage of the current budget of the universities (around 70% or more), also allows the government to decide what will be the tuition fee for a student at the budgeted universities in Israel.Gori Zilka, [https://www.neaman.org.il/Files/6-230.pdf Tuition policy in higher education institutions in Israel], Shmuel Na'aman Institute, Technion, 2006 (in Henrew) But, In 2021, an academic committee of the prestigious Israel Prize decided to award the Israel Prize in the field of mathematics and computer science to Professor Oded Goldreich from the Weizmann Institute of Science. The Minister of Education did not accept the committee's recommendation on the grounds that Goldreich signed a petition calling for an academic boycott of Ariel University, which is located in the territories of Judea and Samaria, which are occupied territory, as well as for appealing to the German government to revoke its decision that the BDS movement is an anti-Semitic movement. The award committee appealed to the Supreme Court for a violation of its academic freedom, and the court overturned the decision, and ordered the Minister of Education to award Goldreich the award. Godreich received the award a year later.{{Cite news |last=tamar Trabelsi Hadad & Eynav Halabi |date=11 April 2022 |title=End of the saga: Prof. Oded Goldreich received the Israel Prize in a small ceremony |url=https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/hjxylpbnc |newspaper=Ynet}}

In recent years, a fierce debate has erupted on the issue of academic freedom, following extreme political statements by a number of university faculty members. The vast majority of the controversial statements were those that called for an academic boycott of Israel, or support for organizations that support an economic and academic boycott of Israel. The question that was at the center of the storm was whether an academic faculty member (hereafter referred to as a professor) is protected by the principle of freedom of speech, or is it forbidden, when he wears the guise of a professor, to express a political position that might identify the position with the institution he allegedly represents. All the more, is it permissible for the professor to express a political position during his teaching, and even to invite representatives of political bodies to lecture in his classes, and without maintaining a balance between those invited.As for summoning political figures to classes, it was usually professors and classes in the field of "political science, politics and government", which apparently or not, summoning these figures and the discourse accompanying their words, is part of the professor's teaching method. Referring to that background, the Minister of Education at the time Naftali Bennett (in 2017) asked Prof. Asa Kasher to compile an academic Code of Ethics for universities,David Tversky. [https://www.davar1.co.il/71715/ Limiting Freedom of Expression or Setting Norms? Storm over the code of ethics for academia]. "Davar", June 2017 (in Hebrew).{{Cite web |last=Katsman |first=Hayim |date=29 January 2019 |title=Protecting academic freedom in Israeli higher education |url=https://jewishstudies.washington.edu/israel-hebrew/academic-freedom-israel-universities-colleges/ |website=University of Washington, January 29, 2019.}} a code that was approved by "The Council" in March 2018. All the research universities (7 universities), with the exception of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, which already had for an academic code of ethics that also included the issue of freedom of expression, refused to adopt this code on the grounds of infringing academic freedom.Adir Yanko. [https://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5194524,00.html Academia Without Political Opinions: on the way to the approval of the ethical code]., Ynet, March 2018 (in Hebrew).

All research universities in Israel have a Chief internal auditor, relatively independent. This issue of the interrelationship between the internal audit in universities and the principle of academic freedom is discussed in detail in an article that appeared in a book issued on behalf of the Ben-Gurion university of the Negev – the only one as mentioned that has a binding academic code of ethics.Ron Avni. [https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AEuuUf8NTNwb9%5Fg&cid=06073481DD0858A3&id=6073481DD0858A3%2111445&parId=6073481DD0858A3%213097&o=OneUp The Internal Audit at the University and Academic Freedom – Between Conflict and Harmony]. In: J. Grados and Y. Nevo (editors), Science and Spirit in the Negev: pp. 581 – 589, BGU, 2014 (in Hebrew).

In the Chapter II Constitution of Mauritius, academics have the right to: the protection of freedom of conscience, protection of freedom of expression, protection of freedom of assembly and association, protection of freedom to establish schools and the protection from discrimination.{{Cite book|title=Handbook of Comparative Higher Education Law|last=Russo|first=Charles J.|publisher=Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc|year=2013|isbn=978-1-4758-0405-8|location=Lanham, Maryland|pages=191–207}} The institutional bureaucracy and the dependence on the state for funds has restricted the freedom of academics to criticize government policy. Dr. Kasenally, an educator at the University of Mauritius stated that in 1970s to 1980s the university was at the forefront of controversial debates, but in the 1990s the university stepped away after academic freedom was curtailed to not express views or ideas especially if they oppose those of the management or government. In a 2012 paper on the University of Mauritius the author states that although there are no records of abuse of human rights or freedom of the state "subtle threats to freedom of expression do exist, especially with regard to criticisms of ruling political parties and their leaders as well as religious groups." While there have been no cases of arrests or extreme detention of academics, there has been fear that it would hinder their career progress especially at the level of a promotion thus, the academics try to avoid participating in controversial debates.{{Cite journal|last=Ramtohul|first=Ramola|date=2012|title=Academic Freedom in a State-Sponsored African University: The Case of the University of Mauritius.|url=https://www.aaup.org/JAF3/academic-freedom-state-sponsored-african-university-case-university-mauritius|journal=AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom|volume=3|pages=1–17|via=American Association of University Professors}} Academic freedom became a public issue in May 2009 when the University of Mauritius spoke out against the vice chancellor Professor I. Fagoonee, who had forwarded a circular sent by the Ministry of Education to academics. This circular targeted public officers and required them to consult their superiors before speaking to the press. The pushback resulted in the vice chancellor stepping down, with the author speculating the government used the vice chancellor as the scapegoat for its unpopular proposal to try to curtail academic freedom.

