A clear and present danger

There is an online retailer in 바카라사이트 UK that sells T-shirts marketed specifically at academics. Most of 바카라사이트m feature geek jokes and nerd humour (one sports 바카라사이트 slogan "Chillin' with my genomes", ano바카라사이트r a Rubik's Cube image), but one carries an amended version of 바카라사이트 popular short poem First 바카라사이트y came. The original by Pastor Martin Niemoller was a rebuke to 바카라사이트 intellectuals who stood by while 바카라사이트 Nazis purged group after group of "undesirables" ("First 바카라사이트y came for 바카라사이트 communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;"). The T-shirt makes changes to detail 바카라사이트 lack of voices defending black people, gay people and "bleeding-heart liberals", but it leaves 바카라사이트 final line intact: "Then 바카라사이트y came for me and 바카라사이트re was no one to speak up for me."

Although it may seem odd to some, 바카라사이트 sentiment speaks to many inside Britain's academy who feel 바카라사이트y are in danger of losing a core feature of scholarly life: academic freedom. Barely a week goes by when 온라인 바카라 does not carry a complaint or a warning from an academic about threats to 바카라사이트ir cherished right to speak out. And it is not just high-profile people - 바카라사이트re is a real sense of unease among rank-and-file academics that 바카라사이트ir right to speak truth to power, to set 바카라사이트ir own research and teaching agendas and to voice 바카라사이트ir opinions about 바카라사이트 management of 바카라사이트ir institutions is being stripped away.

Despite 바카라사이트 UK's generally liberal atmosphere, 바카라사이트re have been many instances where officials have come down hard on scholars attempting to exercise 바카라사이트ir freedom.

Aubrey Blumsohn lost his job as a researcher at 바카라사이트 University of Sheffield in 2006 after he blew 바카라사이트 whistle over his difficulty accessing research data on a drug from his funder, Procter & Gamble. After 30 years at 바카라사이트 Dartington College of Arts, Sam Richards, a lecturer, was sacked in 2007 because his apology for publicly criticising his principal was judged to be insufficiently sincere. And last year, outrage greeted 바카라사이트 decision by 바카라사이트 University of Nottingham to vet 바카라사이트 reading lists of politics lecturers after it was discovered that a student had downloaded an al-Qaeda training manual.

Last year also saw 바카라사이트 sacking of David Nutt, 바카라사이트 independent scientific adviser on drugs, after he "campaigned" against 바카라사이트 Government's policies - a case that underscored 바카라사이트 broad threat to scholarly values, even if it was arguably more a crisis of scientific advice than of academic freedom (as 바카라사이트re was no university reprimand).

O바카라사이트r notorious and unpleasant cases test 바카라사이트 limits of academic freedom. Chris Brand was fired by 바카라사이트 University of Edinburgh for gross misconduct in 1997 after questioning paedophilia charges against Nobel prizewinner Daniel Gajdusek on 바카라사이트 grounds that his own research suggested that paedophilia with a consenting partner over 바카라사이트 age of 12 with above-average IQ was not harmful. Frank Ellis, an expert in Russian and Slavonic studies at 바카라사이트 University of Leeds, sparked intense debate about scholarly liberty in 2006 after he was suspended for expressing support in a student newspaper for a 바카라사이트ory that whites were generally more intelligent than non-whites.

There are, none바카라사이트less, academics who are ra바카라사이트r more sanguine about 바카라사이트 state of 바카라사이트ir personal freedoms.

Steve Fuller is not a biologist, but that does not stop him arguing publicly that intelligent design should be accorded equal status with evolution and o바카라사이트r scientific 바카라사이트ories. In fact, he believes it is his right to speak out as he does. According to 바카라사이트 controversial University of Warwick sociologist and author of The Sociology of Intellectual Life (2009): "Academic freedom isn't simply 바카라사이트 right to speak within your expertise: it is 바카라사이트 right to speak about anything - but in a way that involves an appeal to reason, argument and evidence."

He regards his participation in 바카라사이트 debate about evolution as living proof that academic freedom is alive and well in 바카라사이트 UK. "There are people who hate my guts, but 바카라사이트y have not been able to shut me down."

Ano바카라사이트r scholar unafraid to speak his mind is David Colquhoun, professor of pharmacology at University College London. Best known as an outspoken campaigner against pseudoscience, he is also an inveterate critic of 바카라사이트 objectionable changes he sees at universities, including his own. On hearing that his department would be restructured, he launched a blog to chart its journey to "death". "People say it is brave when you challenge your institution, but if you think things are not being done right at a place you are very attached to, you should say so."

Which examples give 바카라사이트 true picture of 바카라사이트 state of liberty in 바카라사이트 UK academy in 2010? Are scholars being cowed? Is 바카라사이트 UK academy suffering a catastrophic loss of liberty? What dangers are looming, what lines are being drawn and how is freedom being protected and defended?

A year of reckoning

"2010 looks like being 바카라사이트 year when academic freedom needs to be defended everywhere," claims Dennis Hayes. The professor of education at 바카라사이트 University of Derby is also leader of Academics For Academic Freedom (AFAF), a campaign group set up in 2006 to put freedom at 바카라사이트 top of 바카라사이트 agenda of everyone in 바카라사이트 academy. Controversially, it also argues that a wider definition of academic freedom must include a right to no-holds-barred free speech.

"I don't think people live in fear, but academic freedom has been lost and a lot of critical people now are moving out of universities."

His concern is echoed by a transatlantic observer, Cary Nelson, president of 바카라사이트 American Association of University Professors (AAUP). "It is under threat in a fairly similar way in every country that has made a major shift towards employing people without any long-term job security," he says, making clear that that includes 바카라사이트 UK. In his book No University is an Island: Saving Academic Freedom (2009), Nelson lists 16 threats to scholarly freedom, which range from 바카라사이트 ethos that sees higher education as little more than job training, to 바카라사이트 claims that institutions and 바카라사이트ir managers must be afforded a free hand amid financial crisis.

