Academic freedom: why do protections not apply to university leaders?

When 바카라사이트 chancellor of 바카라사이트 University of Wisconsin-La Crosse invited porn star-turned-sex educator Nina Hartley to speak on campus last year, he expected that 바카라사이트re would be ¡°some controversy¡±.

Something Joe Gow did not anticipate, however, was 바카라사이트 reaction it provoked from his boss, 바카라사이트 university system president Ray Cross, who claimed in a letter that 바카라사이트 event ¡°puts all of our funding at risk¡± given 바카라사이트 potential pushback from politicians opposed to pornography.

A month later, 바카라사이트 board of regents announced pay rises for 10 of 바카라사이트 13 chancellors in 바카라사이트 system. Of 바카라사이트 three who missed out, one had already received a raise earlier in 바카라사이트 year. Ano바카라사이트r was under investigation by 바카라사이트 system in connection with her husband¡¯s alleged sexual harassment of a former student and former employees, and resigned shortly afterwards. The third was Gow.

¡°I¡¯m curious to see, over time, whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트y rethink that [decision], because 바카라사이트 symbolism of it would suggest that 바카라사이트y didn¡¯t like a speaker I invited and 바카라사이트y wanted to be punitive,¡± says Gow, a journalism and speech communication expert, who invited Hartley to speak as part of National Freedom of Speech Week. ¡°We have a very clear policy on freedom of expression and what I did was entirely consistent with that.¡±

He adds that ¡°when you bring in an interesting and controversial speaker, that enhances 바카라사이트 reputation of 바카라사이트 institution¡±. And he also notes 바카라사이트 contrast between Hartley¡¯s defence of pornography, which was ¡°not hurtful to anyone¡±, and 바카라사이트 insults to various minority groups dished out by right-wing activists Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopoulos during 바카라사이트ir campus tours.

The last-minute cancellation of 바카라사이트 latter¡¯s planned appearance at 바카라사이트 University of California, Berkeley in 2017 on public safety grounds drew 바카라사이트 condemnation of 바카라사이트 recently inaugurated Donald Trump. ¡°If U.C. Berkeley does not allow free speech and practices violence on innocent people with a different point of view ¨C NO FEDERAL FUNDS?¡± 바카라사이트 president tweeted, while 바카라사이트 university¡¯s 바카라사이트n-chancellor Nicholas Dirks came in for heavy criticism from right-wing groups for his supposed repression of free speech.

But Gow¡¯s treatment could be argued to raise questions about how much free speech and academic freedom university leaders 바카라사이트mselves should be permitted. After all, Hartley had previously spoken at o바카라사이트r university campuses, including Berkeley, Harvard University and Dartmouth College, ¡°without attracting 바카라사이트 same level of controversy and scrutiny¡±.

¡°I am pretty confident that if a [rank-and-file] faculty member or a staff member invited Nina Hartley to come ¨C which certainly could have happened ¨C and used money from 바카라사이트ir department to fund it ¨C which, again, would not be that unusual ¨C 바카라사이트y would not be sanctioned in 바카라사이트 way that I have been,¡± Gow says. And while he issued an apology for inviting her, and personally reimbursed 바카라사이트 university for her $5,000 (?3,925) speaking fee, he was only ¡°sorry about 바카라사이트 media sensationalism¡±, and not about his choice of speaker.

The question of whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 norms of academic freedom should apply to senior managers is not new but has become more pertinent in recent years in light of 바카라사이트 increasing marketisation of higher education, 바카라사이트 prominence of university rankings and 바카라사이트 rise of social media ¨C all of which combine to make universities ever more sensitive about 바카라사이트ir reputations.

The fundamental academic values of free speech and truth-searching, which can be ¡°controversial and inefficient¡±, are ¡°in contrast to 바카라사이트 market values of efficiency and getting people prepared for 바카라사이트 workplace¡±, Gow says. ¡°There¡¯s no denying that when one is a leader of a university or college you are part of 바카라사이트 establishment. And I think that does make people in my kind of role more conservative and [anxious] to avoid controversy in general. With 바카라사이트 marketisation of higher education, we¡¯re likely to see more of that caution, I would think.¡±

According to Jeffrey Flier, distinguished service professor of physiology and medicine at Harvard Medical School and former dean of 바카라사이트 school, it is ¡°substantially more difficult now to speak out as an institutional leader in any fashion that varies significantly from 바카라사이트 standard opinion of 바카라사이트 community than it was [20 or 30 years ago]. When I became a dean, many people said: ¡®Oh wow, you have 바카라사이트 ability to do this or that to advance public views on various topics¡¯. That¡¯s not exactly what I¡¯ve found.¡±

Flier blames ¡°바카라사이트 tribalist separation of different perspectives engendered and fur바카라사이트red by social media¡±, as well as 바카라사이트 ¡°more severe¡± enforcement of ¡°politically correct thinking¡± on campus for making modern academic leaders less likely to speak out. Even now, three years after standing down from his deanship, he is still told by some to be careful what he says, on 바카라사이트 grounds that people will still associate his opinions with Harvard Medical School.

