Published August, 2023 by Dr. Kathleen Bortolin and Dr. Mark Blackell
Introduction
Academic freedom is the freedom of members of the university to teach, research, and engage in public discourse without coercion from outside forces in the private sector, the government, or from internal sources such as the university administration. According to a declaration on academic freedom from the United Nations:
Members of the academic community, individually or collectively, are free to pursue, develop and transmit knowledge and ideas, through research, teaching, study, discussion, documentation, production, creation or writing. Academic freedom includes the liberty of individuals to express freely opinions about the institution or system in which they work, to fulfil their functions without discrimination or fear of repression by the State or any other actor, to participate in professional or representative academic bodies, and to enjoy all the internationally recognized human rights applicable to other individuals in the same jurisdiction. The enjoyment of academic freedom carries with it obligations, such as the duty to respect the academic freedom of others, to ensure the fair discussion of contrary views, and to treat all without discrimination on any of the prohibited grounds (UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, 1999)
Recently, however, there are global concerns that academic freedom is being eroded. A joint statement by the United Nations Human Rights Council (March, 2023), signed by 74 countries including Canada claims:
Regrettably, attacks on academic freedom are on the rise. These include: repression, intimidation and harassment of researchers and teachers in connection with their research and public statements; dissolution of research institutions and the establishment of restrictive legal or financial frameworks (UN Human Rights Council, 2023).
Universities usually defend academic freedom in a university policy. Such policies preserve the goal of intellectual openness and the on-going pursuit of truth in a university in a free society.
Currently, VIU does NOT have a policy, or even a statement, on academic freedom. Recently, faculty members have begun to question this lack of policy, and its potential impacts on our community and our work. We have begun to wonder if having a policy on academic freedom could enhance our professional pursuits through a stronger, more articulated commitment to intellectual openness and critical discourse. Although the VIUFA collective agreement includes language on academic freedom, we see value in having an institutional policy that commits VIU on a broader and more inclusive level to upholding the tenets of academic freedom.
What does the sector look like?
VIU is one of very few institutions in the province that has neither a policy nor a statement on academic freedom. Based on an initial search of public policy documents from a variety of post-secondary institutions in BC, the following figures break down what other institutions have in terms of articulated academic freedom policies and statements. Links have been included for reference.
Figure 1: Academic Freedom Policy at BC Special Purpose Teaching Universities
Figure 2: Academic Freedom Policy at BC FPSE Institutions
Institution | Policy or Statement | Link | Senate or Board of Governors Approved |
Langara | Statements (x2) | ||
TRU | Statement | ||
Emily Carr | Policy | BoG/Sen | |
Capilano | Policy | Senate | |
Douglas | Policy | BoG | |
Kwantlen | Policy | BoG/Sen | |
Selkirk | Policy | President’s Office | |
UFV | Policy | BofG | |
Camosun | None | No | |
College of New Caldonia | None | ||
College of the Rockies | None | ||
NIC | None | ||
NVIT | None | ||
Okanagan College | None | ||
Vancouver Community College | None | ||
VIU | None |
Figure 3: Academic Freedom Policy at BC Post-Secondary Research Institutions
VIU’s Vision Statement lists the University’s purpose, core values, visionary goals, and objectives, yet makes no direct reference to academic freedom in terms of research or teaching. There is a reference in the Core Values section to valuing Discovery and a claim that “…through the pursuit of free enquiry we promote an enduring learning community.” There is also a claim in the Core Values section to valuing Learning and in that section is expressed support for “communication and exchange of ideas across disciplines and locations” as well as for “exploration and application of new thought.” These phrases are vague and do not go far enough in framing the University as a place committed to the open-ended pursuit of truth through free inquiry and debate. Neither do they act as a statement that would defend academic freedom. They are more a gesture in the direction of academic freedom, combined with other vaguely expressed concerns. We believe VIU can and should do better here.
There are two mentions of academic freedom in VIU’s current policies. One is in Policy 31.13 on Intellectual Property. A listed purpose of that policy is to “[p]rovide safeguards for the protection and disposition of Intellectual Property and uphold the principles of scholarly integrity and academic freedom in the mobilization of Intellectual Property.” While important, this clause does not deal with academic freedom more generally — it is restricted to the mobilization of intellectual property.
Policy 21.03, the Human Rights Policy, sets out the responsibilities of the University and its members to uphold the BC Human Rights Code and adds, as an addendum to that main task, that “[i]t is recognized that academic freedom is an important value of the University. This policy will be interpreted in light of our commitment to this value.” This appears to be the only place in VIU’s policies where academic freedom is expressed as a value. However, it is not clear what the value of academic freedom really means to VIU. What does it preserve? What does it preserve against? And there is no mention of the university’s responsibility to defend academic freedom. Without an articulated policy on academic freedom, the value expressed here remains vague and indefensible.
When reviewing more closely VIU’s existing, somewhat mixed bag, of policies, procedures and statements, we find elements that are worrisome to the tenets of academic freedom, and to the University as a place to engage in open-ended dialogue and rational argumentation. For example, Policy 41.05 on Presentations on Campus states that,
[a] speaker or presenter shall be invited on campus by a department or individual employee or the Student Society. The party making the invitation thereby takes responsibility for the actions of their guest and the content of their speech or material. … Members of faculty may invite speakers or presenters into their classroom to augment or be part of a lecture, seminar or lab under this policy. The faculty member is responsible for the actions of their guest and the content of their material. (emphasis added)
This is not a policy of an institution that values the university’s role in society as one of generating open-ended debate. Take for example the desire to hold a political candidates’ debate, as several VIU departments have done. Those departments, and anyone organizing such an event, is put at risk given the above statement.