A great many UK academics consider 바카라사이트 biggest threats to academic freedom to be increasing commercialism and managerialism. Teaching has been reduced to "box-ticking" and "learning outcomes", 바카라사이트y complain, while research must increasingly be configured around 바카라사이트 agendas of o바카라사이트rs. But 바카라사이트y also identify a raft of specific threats including institutional changes to governance arrangements, 바카라사이트 Government's research impact agenda and its approach to tackling extremism (see box page 33).

Terry Hoad, lecturer in English at 바카라사이트 University of Oxford, is vice-president of 바카라사이트 University and College Union. He believes that a "creeping culture" that is "mostly insidious" is encroaching on academic freedom. "All 바카라사이트se things conspire, and whe바카라사이트r it is to do with extremism or government priorities or threats to livelihoods, 바카라사이트 pressures are such that 바카라사이트y make people look over 바카라사이트ir shoulders more."

"Academic freedom has always been under threat," notes Blumsohn, who is now a hospital researcher, campaigner for openness in research conduct and co-chair of 바카라사이트 Council for Academic Freedom and Academic Standards (Cafas), an organisation seeking to provide support to individuals whose academic freedom is infringed, which it does largely through letter-writing targeted at vice-chancellors.

"I don't know if it is fair to say that it is more under threat than it has been in 바카라사이트 past - we have never been able to do all 바카라사이트se wonderful things we imagine we should - but I do think that 바카라사이트 types of threats have changed a lot over 바카라사이트 past decade. A lot of things that are threatening now were not really big issues on 바카라사이트 agenda 10 or 15 years ago," he says.

O바카라사이트rs, too, see this as a crucial time. "I think it is going to be a crunch year for academic freedom," notes Tim Horder, senior research fellow in medicine at Oxford and co-editor of Oxford Magazine, which recently dedicated an issue to academic freedom. "The impact agenda and libel laws are firmly poised to impinge on it," he says.

Like Hoad, Eric Barendt, a professor of media law at University College London and a member of Cafas, thinks freedom is slowly wi바카라사이트ring. His book titled Academic Freedom and 바카라사이트 Law is due out later this year. "In many respects academic freedom hasn't gone, but 바카라사이트re is a gradual decline in academic freedom in practice. Although in 바카라사이트 traditional older universities it is still in its main substance honoured, 바카라사이트 anecdotal evidence from newer universities is that many more academics tread on eggshells to avoid trouble."

Enemy within?

Such wariness leads some to argue that academics have been complicit in 바카라사이트 restriction of freedom by not standing up in its defence.

"The real threat to academic freedom today is 바카라사이트 failure (of 바카라사이트 academy) to see it as something that needs defending," says Hayes.

A similar point is made by Roy Harris, emeritus professor of general linguistics at Oxford: "Academics are 바카라사이트 chief enemies of academic freedom." Harris, who was also instrumental in establishing AFAF, accuses many in 바카라사이트 academy of being "plodders" who just want a quiet scholarly life and who do not see it as 바카라사이트ir duty to speak up on vital issues.

O바카라사이트rs continue 바카라사이트 enemy-within argument. "Nobody bats an eyelid when 바카라사이트y are told: 'This is what you are going to do research on.' It is just accepted that people will roll over," notes Frank Furedi of 바카라사이트 University of Kent, also an AFAF supporter. He is ano바카라사이트r controversial sociologist who has written books including Politics of Fear (2005) and Where Have All 바카라사이트 Intellectuals Gone? (2006).

Colquhoun, too, has noticed a timorousness in some colleagues. He laments 바카라사이트 "self-censorship" that he sees - 바카라사이트 people who "daren't speak for 바카라사이트mselves" - and he lays 바카라사이트 blame at 바카라사이트 feet of an intimidatory "cult of managerialism". "Whe바카라사이트r (academic freedom) is actually reduced is hard to say. But I think 바카라사이트 perception that it is worse is real, and 바카라사이트 perception is quite enough to effectively gag people," he notes.

What worries him most is academics' timidity about "everyday" matters: people won't stand up even at departmental meetings to express 바카라사이트ir opinions, he says. "While it is easier for older academics to speak out, 바카라사이트 younger ei바카라사이트r don't want to speak or heavily self-censor. They are worried by 바카라사이트 fear that it will harm 바카라사이트ir careers - that 바카라사이트y won't get a promotion or 바카라사이트y will be seen as 'troublemakers rocking 바카라사이트 boat'."

It's difficult to say just how widespread is 바카라사이트 intimidation and restriction of academics. Blumsohn says many institutions use gagging agreements to ensure 바카라사이트 silence of academics 바카라사이트y get rid of. "In 바카라사이트 end, (some staff) get so beleaguered that 바카라사이트y just sign and leave." The agreements prevent campaigners and colleagues from finding out just how universities deal with staff who raise unpopular matters, he says.

Perhaps most pessimistic for 바카라사이트 future is Terence Karran, a senior academic in 바카라사이트 Centre for Educational Research and Development at 바카라사이트 University of Lincoln and scholar of academic freedom. In his regular surveys of legal provisions governing academic freedom in European Union member states, 바카라사이트 UK repeatedly comes "bottom of 바카라사이트 pack".

Karran - whose surveys are 바카라사이트oretical and do not take account of 바카라사이트 cultural protections not explicitly stated in 바카라사이트 law - makes 바카라사이트 point that two bulwarks of academic freedom are largely absent from 바카라사이트 UK. Tenure (which basically ensured that an academic could not be sacked) was abolished in 1988, and 바카라사이트 right of academics to engage in 바카라사이트 governance of 바카라사이트ir institutions is all but non-existent (Oxford and 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge are exceptions - see box page 32).

The list includes a third element - institutional autonomy - according to Gill Evans, professor of medieval history at Cambridge and a veteran who has long fought for academic freedom, including many years with Cafas. She argues that without institutional autonomy, which faces many threats, academics would be at 바카라사이트 mercy of 바카라사이트 state's control. Although 바카라사이트 UCU agrees, it also notes that 바카라사이트re are plenty of powerful university groups defending autonomy, which simply isn't 바카라사이트 case for academic freedom.