In the Netherlands the academic freedom is limited relative to other Western European countries.{{Citation needed|date=May 2025}} In November 1985 the Dutch Ministry of Education published a policy paper titled Higher Education: Autonomy and Quality.{{Cite book|title=Handbook of Comparative Higher Education Law|last=Russo|first=Charles J.|publisher=Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc|year=2013|isbn=978-1-4758-0405-8|location=Lanham, Maryland|pages=207–229}} This paper had a proposal that steered away from traditional education and informed that the future of higher education sector should not be regulated by the central government. In 1992 the Law of Higher Education and Research (Wet op het hoger onderwijs en wetenschappelijk onderzoek, article 1.6) was published and became effective in 1993. However, this law governs only certain institutions.

The Education Act 1989 (s161(2)) defines Academic freedom as: a) The freedom of academic staff and students, within the law, to question and test received wisdom, to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions; b) The freedom of academic staff and students to engage in research; c) The freedom of the university and its staff to regulate the subject matter of courses taught at the university; d) The freedom of the university and its staff to teach and assess students in the manner they consider best promotes learning; and e) The freedom of the university through its council and vice-chancellor to appoint its own staff.{{cite web|url=http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0080/latest/DLM183665.html|title=Education Act 1989 No 80 (as at 28 September 2017), Public Act 161 Academic freedom – |website=New Zealand Legislation|access-date=10 January 2018}}{{Secondary source needed|date=May 2025}}

The South African Constitution of 1996 offers protection of academic freedom and the freedom of scholarly research.{{Cite journal |date=16 April 2010 |title=Academic Freedom statement from the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf) |url=http://archive.sajs.co.za/index.php/SAJS/article/view/202 |journal=South African Journal of Science |volume=106 |number=3/4}} Academic freedom became a main principle for higher education by 1997. Three main threats are believed to jeopardize academic freedom: government regulations, excessive influence of private sector sponsor on a university, and limitations of freedom of speech in universities.

There have been an abundance of scandals over the restricted academic freedom at a number of universities in South Africa.{{Cite journal|last=Lindow|first=Megan|date=25 May 2007|title=Academic Freedom Is Eroding in South Africa, Critics Say|url= https://www.chronicle.com/article/Academic-Freedom-Is-Eroding-in/5961|journal=Chronicle of Higher Education|volume= 53 |page=A50|issue = 38|url-access= subscription}} The University of KwaZulu-Natal received fame over its restricted academic freedom and the scandal that occurred in 2007. In this scandal a sociology lecturer, Fazel Khan was fired in April 2007 for "bringing the university into disrepute" after he released information to the news media. According to Khan he had been airbrushed from a photograph in a campus publication because of his participation in a staff strike last February. In light of this scandal the South African Council on Higher Education released a report stating that the state is influencing academic freedom. In particular, public universities are more susceptible to political pressure because they receive funds from the public.

{{See also|List of educational institutions closed in the 2016 Turkish purges}}

In 2016, Erdogan was given the power to appoint professors by decree. This, along with firings, harassment and imprisonment of academics{{Cite web |last=Pils |first=Eva |last2=Svensson |first2=Marina |date=2019-10-07 |title=Academic freedom is under threat around the world – here’s how to defend it |url=https://theconversation.com/academic-freedom-is-under-threat-around-the-world-heres-how-to-defend-it-118220 |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=The Conversation |language=en-US}} helped to drop Turkey to one of the countries with the lowest academic freedom in the world by 2021, leading to protests at institutions like Boğaziçi University.{{Cite web |last=Tokyay |first=Menekse |date=2021-02-10 |title=Turkey's Erdoğan cracks down on academic freedom protests |url=https://www.axios.com/2021/02/10/turkey-student-protests-rector-erdogan-arrests |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=Axios |language=en}}

{{See also|Anthony D. Smith}}

The Robbins Report on Higher Education,{{Cite web|url=http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/robbins/robbins1963.html#16|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131030011903/http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/robbins/robbins1963.html#16|url-status=dead|archive-date=October 30, 2013|title=Robbins Report on Higher Education|date=October 1963|access-date=15 July 2019}} commissioned by the British government and published in 1963, devoted a full chapter, Chapter XVI, to Academic freedom and its scope. This gives a detailed discussion of the importance attached both to freedom of individual academics and of the institution itself. In a world, both then and now, where illiberal governments are all too ready to attack freedom of expression, the Robbins committee saw the (then) statutory protection given to academic freedom as giving some protection for society as a whole from any temptation to mount such attacks.