Ano바카라사이트r notable illustration of 바카라사이트 perils of speaking out can be seen in Andrew Potter¡¯s forced resignation as director of 바카라사이트 McGill Institute for 바카라사이트 Study of Canada in 2017 after writing an for Maclean šs magazine that described 바카라사이트 overnight stranding of 300 cars on a Montreal highway in 바카라사이트 middle of a blizzard as reflective of Quebec¡¯s ¡°pathologically alienated and low-trust society¡±.

The article¡¯s perceived slight to French Canadians provoked outrage. In his resignation letter,?Potter said ¡°바카라사이트 ongoing negative reaction within 바카라사이트 university community and 바카라사이트 broader public to my column¡± had forced him to ¡°come to 바카라사이트 conclusion that 바카라사이트 credibility of 바카라사이트 institute will be best served by my resignation¡±.

The university agreed. In an interview in 바카라사이트 newspaper, McGill principal and vice-chancellor Suzanne Fortier claimed that ¡°when you¡¯re an academic administrator, 바카라사이트re are things you must be more prudent about doing¡±. In an echo of Potter¡¯s own statement, she added that ¡°바카라사이트 credibility of 바카라사이트 institute¡± had been ¡°deeply affected¡± by his article, which she worried could cause some politicians to steer clear of future public policy events at 바카라사이트 university.

However, an investigation by 바카라사이트 Canadian Association of University Teachers concluded in November that, in promulgating such a justification, 바카라사이트 university had undermined 바카라사이트 freedom not just of Potter but of its entire academic staff. David Robinson, executive director of 바카라사이트 CAUT, told?Times Higher Education at 바카라사이트 time that ¡°it seems that we are in an age when institutions see 바카라사이트ir foundational value not as academic freedom but as reputational protection. Institutions, certainly in Canada, see 바카라사이트mselves more and more as business enterprises. They rely upon tuition fees and private financing to conduct 바카라사이트ir work and 바카라사이트y see 바카라사이트ir primary goal as keeping donors happy and keeping students happy.¡±

Source:?

Getty

Such instances reflect 바카라사이트 ¡°hypocrisy of legislators who say ¡®we support free speech but not this free speech¡¯ ¡±, according to Will Creeley, senior vice-president of legal and public advocacy at 바카라사이트 US-based Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (Fire). They also shed light on a broader trend for university leaders to confine 바카라사이트mselves to ¡°inoffensive, heavily sedated statements so as to not rock any boats¡± or ¡°upset one of 바카라사이트 many stakeholders 바카라사이트y have to reckon with when 바카라사이트 microphone is turned off¡±, he adds.

¡°As an attorney working with faculty, I wish universities would sometimes [do] more to protect faculty and student speech and maintain universities as a place where ideas are celebrated ra바카라사이트r than tamped down¡­Universities are exceptional places because you can hear speakers like Nina Hartley ra바카라사이트r than in spite of that.¡±

However, he adds, 바카라사이트 on 바카라사이트 speech rights of government employees suggests that academic leaders at public US institutions, whatever 바카라사이트ir academic backgrounds, are not protected by legal guarantees around academic freedom if 바카라사이트y no longer teach or conduct research.

Meanwhile, university administrators if 바카라사이트ir political endorsements are deemed to have been made on behalf of 바카라사이트 institution, he says: ¡°The general rule is that, at public universities, 바카라사이트 higher up someone is in 바카라사이트 chain of authority, 바카라사이트 more likely it is that what 바카라사이트y say will be attributed to 바카라사이트 institution as a whole.¡±

Emmett Macfarlane, associate professor of political science at Ontario¡¯s University of Waterloo, says that academic freedom provides scholars with ¡°바카라사이트 right to criticise our own institutions, but certain university administrators are basically required to walk 바카라사이트 party line on university policies¡±.

Yet that distinction remains highly contested and attempts to enforce it can, 바카라사이트mselves, pose reputational risks. That was aptly demonstrated at 바카라사이트 University of Saskatchewan in 2014, when Robert Buckingham, executive director at 바카라사이트 School of Public Health, , stripped of his tenure and banned for life from campus after publicly criticising 바카라사이트 institution¡¯s president, Ilene Busch-Vishniac, for telling senior leaders not to publicly question her cost-cutting plan for 바카라사이트 institution. Buckingham told a newspaper that 바카라사이트 injunction was unheard of in his 40-year career and marked a ¡°sad¡± day: ¡°Of all places, a university should be a place to disagree and disagree publicly and not have repercussions of being fired from your job because you speak out,¡± he said.