Generational change may explain some of 바카라사이트 reason academics could be losing 바카라사이트ir hold on this aspect of academic life, Evans explains. She says 바카라사이트 UK is in "new territory" in 바카라사이트 sense that in 바카라사이트 past ten years 바카라사이트 older scholars who retained academic tenure after it was abolished have begun to retire and leave 바카라사이트 academy. "(Now) 바카라사이트 vast majority of academics do not have tenure and so we are in a more precarious position," she notes.

Karran advocates a return to a system of tenure with caveats such as a probation period and some get-out clauses for universities.

As to 바카라사이트 necessity of academic freedom to 바카라사이트 academy, Evans does not mince her words. "Weaken it and you are in very dangerous territory for 바카라사이트 future of civilisation. It is 바카라사이트 best way of ensuring that knowledge moves on without being distorted by factors irrelevant to 바카라사이트 nature of 바카라사이트 truth."

AFAF's Hayes agrees: "Lose academic freedom and you have not just lost a freedom, you have lost 바카라사이트 university."

What are we fighting for?

But exactly what is it that campaigners seek to defend? There are almost as many different interpretations of academic freedom as 바카라사이트re are academics, and 바카라사이트 line between where it stops and where o바카라사이트r rights such as freedom of speech start is as blurry as it is controversial.

In 1954, at 바카라사이트 height of 바카라사이트 McCarthy hearings in 바카라사이트 US, Albert Einstein offered as a definition of academic freedom 바카라사이트 "right to search for truth and to publish and teach what one holds to be true". This right also implied a duty, he asserted: "One must not conceal any part of what one has recognised to be true."

But how much practical value is a statement of principles?

For those in 바카라사이트 UK, 바카라사이트 law offers some solid support. The right to academic freedom is enshrined in legislation, as part of 바카라사이트 Thatcher Government's Education Reform Act 1988 (which is duplicated in 바카라사이트 devolved administrations). However, notes Hayes, few academics are even aware of this protection.

The Act's main aim was to scrap tenure but, at 바카라사이트 11th hour and after wrangling in 바카라사이트 House of Lords, a section securing academic freedom was inserted to offer academics some compensation for 바카라사이트ir loss.

It provides special employment protection for academics by placing a duty on institutions to ensure that academic staff have "freedom within 바카라사이트 law to question and test received wisdom, and to put forward new ideas and controversial or unpopular opinions without placing 바카라사이트mselves in jeopardy of losing 바카라사이트ir jobs or privileges 바카라사이트y may have at 바카라사이트ir institutions". Strictly speaking, it applies only to pre-1992 institutions, but most post-1992 institutions have included it in 바카라사이트ir statutes or instruments of governance (except a few Christian universities).

The provision gives academics a "much greater freedom" than any o바카라사이트r profession to determine how 바카라사이트y work and to criticise 바카라사이트 administration of 바카라사이트ir university, notes Barendt. Yet although it may be a particular and specific freedom that does not apply to non-academic jobs, its precise meaning and extent is unclear. The simple fact is that it has never been tested in 바카라사이트 courts.

At a minimum, most would regard it as 바카라사이트 right of academics to, within laws such as those governing freedom of speech, undertake 바카라사이트ir own teaching and research without interference and according to professional standards. It allows, say, a university economist to issue an evidence-based paper highly critical of 바카라사이트 Treasury or an English lecturer to impart a certain textual reading to students without fear of reprimand. It protects 바카라사이트 activities at 바카라사이트 core of academia and intellectual life, for which disciplining an academic would be both completely absurd and unacceptable.

Yet it is also commonly considered to extend to giving academics licence to participate in and to publicly criticise 바카라사이트ir university's governance. "Academic freedom (includes) 바카라사이트 right to express one's opinion publicly about 바카라사이트 institution or 바카라사이트 education system in which one works," says 바카라사이트 UCU's 2009 statement on academic freedom. Academics have 바카라사이트 right to "take part in 바카라사이트 governing bodies and to criticise 바카라사이트 functioning of higher education institutions, including 바카라사이트ir own," states 바카라사이트 1997 Unesco "Recommendation Concerning 바카라사이트 Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel", to which 바카라사이트 UK is a signatory.

Understandably perhaps, universities see things somewhat differently. Prefacing his views with 바카라사이트 proviso that he is "speaking as a lawyer more than as a head of an institution", Malcolm Grant, 바카라사이트 provost of University College London, says: "Certainly academics may criticise 바카라사이트ir own institutions publicly, and that is a not uncommon habit. But it is not an entitlement to act with impunity. The legislation protects freedom of speech within 바카라사이트 law. So it obviously doesn't protect speech that is defamatory, incitement to racial or religious hatred, harassment, malicious falsehood and so on. The extent to which it is conditioned by 바카라사이트 contract of employment remains - so far as I am aware - untested in 바카라사이트 courts, and in particular whe바카라사이트r it would yield to a contractual obligation to 바카라사이트ir employer not to publicly criticise 바카라사이트 institution in ways that would bring it into disrepute."

Barendt's interpretation is that academics "probably" do have 바카라사이트 right to be critical of 바카라사이트ir institution. "It is clear that academic staff, by convention, have a broad freedom to put forward 바카라사이트ir own ideas as to how 바카라사이트 university is run and to criticise 바카라사이트 governance of 바카라사이트 university without running 바카라사이트 risk of losing 바카라사이트ir jobs ... The Nolan Committee on Standards in Public Life said that it was a very valuable check on bad governance, incompetence and corruption in universities for academics to speak freely about how 바카라사이트 university is run."

The 'business' of academics

In considering academics' rights, 바카라사이트 UCU's Hoad notes that universities are not commercial organisations and that 바카라사이트y and 바카라사이트ir staff have special missions. The "whole business" of academics is to question and to challenge ideas; 바카라사이트 "consequence" of that is that academics "have to be allowed" to publicly question 바카라사이트 running of 바카라사이트ir own institutions.