When Margaret Thatcher's government sought to remove many of the statutory protections of academic freedom which Robbins had regarded as so important, she was partly frustrated by a hostile amendment to her bill in the House of Lords. This incorporated into what became the 1988 Education Reform Act, the legal right of academics in the UK 'to question and test received wisdom and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs or the privileges they may have'.{{cite web |title=1988 Education Reform Act |url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/40/contents |website=The National Archives}} These principles of academic freedom are thus articulated in the statutes of most UK universities. Professor Kathleen Stock formerly of University of Sussex resigned from her role due to controversy from students and the media regarding her transphobic views.{{cite web |author1=Burns, A. |title=The rise of anti-trans "radical" feminists, explained |url=https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical |website=Vox |date=2019}} In response to such concerns, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has issued guidance.{{cite web |title=Freedom of expression: a guide for higher education providers and students' unions in England and Wales |url=https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/publication-download/freedom-expression-guide-higher-education-providers-and-students-unions-england |website=Equality and Human Rights Commission |date=2019}} The Guidance provides detailed procedures for universities to consider in determining whether or not specific events can go ahead. It also provides ways to reduce any potential barriers for freedom of speech in regards to specific events. The guidance also makes clear the statutory requirement of universities to ensure they protect freedom of speech on campus however as well as compliance with the Prevent Strategy and the Equality Act 2010. In 2016 the Warden of Wadham College Oxford, a lawyer previously Director of Public Prosecutions, pointed out that the Conservative government's anti-terrorism "Prevent" strategy legislation has placed on universities 'a specific enforceable duty ... to prevent the expression of views that are otherwise entirely compatible with the criminal law'.{{Cite web|url=https://www.wadham.ox.ac.uk/news/2016/february/prevent-in-the-academy|title=PREVENT: Counter-Terrorism and Freedom|last=Macdonald|first=Ken|date=February 2016|website=Wadham College, University of Oxford|access-date=15 July 2019|archive-date=5 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220305212619/https://www.wadham.ox.ac.uk/news/2016/february/prevent-in-the-academy|url-status=dead}}

{{Split section|Academic freedom in the United States|discuss={{TALKPAGENAME}}#Split proposed|date=November 2024}}

{{further|Censorship of school curricula in the United States|Freedom of speech in schools in the United States}}

{{See also|Chicago principles|Academic Freedom Alliance}}

In the United States, academic freedom is generally taken as the notion of academic freedom defined by the "1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure", jointly authored by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the Association of American Colleges (now the Association of American Colleges and Universities).1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, AAUP {{cite web|url=http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/1940statement.htm |title=AAUP: 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure |access-date=2006-10-13 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070208031344/http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/1940statement.htm |archive-date=2007-02-08 }}, accessed March 23, 2007 These principles state 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". The principle also refers to the ability of teachers, students, and educational institutions to pursue knowledge without unreasonable political or government interference.{{Cite web |last1=Kraft |first1=Emilie S. |date=February 18, 2024 |title=Academic Freedom |url=https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/17/academic-freedom |access-date=2023-04-07 |website=The Free Speech Center at Middle Tennessee State University |language=en}} The Principles have only the character of private pronouncements, not that of binding law.

Some accreditors work with American colleges and universities, including private and religious institutions, to support academic freedom in various forms, which vary by accreditor.{{Cite web |last=Shireman |first=Robert |date=2024-06-12 |title=Academic Freedom Is Under Attack. College Accreditors May Be the Best Line of Defense. |url=https://tcf.org/content/report/academic-freedom-is-under-attack-college-accreditors-may-be-the-best-line-of-defense/ |access-date=2024-08-29 |website=The Century Foundation |language=en}} Additionally, the AAUP, which is not an accrediting body, works with these same institutions. The AAUP does not always agree with the accrediting bodies on the standards of protection of academic freedom and tenure.For example, the Northwest Association of Schools and of Colleges and Universities reviewed Brigham Young University's academic freedom statement and found it in compliance with the 1940 statement, while AAUP has found Brigham Young University to be in violation{{Cite book |last=Lai |first=Amy T.Y. |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/book/113334 |title=In Defense of Free Speech in Universities: A Study of Three Jurisdictions |date=2023 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |isbn=978-0-472-90379-5 |language=en |doi=10.1353/book.113334|hdl=20.500.12657/64037 }} The AAUP lists (censures) those colleges and universities which it has found, after its own investigations, to violate these principles.{{cite web|url=http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/about/censuredadmins/|title=Censure List|date=18 July 2006 |publisher=AAUP|access-date=3 May 2015}} By 2022, 88 percent of four-year colleges and universities will limit student free speech, reversing a 15-year trend, according to the College Speech Codes annual report. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) reported that 426 out of 486 institutions have at least one policy restricting student speech.{{Cite web |last=Salai |first=Sean |date=2022-12-17 |title=More and more U.S. universities limiting students' free expression |url=https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/dec/17/88-four-year-colleges-restrict-students-free-expre/ |access-date=2023-02-13 |website=The Washington Times |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |last= |date=2024-01-31 |title=New FIRE report finds 85% of top colleges have restrictive speech codes |url=https://www.thefire.org/news/new-fire-report-finds-85-top-colleges-have-restrictive-speech-codes |access-date=2024-03-04 |website=The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression |language=en}}

