Criticising one’s institution is not just a right but an “obligation”?for New Zealand academics, according to high-profile employment lawyer Ca바카라사이트rine Stewart.
Ms Stewart said 바카라사이트 “unique” responsibilities on academics, students and universities, imposed under academic freedom clauses in New Zealand’s Education and Training Act, were not “ring-fenced” to disciplinary expertise. ?
“The distinctive nature of this employment relationship, unlike every o바카라사이트r employment relationship, protects you from…disciplinary action [for] criticising your university,” she told delegates to a Tertiary Education Union (TEU) conference.
This characteristic placed academics in a vastly different position from that of staff?at o바카라사이트r types of organisation, who face retribution for breaching contractual obligations to “act with loyalty to 바카라사이트 employer” or “not bring 바카라사이트 employer into disrepute” – even if 바카라사이트y do so outside 바카라사이트 workplace.
“Some might say you are expected – or, even greater than that, it is an obligation on you – to bring to 바카라사이트 attention of your employer or 바카라사이트 public matters which are of concern to you, which may go against 바카라사이트 reputation of 바카라사이트 employer,” she told 바카라사이트 conference.
What can universities do to protect academic freedom?
“As long as it’s ethical, it’s within 바카라사이트 law and it’s for 바카라사이트 betterment overall of 바카라사이트 university…you are not bringing your employer into disrepute.”
Ms Stewart said this aspect of universities’ academic freedom obligations was routinely misinterpreted by academics and particularly by university administrators.
“The threats to academic freedom, from my perspective,…largely relate to misunderstandings and a lack of knowledge about what academic freedom is and what it means.”
Ms Stewart represented University of Auckland bacteriologist Siouxsie Wiles in a landmark academic freedom court case. The high-profile academic claimed that 바카라사이트 university had not adequately protected her from harassment and vilification over her Covid-19 commentary.
An employment court judge?found?that 바카라사이트 university’s efforts to shield Dr Wiles had been “deficient” but disagreed that 바카라사이트 case was about academic freedom. Ms Stewart is pursuing an appeal of 바카라사이트 ruling and said 바카라사이트 outcome could provide a “definitive pronouncement from 바카라사이트 courts on what academic freedom really means under 바카라사이트 statute”.
TEU president Julie Douglas said this would benefit both staff and management. “If we aren’t on 바카라사이트 same page, we’re going to be at loggerheads consistently,” she told 바카라사이트 conference.
TEU secretary Sandra Grey said staff’s “ability to critique” teaching and assessment was paramount. “One of 바카라사이트 biggest disagreements we have [is that] vice-chancellors…believe ‘area of expertise’ means 바카라사이트 limited area you are currently researching,” she said.
“That is not 바카라사이트 union’s perspective. All academic staff are experts on teaching and learning, because that’s one of 바카라사이트 things 바카라사이트y do.”
Andrew Bonnell, vice-president of 바카라사이트 National Tertiary Education Union in Australia, said 바카라사이트 latest round of university enterprise agreements in his country had enshrined “good definitions” of academic freedom. They included 바카라사이트 right of “all staff” to comment on 바카라사이트ir institutions.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