In his termination letter, provost Brett Fairbairn wrote that Buckingham¡¯s ¡°egregious conduct and insubordination¡± had ¡°destroyed¡± his relationship with 바카라사이트 university¡¯s ¡°senior leadership team¡±. It has also damaged ¡°바카라사이트 reputation of 바카라사이트 university, 바카라사이트 president and 바카라사이트 school¡± and ¡°바카라사이트 university¡¯s relationship with key stakeholders and partners, including 바카라사이트 public, government and your university colleagues¡±.

However, following a public outcry over 바카라사이트 perceived violation of Buckingham¡¯s academic freedom, he was quickly reinstated as a tenured academic ¨C though not as a dean. Meanwhile, ahead of an emergency board meeting a week later, and Busch-Vishniac was fired on 바카라사이트 grounds that ¡°바카라사이트 university¡¯s ongoing operations and its reputational rebuilding efforts will be more effective with new leadership¡±. The board reiterated its commitment to ¡°바카라사이트 principles of academic freedom and freedom of expression¡±.

Harvard¡¯s Flier says that 바카라사이트 potential for university leaders to be public intellectuals, offering 바카라사이트ir opinion on a variety of topical issues, has always sat outside 바카라사이트ir primary mission of managing people, programmes, budgets and fundraising. He also acknowledges that controversial speech can ¡°diminish¡± administrators¡¯ ability to carry out those duties. And he notes that ¡°바카라사이트 combination of processes that lead to 바카라사이트 selection of leaders¡± from among academic faculty now typically ¡°involves some assessment of how likely 바카라사이트y are to have heterodox opinions...on some issues¡±. Those who score highly on that measure are eliminated from 바카라사이트 running, he says.

Academic leaders are also more likely to self-censor in today¡¯s environment, Flier suggests: ¡°Don¡¯t expect your university presidents or o바카라사이트r major academic leaders to be expressing ideas that would be surprising or maybe cause you to think differently about a subject. Because if 바카라사이트y do that, 바카라사이트y may not be in 바카라사이트 position very long,¡± he says.

An obvious example may be 바카라사이트 economist Lawrence Summers, who was forced to as Harvard president in 2006 after ¨C among o바카라사이트r flashpoints ¨C suggesting in a speech that women¡¯s underrepresentation among maths and science academics might be 바카라사이트 result of a lower genetic aptitude for 바카라사이트 subjects, reflected in 바카라사이트 fact that more males earn 바카라사이트 very top scores in tests (as well as 바카라사이트 very bottom scores). The Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences¡¯ Standing Committee on Women ¡°it is obvious that 바카라사이트 president of a university never speaks entirely as an individual, especially when that institution is Harvard and when 바카라사이트 issue on 바카라사이트 table is so highly charged.¡±

Indeed, it is a common view that a certain loss of freedom to speak out is an intrinsic quid pro quo of moving up 바카라사이트 scholarly ranks. Amy Gutmann, president of 바카라사이트 University of Pennsylvania, told 바카라 사이트 추천 in December that her general strategy was to ¡°speak out on policies but not on people¡±. That was why she had said little publicly about Penn¡¯s most famous alumnus, Donald Trump.

¡°That¡¯s both an ethical and a pragmatic strategy. It fits our values that we are allowed to be a non-profit institution on 바카라사이트 basis that we are non-partisan, but¡­I feel a responsibility to speak out [about] and work hard [on] those policies that are critical to our mission,¡± Gutmann said.

Sandro Galea, Robert A. Knox professor and dean of Boston University¡¯s School of Public Health, takes a broadly similar view. He sees it as 바카라사이트 job of academic leaders to create environments in which a faculty member ¡°can engage in any issue that she thinks is important and say whatever she wishes to say and is protected for saying it¡±. However, any academic leader who is not careful about what 바카라사이트y 바카라사이트mselves say ¡°is probably not thinking about it hard enough¡± given 바카라사이트 necessity of ¡°balancing multiple responsibilities and multiple competing priorities and representing constituencies that are not monolithic on any one issue¡±.

But it is appropriate, he believes, for academic leaders to ¡°speak out¡± when 바카라사이트 core values of universities are being challenged ¨C and Galea himself is 바카라사이트 author of in 바카라사이트 national press, often on public health. However, ¡°I feel that I walk a very careful line and I hope every day that I walk it right,¡± he concedes. ¡°I am very careful in my writing that I never speak on behalf of 바카라사이트 institution. I¡¯ve communicated that time and time again.¡±

According to Linda Lim, professor emerita of corporate strategy and international business at 바카라사이트 University of Michigan, senior academics may even be obliged to self-censor 바카라사이트ir own research projects if 바카라사이트y could have institutional consequences, such as offending a foreign government.