Academic freedom started in America after the Civil War disrupted the previously stagnating systems of higher education. The educational system that Germany had was analyzed by universities to progress fields of research. Johns Hopkins University was the first to use this education system.{{Cite web |date=March 7, 2016 |title=Free Speech and Academic Freedom |url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/news/archive/free-speech-and-academic-freedom |access-date=2023-10-23 |website=www.law.columbia.edu |language=en}}

Prior to the turn of the twentieth century, a professor by the name of Edward Ross published the free silver movement supporting document known as Honest Dollars. The document placed the professor in political disagreement with the founders of Stanford University. The Stanford family made their money from the railroad industry that the professor had publicly ridiculed. In 1900, the professor expressed politically charged statements that called for the expulsion of Japanese immigrants from the country which would lead to his termination from the university. This decision was followed by seven other professors resigning from the university and elevated the matter to national scrutiny. This event would set in motion the creation of the AAUP to provide monetary and legal security, filling the gaps in many of their contracts.{{Cite web |last=University |first=Stanford |date=2023-05-01 |title=Academic freedom's origin story |url=https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05/01/origin-story-academic-freedom/ |access-date=2023-10-23 |website=Stanford Report |language=en}}

In 1957, the U.S. Supreme Court began to take up the matter starting with the case of Sweezy v. New Hampshire. In Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967), the Supreme Court made connections between the First Amendment and academic freedom as an especially important protection on the grounds that it was crucial to everyone. Such First Amendment protections only applied to public institutions, and academic freedom contains protections outside of the First Amendment as the Court never outright declared that it contained academic freedom.

A prominent feature of the English university concept is the freedom to appoint faculty, set standards and admit students. This ideal may be better described as institutional autonomy and is distinct from whatever freedom is granted to students and faculty by the institution.Kenneth W. Kemp (15 November 2000) [https://web.archive.org/web/20040625233457/http://courseweb.stthomas.edu/kwkemp/Papers/AF.pdf What is Academic Freedom?], p. 7 - University of St. Thomas

The Supreme Court of the United States said that academic freedom means a university can "determine for itself on academic grounds:

1. who may teach,
2. what may be taught,
3. how it should be taught, and
4. who may be admitted to study."Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 312 (1978).Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234, 262–263 (1957) (Felix Frankfurter, Justice).Stronach v. Virginia State University, civil action 3:07-CV-646-HEH (E. D. Va. Jan. 15, 2008).{{Cite web |date=May 2002 |title=Academic Freedom of Professors and Institutions – AAUP |url=https://www.aaup.org/issues/academic-freedom/professors-and-institutions |access-date=2021-01-15 |website=www.aaup.org}}{{Update inline|date=March 2024|reason=This 2002 source is too old, the other notes of specific cases constitute OR}}