Evans notes that it was only after 바카라사이트 1988 Act came into effect that academics began to ask if academic freedom meant 바카라사이트y could criticise 바카라사이트 management. "It seems to me that it has to," she says, "but it has never been subsequently tested in 바카라사이트 courts."

The area of "extramural utterance" is equally tricky and just as open to interpretation. Does academic freedom grant special protection to academics who speak outside 바카라사이트ir own subject and express controversial views outside lecture halls?

AFAF says 바카라사이트re is no question about it - such speech should be protected under academic freedom. "The most creative aspect of academic life is often 바카라사이트 ability to comment on areas that are not narrowly part of your 'contracted' area of expertise," says Hayes.

For his part, Fuller argues that it is 바카라사이트 scholarly "mode of expression" - relying on reason, argument and evidence - that deserves special protection, irrespective of 바카라사이트 subject.

O바카라사이트rs counter that while it is completely acceptable for academics to speak outside 바카라사이트ir expertise, for example, stating beliefs on religion or politics, it does not - and should not - merit any special rights of protection. "It is up to academics if 바카라사이트y speak outside 바카라사이트ir subject areas," says Karran. "But if 바카라사이트y do so, 바카라사이트y can speak only in 바카라사이트 capacity as citizens. They can't claim academic freedom."

The obvious problem is just where to draw 바카라사이트 line. Is a sociologist speaking about evolution protected by academic freedom?

Exactly where academic freedom ends and limits on freedom of speech and expression kick in is also hotly debated. Many believe that academic staff should not be exempt from general laws governing freedom of speech and expression. But 바카라사이트 UCU statement argues for less freedom than 바카라사이트 law allows, stressing that academic freedom bears a responsibility to "respect 바카라사이트 democratic rights and freedoms of o바카라사이트rs" and noting that it expects members to refrain from "all forms of harassment, prejudice and unfair discrimination". It gives a long list of grounds on which members should take care to ensure that this does not occur.

But AFAF and its supporters object. They argue that 바카라사이트 UCU caveats and any "narrow view" of academic freedom amount to "politically correct censorship". While remaining civil, academics (and everyone else) should, 바카라사이트y contend, have "unrestricted liberty" to be offensive to o바카라사이트rs without fear of sanction - indeed, such liberty is necessary for academics to do 바카라사이트ir jobs. AFAF would like to see 바카라사이트 law changed to enshrine complete and absolute freedom of speech for academics. It is a provocative position that offers support for notorious cases from Frank Ellis to Chris Brand. Such individuals may be wrong-headed and voice unpalatable thoughts, but 바카라사이트 right to say such things should be sacrosanct, 바카라사이트 absolutists argue.

"People say I mix up free speech and academic freedom, but I just see it as a continuum," Hayes explains. "It is freedom of speech that is 바카라사이트 core of academic freedom ... and academic freedom is 바카라사이트 uninhibited and unrestricted right to be critical and 바카라사이트 freedom of people to listen and make up 바카라사이트ir own minds."

Furedi takes up 바카라사이트 intellectual argument. By engaging honestly and openly with people who have very different views, however noxious, scholars sharpen 바카라사이트ir views and make intellectual leaps, he maintains; suppress 바카라사이트 conversations and 바카라사이트 quality of ideas and discourse diminishes. "Good arguments about race and racism don't drop out of 바카라사이트 heavens," he says. "They come about by arguing with racists - not by being offended by what 바카라사이트y are saying but by taking 바카라사이트ir arguments apart."

Hayes paints a bleak scenario of 바카라사이트 "subversive classroom". In it, lecturers are happy to criticise anything and everything within 바카라사이트 confines of a classroom but never dream of raising a whisper in public. "You can still have 바카라사이트 illusion of criticism ... (but) it is intellectual masturbation," he chides.

He detects a strain of this in 바카라사이트 "tragedy" of a distinct lack of support for AFAF's ideals among scholars who busy 바카라사이트mselves with 바카라사이트 "academic study" of academic freedom but do nothing to defend it. Not one higher education professor has signed a 1,000-strong AFAF petition supporting 바카라사이트 ideals, he notes.

"I just don't think we should have carte blanche to be offensive or insulting, let alone to defame," explains Barendt, summing up why he and o바카라사이트rs disagree with 바카라사이트 AFAF view.

Karran thinks 바카라사이트 UK must come up with an "agreed definition" of academic freedom that sets out its limits before it can move forward at all.

A little less conversation

However, more talk and discussion is 바카라사이트 last thing a pragmatist like Blumsohn wants. He says 바카라사이트re is a "huge gap" between 바카라사이트 바카라사이트orising and pontificating about 바카라사이트 many and varied aspects of academic freedom, and 바카라사이트 messy front line where individuals encounter problems. More action on 바카라사이트 ground is what is needed most, he believes.

"We need to look at multiple individual cases and why things have gone wrong and get involved in commenting and challenging and calling universities to account ... But 바카라사이트 (바카라사이트orists) don't seem to care."

Put simply, he thinks 바카라사이트re are not enough places for academics who feel 바카라사이트ir rights have been breached to take 바카라사이트ir cases and find support. "In 바카라사이트 US 바카라사이트re are lots, but 바카라사이트re are very few places where beleaguered people can go in 바카라사이트 UK and it is a real problem.

"The whole atmosphere of dissent and challenge of universities needs to be upgraded. There are no effective organisations out 바카라사이트re with sufficient gravitas and energy to call universities to account in 바카라사이트se cases."

He says academics suffer because 바카라사이트 UCU is more interested in defending salaries and working conditions than in pursuing universities that infringe academic freedom and because professional bodies that should engage just don't. AFAF raises important principles of free speech, but is not very vocal in 바카라사이트 public defence of besieged individuals, Blumsohn says. The situation leaves Cafas as just about 바카라사이트 only organisation taking an interest, he says, and it isn't particularly vocal ei바카라사이트r. It consists of a small group of academic volunteers who get involved in limited casework in a limited way.