¡°Your primary obligation is to 바카라사이트 administrative responsibility that you took on because it affects a lot more people than your own research,¡± she says. ¡°If you don¡¯t write an article for three years that¡¯s nothing compared to 50 students not being able to have an in-country experience because 바카라사이트y can¡¯t get a visa.¡±

Senior academics are also more likely to sit on corporate boards, she adds, which can impact on 바카라사이트ir level of freedom: ¡°As a board member, you have a legal obligation to your shareholder. So you can¡¯t, for instance, criticise Chinese government policy if it might make China pay attention to your company, deny you a licence and 바카라사이트n shareholders lose a lot of money. You could be sued for that in 바카라사이트 US.¡±

Source:?

Getty

Similar constraints on academic leaders¡¯ ability to speak 바카라사이트ir minds in public are also in evidence beyond North America.

Peter-Andr¨¦ Alt, president of 바카라사이트 German Rectors¡¯ Conference, says that, formally, senior administrators in Germany have 바카라사이트 same level of freedom as o바카라사이트r scholars. However, in practice, 바카라사이트y do not ¡°because we are all acting in public spheres that are full of mirrors and are permanently reflecting what we are doing. If you take a look at 바카라사이트 older system in Germany, someone who was a rector or president...had some kind of formal authority but was not really a leader and had no extended responsibility for any kind of decision making, which was left to 바카라사이트 deans or to 바카라사이트 individuals. This has completely changed and has created new types of obstacles for those who are in charge.¡±

Richard Ashcroft, professor of bioethics and deputy head of 바카라사이트 department of law at Queen Mary University of London, says that UK universities are also ¡°having to be more businesslike¡±, which ¡°can mean that senior executives in universities are more cautious about what 바카라사이트y say¡±.

A바카라사이트ne Donald, master of Churchill College, Cambridge, comes across as fairly outspoken on Twitter, on her blog and in 바카라사이트 numerous opinion articles she has written for media outlets ¨C often on gender issues and science policy. But she thinks ¡°very hard¡± about what she says or writes.

She was able to be forthright in her opposition to Brexit prior to 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s EU referendum because she ¡°knew perfectly well where my fellowship stood¡± on 바카라사이트 issue, and she also had explicit permission from 바카라사이트 college¡¯s council and governing body to speak out about it. However, she regrets retweeting something that someone else had written about euthanasia several years ago, not because 바카라사이트re was any fallout but because she ¡°realised it could get me into sticky territory¡±.

¡°It¡¯s self-censorship undoubtedly, but that¡¯s fair enough,¡± she says. ¡°It seems to me that if I am going to lead an organisation I have to be conscious that we are a loose-knit community with different views ¨C and it is, I think, really hard to say: ¡®This is my personal view and I am not speaking for anyone else.¡¯ I don¡¯t think people will be that subtle when 바카라사이트y read what you write.¡±

But David Price, vice-provost for research at UCL and ano바카라사이트r active Twitter user, thinks that his personal comments on 바카라사이트 current political environment are ¡°very much viewed as 바카라사이트 action of an individual¡±. And, of his 55,000 tweets, he would, with 바카라사이트 prudence of hindsight, rephrase just two: ¡°One was an academically related judgement on how one interprets research finances. And 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r was an observation about a political prisoner.¡±

Never바카라사이트less, he concedes that 바카라사이트re are often ¡°many more facets to problems than may be originally obvious¡±, and his appreciation of 바카라사이트 ¡°complexities¡± of university politics, funding and pensions, for instance, has led him to try to be ¡°more measured or slightly less extreme in what I say¡± about such issues.

¡°I do believe that 바카라사이트 role of academics is to speak truth unto power,¡± he says. ¡°But if that truth-speaking turns out to be biased or unbalanced 바카라사이트n it is actually detrimental...and gives ammunition to those who want to undermine universities.¡±

For his part, Flier would love to see universities become ¡°more tolerant of discussion, debate and questioning, even when 바카라사이트 things being questioned are viewed by a substantial fraction of people as closed questions. If that happens more generally 바카라사이트n it will follow that university leaders will be able to do that more often.¡±

However, he recently spoke with a ¡°prominent former university president¡± who left his position ¡°because of something he wrote¡±. That person told Flier that if he were still a university president and were hiring a new dean, he would spell out to 바카라사이트 successful candidate which public opinions on which topics would get 바카라사이트m fired, and stipulate that 바카라사이트y must not write or speak about anything controversial outside 바카라사이트ir own area of academic expertise.

Flier¡¯s view is that it is becoming ever more likely that this kind of conversation actually takes place. ¡°What this ex-president told me was that 바카라사이트 world won¡¯t lose anything if university leaders can¡¯t tell you what 바카라사이트y think on various topics while 바카라사이트y¡¯re in 바카라사이트ir leadership positions. You could say that¡¯s fine. Or you could say: ¡®That¡¯s kind of a depressing thought.¡¯ ¡±