In a 2008 case, a federal court in Virginia ruled that professors have no academic freedom; all academic freedom resides with the university or college. In that case, Stronach v. Virginia State University, a district court judge held "that no constitutional right to academic freedom exists that would prohibit senior (university) officials from changing a grade given by (a professor) to one of his students." The court relied on mandatory precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court case of Sweezy v. New Hampshire and a case from the fourth circuit court of appeals.See Urofsky v. Gilmore, 216 F.3d 401, 414, 415 (4th Cir. 2000). (Noting that "cases that have referred to a First Amendment right of academic freedom have done so generally in terms of the institution, not the individual ...." and "Significantly, the court has never recognized that professors possess a First Amendment right of academic freedom to determine for themselves the content of their courses and scholarship, despite opportunities to do so". The Stronach court also relied on persuasive cases from several circuits of the courts of appeals, including the first,Lovelace v. S.E. Mass. University, 793 F.2d 419, 425 (1st Cir. 1986) ("To accept plaintiff's contention that an untenured teacher's grading policy is constitutionally protected ... would be to constrict the university in defining and performing its educational mission".) third,Edwards v. California University of Pennsylvania, 156 F.3d 488, 491 (3d Cir. 1998) ("In Edwards v. Cal. Univ. of Pa., The court held that the First Amendment does not allow a university professor to decide what is taught in the classroom but rather protects the university's right to select the curriculum," as cited in Stronach.)Brown v. Amenti, 247 F.3d 69, 75 (3d Cir. 2001). (Holding "a public university professor does not have a First Amendment right to expression via the school's grade assignment procedures".) and seventhWozniak v. Conry, 236 F.3d 888, 891 (7th Cir. 2001). (Holding that "No person has a fundamental right to teach undergraduate engineering classes without following the university's grading rules ...." and that "it is the [u]niversity's name, not [the professor]'s, that appears on the diploma; the [u]niversity, not [the professor], certifies to employers and graduate schools a student's successful completion of a course of study. Universities are entitled to assure themselves that their evaluation systems have been followed; otherwise their credentials are meaningless".) circuits. That court distinguished the situation when a university attempts to coerce a professor into changing a grade, which is clearly in violation of the First Amendment, from when university officials may, in their discretionary authority, change the grade upon appeal by a student.See Parate v. Isibor, 868 F.2d 821, 827–28 (6th Cir. 1989). (Holding that "a university professor may claim that his assignment of an examination grade or a final grade is communication protected by the First Amendment ...

[t]hus, the individual professor may not be compelled, by university officials, to change a grade that the professor previously assigned to her student". The Stronach case has gotten significant attention in the academic community as an important precedent.White, Lawrence, "CASE IN POINT: STRONACH V. VIRGINIA STATE U. (2008): Does Academic Freedom Give a Professor the Final Say on Grades?", Chronicle of Higher Education, found at [http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i33/33a03901.htm Chronicle web site] and [http://chronicle.com/review/brainstorm/fendrich/the-secretary-to-the-rescue Chronicle Review commentary and blog]. Accessed May 20, 2008.

Academic freedom and free speech rights are not coextensive, although this widely accepted view has been challenged by an "institutionalist" perspective on the First Amendment.See, for instance, Paul Horwitz, "Universities as First Amendment Institutions: Some Easy Answers and Hard Questions, 54 UCLA Law Review 1497 (2007) Academic freedom involves more than speech rights; for example, it includes the right to determine what is taught in the classroom.{{Cite news |last=Litt |first=Andrew |date=July 23, 2017 |title=Opinion: At UCLA, free speech is suppressed and double standards reign |url=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/at-ucla-free-speech-is-suppressed-and-double-standards-reign/article/2629382 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170728204000/http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/at-ucla-free-speech-is-suppressed-and-double-standards-reign/article/2629382 |archive-date=July 28, 2017 |access-date=2017-09-26 |work=Washington Examiner |language=en}}{{Cite journal |last= |date=1982 |title=Testing the Limits of Academic Freedom |url=https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol130/iss3/6 |journal=University of Pennsylvania Law Review |volume=130 |issue=3 |pages=712–743|doi=10.2307/3311840 |jstor=3311840 |url-access=subscription }} The AAUP gives teachers a set of guidelines to follow when their ideas are considered threatening to religious, political, or social agendas. When teachers speak or write in public, whether via social media or in academic journals, they are able to articulate their own opinions without the fear from institutional restriction or punishment, but they are encouraged to show restraint and clearly specify that they are not speaking for their institution.{{cite web|title=AAUP. 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure|url=http://www.aaup.org/file/1940%20Statement.pdf|website=AAUP}} In practice, academic freedom is protected by institutional rules and regulations, letters of appointment, faculty handbooks, collective bargaining agreements, and academic custom.Donna Euben, Political And Religious Belief Discrimination On Campus: Faculty and Student Academic Freedom and The First Amendment. March 2005. (talk) {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051220123513/http://www.aaup.org/Legal/info%20outlines/05beliefdis.htm|date=2005-12-20}}

In the U.S., the freedom of speech is guaranteed by the First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...." By extension, the First Amendment applies to all governmental institutions, including public universities. The U.S. Supreme Court has historically held that academic freedom is a First Amendment right at public institutions.Sweezy v. New Hampshire, 354 U.S. 234 (1957); Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589 (1967); Regents of Univ. of Michigan v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (1985). However, the United States' First Amendment has generally been held to not apply to private institutions, including religious institutions. These private institutions may honor freedom of speech and academic freedom at their discretion.{{Cite web |title=The Basics |url=https://campusfreespeechguide.pen.org/the-law/the-basics/ |access-date=2024-03-04 |website=PEN America |language=en-US}}{{Cite web |title=State of the Law: Speech Codes |url=https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/state-law-speech-codes |access-date=2024-03-04 |website=Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression |language=en}}

{{see also|Scopes Monkey Trial}}

Academic freedom is also associated with a movement to introduce intelligent design as an alternative explanation to evolution in US public schools. Supporters claim that academic institutions need to fairly represent all possible explanations for the observed biodiversity on Earth, rather than implying no alternatives to evolutionary theory exist, although in practice are interested in possible explanations from only one of the world's religious traditions, the Abrahamic religions.