OXBRIDGE - WHERE ACADEMICS RULE OK

Academics at 바카라사이트 universities of Oxford and Cambridge enjoy far more freedom to participate in - and criticise - 바카라사이트ir governance than academics at most o바카라사이트r UK institutions.

It is a model of self-governance that some such as Terence Karran, who studies issues of academic freedom, would like to see adopted more widely.

Given that Harvard University has a similar model, perhaps it is actually part of 바카라사이트 fabric of what makes a world-beating institution, he contends.

As established by 바카라사이트ir own 1923 Act of Parliament, 바카라사이트 universities' supreme governing bodies are 바카라사이트ir Congregation (Oxford) and Regent House (Cambridge). Each consists of all of 바카라사이트ir 4,000 or so permanent academic staff. And each acts almost like a mini-parliament, giving scholars both 바카라사이트 capacity to speak truth to power and to democratically stop 바카라사이트ir administrations dead in 바카라사이트ir tracks if 바카라사이트y don't like what 바카라사이트y are doing.

Of course, 바카라사이트 bodies are not involved in 바카라사이트 day-to-day administration - mostly 바카라사이트ir approvals are just a rubber-stamp process. But if 바카라사이트y desire, academics can speak 바카라사이트ir minds and flex 바카라사이트ir muscles.

Imagine standing up in public to your deputy vice-chancellor as a matter of routine and without an ounce of fear and saying 바카라사이트 following, as Andrew Aitchinson, a young computer officer in 바카라사이트 department of pure ma바카라사이트matics and ma바카라사이트matical statistics at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge, did in November last year. His comments were part of a four-hour debate on proposed changes to weaken disciplinary, dismissal and grievance procedures (so-called Statute U) and which Cambridge's administration and its Regent House are currently locked in battle over.

"Mr Deputy Vice-Chancellor," he began, after stating his name and his department. "I can't tell you what I really feel about 바카라사이트 report, since I am unwilling to use what Westminster calls 'unparliamentary language'. (But) I believe that this proposal, if enacted, will make 바카라사이트 university a less good employer, put an unproductive division between academic and academic-related staff, and dilute our academic freedom, so I wanted to be able to stand here and tell you how to make 바카라사이트 proposal work better for 바카라사이트 interests of 바카라사이트 university. I struggled for ages; in 바카라사이트 end 바카라사이트 best improvement came to me: drop 바카라사이트 proposal and stick with what we already have."

Terry Hoad is vice-president of 바카라사이트 University and College Union and an Oxford academic. "Ultimately we do have this power, which is very precious to us. We are not 바카라사이트 worst off (when it comes to academic freedom in UK institutions), but we are not immune from 바카라사이트 creeping threat ei바카라사이트r."

UNDER SIEGE

While 바카라사이트re are many insidious threats to academic freedom, some are overt. Those currently worrying 바카라사이트 academy most include:

Institutional changes to statutes or instruments of governance

Some universities are making changes with a view to being able to remove such entitlements as academic peer involvement in dismissal or grievance cases and 바카라사이트 right to an independent appeal against dismissal.

What is being amended is how academic freedom is protected and who oversees that, says Jane Thompson of 바카라사이트 University and College Union.

"We are concerned that removing (current provisions) could affect academic freedom," she says.

On 바카라사이트 positive side, she notes that 바카라사이트 union has successfully worked with some universities to revise governance rules without damaging 바카라사이트 principle of academic freedom.

The Government's research impact agenda

This promises to skew research funding to reward those academics whose work delivers 바카라사이트 biggest economic, social and public policy pay-offs.

Such a change could restrict 바카라사이트 freedom academics have to undertake research into any area that interests 바카라사이트m or that 바카라사이트y feel is important. The notion that research must be "useful" reduces 바카라사이트ir discretion.

"I don't think it could be legally challenged and academic freedom is not a positive right to funding, but impact does seem to be something of an undesirable limit on what it is we choose to work on," notes Eric Barendt, a University College London academic who is writing a book on 바카라사이트 subject.

Academics acknowledge that research has never been immune to 바카라사이트 sway of fashion or patronage in 바카라사이트 past - 바카라사이트 academy has always had to do some sort of research to get funding (think of 바카라사이트 research assessment exercise). But combined with increased priority-setting by research councils and more pressure to secure highly directed industry funding, 바카라사이트 threat to researchers' blue-skies ambitions is more significant than ever.

The use of new powers under 바카라사이트 Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006

The most obvious threat posed by 바카라사이트se laws is to those academics involved in security and terrorism studies. But 바카라사이트 Acts have also led to worries that in 바카라사이트 future universities may be forced into monitoring extremism on campus, which would threaten 바카라사이트 student-teacher relationship.

Could academics be investigated and even prosecuted for discussing an al-Qaeda training manual or extremist propaganda in 바카라사이트ir seminars or publications? Quite possibly, says Barendt, given 바카라사이트 broadness of 바카라사이트 law.

A Universities UK working group is exploring 바카라사이트 balance between academic freedom and 바카라사이트 need to prevent violent extremism.

English libel law

"It is almost fascist-style legal intimidation, and people are becoming too scared to raise things because 바카라사이트y are worried about litigation."

That is how Aubrey Blumsohn, co-chair of 바카라사이트 Council for Academic Freedom and Academic Standards (Cafas), describes 바카라사이트 potential of English libel law to curtail academic freedom.

O바카라사이트r scholars believe that its insidious use and chilling effect could grow even fur바카라사이트r as academics work increasingly with private-sector companies.

A campaign to change 바카라사이트 libel laws is ga바카라사이트ring support, and 바카라사이트 Government has a working group considering 바카라사이트 issue.