Critics of the movement claim intelligent design is religiously motivated pseudoscience and cannot be allowed into the curriculum of US public schools due to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, often citing Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District as legal precedent.{{cite web|last=Lynn|first=Leon|date=Winter 1997–1998|title=Creationists Push Pseudo-Science Text|url=http://rethinkingschools.aidcvt.com/restrict.asp?path=archive/12_02/panda.shtml|url-access=subscription|work=Rethinking Schools Online|volume=12|issue=2}}[http://ncse.com/creationism/legal/intelligent-design-trial-kitzmiller-v-dover Intelligent Design on Trial: Kitzmiller v. Dover]. National Center for Science Education. October 17th, 2008 They also reject the allegations of discrimination against proponents of intelligent design, of which investigation showed no evidence.[http://www.flsenate.gov/data/session/2008/Senate/bills/analysis/pdf/2008s2692.ed.pdf Bill Analysis and Fiscal Impact Statement] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080910084959/http://www.flsenate.gov/data/session/2008/Senate/bills/analysis/pdf/2008s2692.ed.pdf|date=2008-09-10}}, The Professional Staff of the Education Pre-K-12 Committee, Florida Senate, March 26, 2008

A number of "academic freedom bills" have been introduced in state legislatures in the United States between 2004 and 2008. The bills were based largely upon language drafted by the Discovery Institute,[http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/05/academic_freedom_bill_in_south.php "Academic Freedom" Bill in South Carolina Now] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080520095016/http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/05/academic_freedom_bill_in_south.php|date=2008-05-20}} Ed Brayton, Dispatches From the Culture Wars, May 18, 2008. the hub of the Intelligent Design movement, and derive from language originally drafted for the Santorum Amendment in the United States Senate. According to The Wall Street Journal, the common goal of these bills is to expose more students to articles and videos that undercut evolution, most of which are produced by advocates of intelligent design or biblical creationism.[https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120967537476060561 Evolution's Critics Shift Tactics With Schools], Stephanie Simon, The Wall Street Journal, May 2, 2008 The American Association of University Professors has reaffirmed its opposition to these bills, including any portrayal of creationism as a scientifically credible alternative and any misrepresentation of evolution as scientifically controversial.[http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/about/events/past/2008/am/resol.htm Academic Freedom and Teaching Evolution] {{webarchive|url=https://archive.today/20091205190229/http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/about/events/past/2008/am/resol.htm|date=2009-12-05}} Resolutions of the 94th Annual Meeting, American Association of University Professors. 2008[http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-latest-face-of-creationism The Latest Face of Creationism in the Classroom] Glenn Branch and Eugenie C. Scott. Scientific American, December 2008. {{as of|2013|}}, only the Louisiana bill has been successfully passed into law.{{Cite web |date=February 7, 2013 |title=Chronology of "Academic Freedom" Bills |url=https://ncse.ngo/chronology-academic-freedom-bills |access-date=2024-03-04 |website=National Center for Science Education |language=en}}

{{One source|date=March 2024|subsection}}

In 1940, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) provided a fundamental definition of the principles of academic freedom outlining the following: professors have the privilege to search for truth and knowledge and the right to impart those truths and knowledge to others, including students, the academy, and the general public, unfettered by political or ideological pressure.{{Cite web |date=2021-07-14 |title=FAQs on Academic Freedom |url=https://www.aaup.org/programs/academic-freedom/faqs-academic-freedom |access-date=2024-08-10 |website=AAUP |language=en}}

Since being drafted, this definition has undergone two revisions in 1970 and 1999 respectively. The 1970 revision declares that the protections of academic freedom "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".{{Cite web |date=2006-07-10 |title=1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure |url=https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure |access-date=2024-08-10 |website=AAUP |language=en}} The 1999 revision places emphasis on the idea that post-tenure review should be conducted in a manner that respects academic freedom and due process.

In 2014, a debate was held by the Academic Leadership Fellows Program (ALFP), addressing the potential need to either further revise the text, overhaul it completely, or leave it as is. The argument that revision/overhaul is necessary asserts that due to rapid growth of technology in education, introduction of social media (which effectively blurs the line between existing as an academic and an individual with unique interests), increase in international students, and rise in student expectations for return on investment since 1999, the statement no longer applies to modernized academia and thus should be changed. The counterargument to revision/overhaul asserts that the AAUP's statement has aged well, and that overhauling the standard that has existed for decades would only stir up further confusion. Instead, it is necessary to "clearly articulate the statements' intended meaning through education, discussion, and by not supporting inappropriate behavior in the name of academic freedom".{{Cite journal |last=Woods |first=Tonja M. |date=2016 |title=Academic Freedom Should be Redefined: Point and Counterpoint |url=https://www.ajpe.org/article/S0002-9459(23)02682-7/pdf |journal=American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education |pages=2}} This debate took place in front of a live audience, who after hearing both arguments agreed overwhelmingly with keeping the statement as-is.{{Cite journal |last=Aarrevaara |first=Timo |date=May 2010 |title=Academic Freedom in a Changing Academic World |journal=European Review |language=en |volume=18 |issue=S1 |pages=S55–S69 |doi=10.1017/S1062798709990317 |issn=1474-0575 |s2cid=146443318 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free |hdl=10138/17446}}

{{Context|subsection|details=needs more context about this issue as right now it's very 1 sided|date=January 2023}}

In the 20th century and particularly the 1950s during McCarthyism, there was much public date in print on Communism's role in academic freedom, e.g., Sidney Hook's Heresy, Yes–Conspiracy, No

{{cite book|last=Hook|first=Sidney|url=https://archive.org/details/heresyyesconspir0000hook|title=Heresy, Yes–Conspiracy, No|date=1953|publisher=John Day Company|pages=[https://archive.org/details/heresyyesconspir0000hook/page/9 9]–13 (two groups), 13 (publications), 278 (conclusion)|lccn=63006587|author-link=Sidney Hook|url-access=registration}} and Whittaker Chambers' "Is Academic Freedom in Danger?"

{{cite magazine|last=Chambers|first=Whittaker|author-link=Whittaker Chambers|date=22 June 1953|title=Is Academic Freedom in Danger?|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CEgEAAAAMBAJ|magazine=Life|publisher=Time, Inc.|pages=91|access-date=2 February 2018}} among many other books and articles.

{{Context|subsection|details=needs more context about this issue as right now it's very 1 sided|date=January 2023}}

Since 2014, Harvard Medical School Dean Jeffrey Flier,{{cite web |last=Flier |first=Jeffrey |author-link=Jeffrey Flier |date=2019-01-03 |title=Against Diversity Statements |url=https://www.chronicle.com/article/against-diversity-statements/ |access-date=2020-12-29 |website=Chronicle of Higher Education}}{{cite web|date=2018-11-12|title=Former Harvard dean's tweet against required faculty diversity statements sets off debate|url=https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/11/12/former-harvard-deans-tweet-against-required-faculty-diversity-statements-sets-debate|access-date=2020-12-29|website=Inside Higher Ed}} and American Mathematical Society Vice President Abigail Thompson{{cite journal|url=https://www.ams.org/journals/notices/201911/rnoti-p1778.pdf|title=A word from|author=Abigail Thompson

|journal=Notices of the American Mathematical Society|volume=66|issue=11}} have contended that academics are asked to support diversity initiatives, and are discouraged from voicing opposition to equity and inclusion through self-censorship, as well as explicit promotion, hiring, and firing.{{cite web|last=Friedersdorf|first=Conor|date=2016-05-26|title=The Perils of Writing a Provocative Email at Yale|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/the-peril-of-writing-a-provocative-email-at-yale/484418/|access-date=2020-12-29|website=The Atlantic}}{{cite news |last=Christakis |first=Erika |date=2016-10-28 |title=Opinion: My Halloween email led to a campus firestorm |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/my-halloween-email-led-to-a-campus-firestorm--and-a-troubling-lesson-about-self-censorship/2016/10/28/70e55732-9b97-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html |access-date=2020-12-29 |newspaper=The Washington Post}}

While some controversies of academic freedom are reflected in proposed laws that would affect large numbers of students through entire regions, many cases involve individual academics that express unpopular opinions or share politically unfavorable information. These individual cases may receive widespread attention and periodically test the limits of, and support for, academic freedom. Several of these specific cases are also the foundations for later legislation.

In 1929, Experimental Psychology professor Max Friedrich Meyer and sociology assistant professor Harmon O. DeGraff were dismissed from their positions at the University of Missouri for advising student Orval Hobart Mowrer regarding distribution of a questionnaire which inquired about attitudes towards partners' sexual tendencies, modern views of marriage, divorce, extramarital sexual relations, and cohabitation.{{cite book|title=Rumors of Indiscretion: The University of Missouri "Sex Questionnaire" Scandal in the Jazz Age|url=https://archive.org/details/rumorsofindiscre00nels|url-access=registration|author=Nelson, Lawrence J.|publisher=University of Missouri Press|year=2003|isbn=0-8262-1449-5|location=Columbia, MO}}{{Cite web|url=http://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/1930.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150320120427/http://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/1930.pdf|url-status=live|archive-date=March 20, 2015|title=Academic Freedom at the University of Missouri: Report on the Dismissal of Professor DeGraff and the Suspension of Professor Meyer|last=Broadwell|first=Percy|date=February 2, 1930}} The university was subsequently censured by the American Association of University Professors in an early case regarding academic freedom due a tenured professor.{{cite journal|author=A.J. Carlson|date=February 1930|title=Report on the Dismissal of Professor DeGraff and the Suspension of Professor Meyer|journal=Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors|volume=XVI|issue=2|pages=2–35|doi=10.2307/40218216|jstor=40218216}}