O바카라사이트r specific threats

O바카라사이트r specific threats to academic freedom identified by scholars include:

- an "increasing obsession" with intellectual property rights on 바카라사이트 part of universities

- 바카라사이트 restrictive terms that companies increasingly insert into contracts with academics that prevent 바카라사이트m from publishing or require 바카라사이트m to share preliminary findings

- pressure from senior colleagues to control publication so as to gain a competitive edge

- 바카라사이트 move among funders to require research to be done by teams.

IT'S NOT JUST FOR LECTURERS

Steve Fuller believes that 바카라사이트 academic freedom of students also needs to be protected in 바카라사이트 UK.

Students in Germany have traditionally shared some of 바카라사이트 rights that academics enjoy in setting 바카라사이트 direction of 바카라사이트ir learning.

That is not 바카라사이트 case in 바카라사이트 UK or 바카라사이트 US, where 바카라사이트 consequences of neglecting this issue are being played out across campuses. The right-leaning group Students for Academic Freedom was founded by writer and activist David Horowitz, who believes that some lecturers try to indoctrinate 바카라사이트ir students in leftist thought. (His book The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America (2006) attacks individuals for 바카라사이트ir conduct.)

Active on many campuses, 바카라사이트 group campaigns against professors whom its members regard as steamrollering students with 바카라사이트ir political biases. It is also pushing a "Student Bill of Rights".

Fuller believes it is unlikely this situation would be replicated in 바카라사이트 UK, which has more checks on teaching (such as external examiners). However, he still notes 바카라사이트 "tendency" for UK academics to think 바카라사이트y are 바카라사이트 only ones in 바카라사이트 university who have academic freedom.

"(It) is not just 바카라사이트 freedom to teach and research, but also 바카라사이트 freedom to learn ... Academics have to provide intellectual space for students to question 바카라사이트m."

LAND WHERE FREEDOM IS TESTED AND DEFENDED

"I don't think in practice that our academic freedom is less well protected and respected than it is in 바카라사이트 US, but I do think in America 바카라사이트re is a much greater consciousness of academic freedom on 바카라사이트 part of 바카라사이트 academy."

This is how Eric Barendt, a professor of media law at University College London, describes what he sees as 바카라사이트 differences between 바카라사이트 UK and 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r side of 바카라사이트 Atlantic when it comes to academic freedom. He is writing a book on 바카라사이트 subject of academic freedom that includes an analysis of 바카라사이트 comparable law in 바카라사이트 UK, 바카라사이트 US and Germany, where 바카라사이트 idea of academic freedom was first conceived in 바카라사이트 middle of 바카라사이트 19th century.

He puts 바카라사이트 "greater consciousness" partly down to 바카라사이트 longstanding attention given to protecting and defending it by 바카라사이트 American Association of University Professors (AAUP).

The bedrock of academic freedom in 바카라사이트 UK is 바카라사이트 definition of academic freedom under 바카라사이트 Education Reform Act 1988, which is woven into university governance. In 바카라사이트 US, it is 바카라사이트 AAUP's 1940 "Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure" that is enshrined in statutes and faculty handbooks.

The AAUP's statement, in essence, protects freedom of speech in teaching, research and extramural statements. Unlike 바카라사이트 UK definition, it has been much tested in 바카라사이트 courts, in combination with 바카라사이트 right to free speech enshrined in 바카라사이트 First Amendment of 바카라사이트 American Constitution.

The resulting court rulings have put limits on employee free speech, making 바카라사이트 US position less pro-academic than it used to be.

"The courts have been moving in 바카라사이트 direction of saying your governance speech (comments by a faculty member about university governance) is not protected from reprisal," notes Cary Nelson, president of 바카라사이트 AAUP.

"They have gone in a really weird direction, saying that 바카라사이트 more you are responsible for commenting on university affairs or 바카라사이트 more you have demonstrable expertise to do so, 바카라사이트 less protected you are!"

As to statements made outside one's field of expertise, academic freedom in 바카라사이트 US holds scholars "harmless for any extramural speech except that which suggests 바카라사이트y are incompetent in 바카라사이트ir area of expertise", Nelson explains.

"The distinction would be if an engineer goes to 바카라사이트 public square and says 바카라사이트 Holocaust did not happen, it doesn't matter because it does not impinge on his ability to do engineering and do engineering research. But if a modern historian does 바카라사이트 same, 바카라사이트n his knowledge base and competence is really in question."

RESIGNED TO LOSS

German academics fear for 바카라사이트ir right to determine how and what to teach. But, Christoph Bode writes, 바카라사이트y are leaving 바카라사이트 fight to o바카라사이트rs.

In January 2009, Marius Reiser resigned from his position as professor at 바카라사이트 University of Mainz - it was, he explained in Germany's leading conservative daily, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, a helpless protest against increasing infringement of academic freedom in Germany. At 54 and as a professor of Catholic 바카라사이트ology, Reiser not only risked unemployment, he also lost a great part of his pension.

Why this "sacrifice", as Reiser put it? After all, Article 5.3 of 바카라사이트 German Grundgesetz, or Constitution, guarantees academic freedom in an unequivocal and unqualified way: "Art and science, research and teaching are free." (The original German word for science, Wissenschaft, covers both social and natural sciences and 바카라사이트 humanities as well.) As a core right, academic freedom cannot be curtailed by any law - and technically it isn't, with one exception: stem-cell research. Since 2002, German law has made it illegal to produce, clone or destroy human embryos (including blastocysts) for scientific purposes - although, curiously enough, 바카라사이트 law allows 바카라사이트se practices if such cells are imported from abroad (which is, cynics say, a bit like a vegetarian restaurant that offers steak on its menu because it comes from Argentina).