In 2006, Lawrence Summers, while president of Harvard University, led a discussion that was intended to identify the reasons why fewer women chose to study science and mathematics at advanced levels. He suggested that the possibility of intrinsic gender differences in terms of talent for science and mathematics should be explored. He became the target of considerable public backlash.{{cite news|first = Marcella|last = Bombardieri|url=http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/17/summers_remarks_on_women_draw_fire/ |title=Summers' remarks on women draw fire|work=Boston.com|date = 17 January 2005 |url-access=subscription|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20050119063040/http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/01/17/summers_remarks_on_women_draw_fire/|archive-date = 19 January 2005}} His critics were, in turn, accused of attempting to suppress academic freedom.{{cite web|url=http://hnn.us/articles/10963.html|title=In Defense of Academic Freedom at Harvard |first= Stephan|last= Thernstrom|date=26 March 2005 |publisher=History News Network, George Mason University}} Due to the adverse reception to his comments, he resigned after a five-year tenure. Another significant factor of his resignation was several votes of no-confidence placed by the deans of schools, notably multiple professors in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.{{Cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/22/education/22harvard.html|title=President of Harvard Resigns, Ending Stormy 5-Year Tenure|last=Finder|first=Alan|date=February 22, 2006|website=The New York Times}}

In 2009 Thio Li-ann withdrew from an appointment at New York University School of Law after controversy erupted about some anti-gay remarks she had made, prompting a discussion of academic freedom within the law school.{{cite web |last=Jaschik |first=Scott |date=8 June 2009 |title=Rights for some people |url=http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/08/nyu |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090807071140/http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/08/nyu |archive-date=August 7, 2009 |access-date=11 June 2009 |website=Inside Higher Ed}}{{cite news|url=http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20090720-155956.html|title=She's not against gay people, just against gay agenda|first=Tay|last=Shi'an|date=22 July 2009|work=The New Paper|access-date=24 July 2009}} Subsequently, Li-ann was asked to step down from her position in the NYU Law School.{{Cite web |last=Hu |first=Winnie |date=July 22, 2009 |title=Citing Opposition, Professor Calls off NYU Appointment |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/education/23nyu.html |website=The New York Times}}

In 2009 the University of California at Santa Barbara accused William I. Robinson of antisemitism after he circulated an email to his class containing photographs and paragraphs of the Holocaust juxtaposed to those of the Gaza Strip.{{cite news|url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-apr-30-me-professor30-story.html|title=Professor's comparison of Israelis to Nazis stirs furor|last=Helfand|first=Duke|date=30 April 2009|work=Los Angeles Times}} Robinson was fired from the university, but later the accusations were dropped after a worldwide campaign against the management of the university.[http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=5691 SPME Statement on the Disposition of the Case of William Robinson at UCSB], SPME Board of Directors, June 29, 2009

• Academic bias
• Freedom of education
• Network for Education and Academic Rights
• Pedagogy
• Politicization of science
• Right to science and culture
• Speech code

{{reflist|group=Note}}

{{reflist}}

• Suissa, J and Sullivan, A. "The Gender Wars, Academic Freedom and Education". Journal of Philosophy of Education (2021).
• {{cite book |title=Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech|author1-link=Keith Whittington |first=Keith E. |last=Whittington |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2019 |isbn=978-0691191522}}
• Tierney, William G., and Lanford, Michael. "[http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.3868/s110-003-014-0002-x The Question of Academic Freedom: Universal Right or Relative Term]". Frontiers of Education in China (2014) 9.1, 4–23.
• Chesterman, Simon. "[http://ssrn.com/abstract=2031310 Academic Freedom in New Haven and Singapore]". The Straits Times, 30 March 2012, page A23.
• Nelson, Cary, [https://books.google.com/books?id=Yx3mlHlttTgC No University Is an Island: Saving Academic Freedom]. New York University Press, 2010. {{ISBN|978-0-8147-5859-5}}
• Sandis, Constantine. [http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=410069&c=1 "Free Speech Within Reason"]. Times Higher Education, 21 January 2010.

• [https://academic-freedom-index.net/ Academic Freedom Index]

{{Sister project links|Academic freedom}}

{{Science and technology studies}}

{{Censorship}}

{{Liberty}}

{{Authority control}}

Freedom

Category:Education rights

Category:University governance