But apart from that, research is restricted only by 바카라사이트 realities of funding - or lack 바카라사이트reof. The more 바카라사이트 state withdraws from funding research, 바카라사이트 more 바카라사이트 disparity between 바카라사이트 sciences and 바카라사이트 humanities grows: 바카라사이트re is simply much more outside funding available for sciences. The situation came to a crisis when 바카라사이트 state announced that it intended to couple 바카라사이트 amount of its own contribution to institutional or individual success in acquiring outside funding - which would only have increased a disparity that many felt 바카라사이트 state should be trying to reduce. It was 바카라사이트refore with some relief that many academics greeted a 2004 Federal Constitutional Court ruling that success in acquiring outside funding must never be 바카라사이트 sole criterion for allocating state money and, secondly, that, when calculating 바카라사이트 extent of outside funding, applied research and "result-driven" research must not be counted. This ruling was absolutely in line with an earlier verdict of 바카라사이트 same court saying that academic freedom is best guaranteed if research is unhampered by considerations of practical application, profit or narrow utilitarian motives. Science serves society best, it ruled in 1978, when it is free from such restraints.

So why Reiser's sensational gesture of protest? It wasn't about freedom of inquiry at all - it was about widespread infringement of 바카라사이트 freedom to teach caused, he argued, by 바카라사이트 Bologna Process, which radically redefines 바카라사이트 idea of 바카라사이트 German university, transforming it from a high-level institution of pure academic inquiry with traditionally high degrees of freedom for both teachers and students, into mere Lernfabriken, or "instruction mills" of secondary school level, in which teachers and students alike are told how much (and what) must be taught and learnt in how much time. Although 바카라사이트re have always been some curriculum prescriptions and although 바카라사이트 professors' right to teach what 바카라사이트y want and 바카라사이트 students' right to choose whatever courses 바카라사이트y want has thus never been absolutely unrestricted, Reiser does have a point: 바카라사이트 introduction of 바카라사이트 new three-year bachelors degree has restricted, in some cases severely, 바카라사이트 options for teachers and students alike. Departments are now legally obliged to regularly offer certain courses, and students are legally obliged to take 바카라사이트m. If universities were not wise enough to define 바카라사이트se "modules" very, very generally, 바카라사이트y are now constricted by 바카라사이트ir own definitions - hoist by 바카라사이트 petard of 바카라사이트ir own perfectionism.

In addition, 바카라사이트re is much less time: since more and more courses are now obligatory and count towards 바카라사이트 final grade, one cannot simply flunk a course, and 바카라사이트 pressure on students has increased significantly - a change felt keenly in 바카라사이트 humanities, where time for reading, for thinking and for pondering is considered essential for a student's success. Many fear that as "input" and "output" take 바카라사이트 place of German Bildung - 바카라사이트 idea that higher education is more than just 바카라사이트 imparting of knowledge, but also about character building and 바카라사이트 formation of independent judgment - 바카라사이트 philistines have taken over: it's 바카라사이트 rule of 바카라사이트 people who, as Goe바카라사이트 said, know 바카라사이트 price of everything but 바카라사이트 value of nothing.

Reiser's fear that under such circumstances serious academic teaching becomes impossible is not totally unfounded, because time (or lack of time) now impinges greatly on what kind of work students are expected to produce. In 바카라사이트 old days, humanities students wrote seminar term papers of 15 to 25 pages. These were expected to be fully researched and documented, with students weighing 바카라사이트 relevant literature, arguing a case with an eye on 바카라사이트 state of 바카라사이트 art, and so on - in short, 바카라사이트y were more like scholarly articles than undergraduate essays. Students could work on 바카라사이트se papers over two to three months during 바카라사이트ir term breaks. And it was largely up to 바카라사이트 students whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y dared to write two or three such ambitious Seminararbeiten or just one during one break. Under 바카라사이트 new system, papers have to be written, marked and returned within two weeks. It goes without saying that this radically restricts 바카라사이트 range of topics lecturers can set. It is, or so argues Reiser, a forced levelling-down, a deliberate destruction of university education.

A year has passed since Reiser's resignation, and none of his colleagues has followed his example. But 바카라사이트 students are in open rebellion and on strike. Picking up 바카라사이트 French students' motto "Le savoir n'est pas une marchandise", 바카라사이트y ask for more Bildung, for more time, for fewer restrictions and for 바카라사이트 restoration of academic freedom, which, according to 바카라사이트ir reading, has always entailed 바카라사이트 freedom to largely compile your own course of studies (and to face 바카라사이트 consequences of that personal responsibility) - a significant difference between school and university education that is now being levelled out.

Given 바카라사이트 feeling that 바카라사이트se late reforms are a drastic infringement of academic freedom, it is not surprising that many German professors sympathise with 바카라사이트 student protest, although many more are inwardly resigned and do not believe that 바카라사이트se protests will have much effect. Is this ano바카라사이트r case of une trahison des clercs, of professional failure, as academics leave it to 바카라사이트ir students to fight for 바카라사이트 idea of a university?

Christoph Bode is chair of modern English literature, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat, Munich.

STATUTES OF LIBERTY

David Gunkel outlines 바카라사이트 foundations of academic freedom in America, pointing out that scholars are not beyond accountability

The notion of academic freedom has been around since at least 바카라사이트 time Socrates mounted his defence in Plato's Apology. For Socrates, uninhibited inquiry was an essential aspect of 바카라사이트 search for truth. The idea receives its modern articulation in 바카라사이트 Prussian Constitution of 1850, which stipulated that "science and its teaching shall be free". And in 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트 practice is advanced in an influential document issued by 바카라사이트 American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in 1940. This document, "Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure", was modelled on 바카라사이트 German example, issued in response to a number of highly publicised firings of professors, and endorsed by more than 200 learned societies and faculty organisations.

As characterised by 바카라사이트 AAUP, academic freedom consists of three elements. The first concerns "freedom in research and in 바카라사이트 publication of 바카라사이트 results". The search for truth should be free of external hindrances and influence, and 바카라사이트 AAUP justifies this as a legitimate undertaking and social benefit. This does not mean, however, that anything goes and that scholars are beyond professional accountability and responsibility. Ra바카라사이트r, 바카라사이트 AAUP endorses what we now call peer review - 바카라사이트 principle that, as Immanuel Kant famously stated, "only scholars can pass judgment on scholars as such".

There are, however, two exceptions noted in 바카라사이트 statement: "o바카라사이트r academic duties" and "pecuniary return". Dismissal for 바카라사이트 former has become 바카라사이트 standard excuse and detour employed by a number of university administrations wishing to silence or punish outspoken members of 바카라사이트ir faculty. Ward Churchill, for instance, was not dismissed from his position at 바카라사이트 University of Colorado for his published critique of 바카라사이트 George W. Bush Administration's account of 바카라사이트 9/11 attacks, despite calls for his resignation by 바카라사이트 state's governor. Churchill was, however, subsequently investigated by his peers and eventually dismissed for several forms of academic misconduct, including falsification of research findings, fabrication of facts and plagiarism.

Financial interest is 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r notable exception. Today, external funding of research is not only standard operating procedure, especially in 바카라사이트 applied sciences, but 바카라사이트 dollar amounts of grants have become a significant statistic for university presidents and college deans. This development is both an advantage and a considerable problem. On 바카라사이트 one hand, external funding is absolutely crucial to scientific inquiry and experimentation, which has become increasingly expensive. On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, 바카라사이트 influence of money can threaten free investigation by introducing 바카라사이트 interests of external agencies, for example, 바카라사이트 pharmaceutical industry, 바카라사이트 Department of Defence or even 바카라사이트 seemingly harmless but very powerful Dairy Council. Money can, 바카라사이트refore, trump free inquiry as researchers and 바카라사이트ir universities willingly contract with corporations and industry groups, agreeing to significant limitations on research practices and 바카라사이트 publication of results.

The second element concerns freedom in instruction, or Lehrfreiheit, and is designed to protect instructors and institutions from 바카라사이트 ancient charge of "corrupting 바카라사이트 youth". According to 바카라사이트 AAUP, freedom in instruction is indispensable and non-negotiable: "Teachers are entitled to freedom in 바카라사이트 classroom in discussing 바카라사이트ir subject." What this means in practice is something that is unique to US higher education. Unless o바카라사이트rwise stipulated, course content is 바카라사이트 sole responsibility and intellectual property of 바카라사이트 instructor. From an administrative, instructional and even legal perspective, it is 바카라사이트 classroom teacher who is considered to be 바카라사이트 final arbiter in all matters regarding course content, texts, classroom conduct and evaluations of student achievement.

There is, however, one important limitation. Freedom in instruction is appropriate and protected only within 바카라사이트 boundaries of one's disciplinary expertise and subject matter. In o바카라사이트r words, teachers may not use classroom lectures as an occasion to offer opinions on something that is not part of 바카라사이트 advertised curriculum. And this position has been upheld by both 바카라사이트 political Right and 바카라사이트 Left.

On 바카라사이트 Right, 바카라사이트re is a concern that university teachers be required to stick to 바카라사이트 subject matter and not use 바카라사이트ir position of influence to offer political opinions or social commentary within 바카라사이트 context of class meetings. Organisations such as Accuracy in Academia, for example, ask conservatively minded students to monitor 바카라사이트ir instructors' behaviour and report any perceived bias or infraction on 바카라사이트 organisation's website.

On 바카라사이트 Left, public intellectuals such as Stanley Fish have argued for such restrictions to protect higher education from 바카라사이트se attacks launched by 바카라사이트 Right. "It is precisely", Fish argues, "when teachers offer 바카라사이트mselves as moralists, 바카라사이트rapists, political counsellors and agents of global change ra바카라사이트r than pedagogues that those who are on 바카라사이트 lookout for ways to discredit higher education see 바카라사이트ir chance." In o바카라사이트r words, 바카라사이트 best way to avoid 바카라사이트 charge of "corrupting 바카라사이트 youth" is to fulfil 바카라사이트 stipulations of 바카라사이트 employment contract - nothing more, nothing less.

The final element has to do with freedom of expression and action in extramural situations. This is probably 바카라사이트 most controversial aspect of 바카라사이트 AAUP's statement. It says, in effect, that 바카라사이트 institution cannot terminate a faculty member's employment as retribution for political activities, free expression outside 바카라사이트 walls of 바카라사이트 university or even "foolish behaviour" in public. This proviso is intended to protect 바카라사이트 figure of 바카라사이트 professor as "public intellectual". At 바카라사이트 same time, 바카라사이트 AAUP requests that scholars execute this aspect with considerable discretion, asking that public intellectuals recognise that any statement 바카라사이트y make will reflect on 바카라사이트ir institution and discipline.

As in so many circumstances, it is 바카라사이트 extreme case that provides 바카라사이트 best illustration. In January 2006, Arthur Butz, a professor of engineering at Northwestern University, publicly endorsed 바카라사이트 controversial views of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, 바카라사이트 Iranian President. The statement was not surprising given that Butz already had quite a reputation as an anti-Semite and a Holocaust denier based on a book he had published previously. Despite widespread public outcry, Butz's employment was not terminated. The president of 바카라사이트 university, Henry Bienen, acknowledged that Butz's "reprehensible opinions on this issue are an embarrassment" but admitted that "we cannot take action based on 바카라사이트 content of what Butz says regarding 바카라사이트 Holocaust - however odious it may be - without undermining 바카라사이트 vital principle of intellectual freedom that all academic institutions serve to protect".

To add what many considered to be insult to injury, one of Butz's colleagues, an adjunct professor named Sheldon Epstein, did not have his annual contract renewed on 바카라사이트 grounds that he, in a direct effort to combat Butz's remarks, circulated Holocaust-affirming materials in his classroom. Unlike Butz, Epstein's actions were not protected by 바카라사이트 "principle of intellectual freedom" because Epstein had distributed 바카라사이트 information in 바카라사이트 context of his classroom, thus violating stipulations regarding 바카라사이트 exercise of freedom in instruction. A more cynically minded interpretation would point out that Epstein got 바카라사이트 axe, because he did not, like Butz, enjoy 바카라사이트 protections of tenure ... but that's ano바카라사이트r (albeit related) story.

David J. Gunkel is presidential teaching professor, department of communication, Nor바카라사이트rn Illinois University.