Another statement (not a policy) on Teaching and Learning Principles and Responsibilities published by the Provost’s Office is also worrisome. Principle #10, Respect for Institution, states that faculty should be “respectful of the educational goals, policies, and standards of Vancouver Island University.” It is not clear what being respectful means in this context and whether arguments against those goals, policies, and standards is disrespectful or not. Statements are not policies — they do not have the binding power of policies. However, vague statements like this have the potential to be misused and misunderstood, perhaps leading to self-censure or more worryingly, censure by authority of the university if it were to deem dissent and critical discourse as “disrespectful.” Moreover, this statement is potentially at odds with the language of the VIUFA Collective Agreement that defends “freedom to criticize the University and freedom from institutional censorship” (see appendix below).
As outlined here, existing policies and statements at VIU are weak on academic freedom and they pull in different directions. Without a clear policy on academic freedom members of the university are arguably adrift and at risk.
Why start a conversation at the faculty level about academic freedom?
A policy on academic freedom would apply to all members of the university, but because faculty councils are deeply involved in the democratic governance structure as outlined in the University Act, we want to begin the conversation through Senate representatives and their faculty councils. Furthermore, the recently commissioned Report on Vancouver Island University Senate Governance, written by Christine Tausig Ford, calls for comprehensive whole-of-faculty councils to be more robust in their “linkages and input to Senate” (see the report in the Senate Package for Thursday, February 2, 2023, recommendations 7 b and d). A conversation about academic freedom at the faculty level is essential for determining if there is a democratic will.
Why not just rely on the VIUFA Collective Agreement? The VIUFA Collective Agreement includes important language defending academic freedom (see the appendix below for that language), but this language:
(a) only protects VIUFA members and
(b) only comes into force when a potential violation of academic freedom is brought to the union by a VIUFA member, and VIUFA agrees to support the member
We feel that a parallel VIU policy on academic freedom would help make administrators and those on governing bodies more attuned to the need to protect academic freedom in their policy formation and actions. Recently Senate passed a mandatory Course Outline Policy and Procedure (See Procedure 94.08.001) despite expressed Social Sciences Faculty Council concerns about aspects of that policy infringing on academic freedom. If VIU had a robust policy on academic freedom in place, we suspect that that policy development may have evolved along different lines, resulting in a policy more aligned with academic freedom.
One of the reasons for having a policy (and not a statement) on academic freedom would be to make the issue academic freedom central in the re-visiting of old policies and the development of new ones. A policy on academic freedom would not eliminate institutional autonomy but it would add a balancing factor that is arguably important for administration and the governing bodies at VIU to consider. We think VIU needs a better balance between institutional autonomy and academic freedom.
A Way Forward
Most likely, any global VIU policy on academic freedom would ultimately be passed through VIU’s Board of Governors on the recommendation of Senate. To get there, we are advocating that a first step is to have faculty Senate representatives engage faculty councils and other members, faculty and non-faculty, in their areas in conversations regarding academic freedom. This document is meant to support those initial conversations, and those conversations are meant to assess the commitment of having a policy on academic freedom at VIU. If faculties are in favour of the development of such a policy, we would encourage them to bring this recommendation forward to Senate via their Senate representative. Furthermore, we acknowledge that academic freedom extends to other areas of the institution, including various non-instructional areas that do not have faculty councils. To capture the commitment and ideas from these areas, we are hoping Senate support staff representatives engage in conversations with, and invite feedback from, various non-instructional areas on this issue, and also bring this information forward to Senate.
If there is a will for this policy, Senate could then strike a committee to draft a policy, and that policy would be refined further through the appropriate Senate Standing committees and eventually through various readings at Senate. However, senate representatives could perhaps strike their own working group, composed of senators and others, to draft a policy to then bring to Senate. We believe the process as outlined here engages our colleagues in a grassroots approach that informs policy from a situated and engaged position, which increases the likelihood of a meaningful policy that aligns with the needs and interests of the those most impacted by such a policy.
Conclusion
Our hope in sharing this paper is to broaden the dialogue on academic freedom at VIU, and move our institution toward a place where all members of our community trust that they have a level of academic freedom that aligns with working at a university. In our pursuit of intellectual openness, equity of voice, and the scholarly pursuit of creating and sharing knowledge, we believe that VIU needs to support and defend the voices of its people and articulate its commitment to the value of academic freedom. We welcome comments and questions, publicly or privately, and will continue to connect with faculty Senate representatives to determine next steps.
Appendix
From the VIUFA Collective Agreement:
14.14 ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Society benefits from the search for knowledge and its free exposition. Academic freedom is essential to both these purposes in the teaching function of the University as well as in its scholarship and research. There shall be no infringement or abridgement of the academic freedom of any faculty member. Faculty members are entitled, regardless of prescribed doctrine, to freedom in carrying out research and in publishing the results thereof, freedom to produce and perform creative works, freedom of teaching and of discussion, freedom to criticize the University and freedom from institutional censorship. Academic freedom does not require neutrality on the part of the individual. Rather, academic freedom makes commitment possible. Academic freedom carries with it the duty to use that freedom in a fair manner consistent with the scholarly obligation to base research, criticism, and teaching on an honest search for knowledge.
(Source: http://www.viufa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/VIU-VIUFA-2019-2022-Collective-Agreement-Final-Signed.pdf)
Further reading/Resources
The University of Toronto provides an example a statement of institutional purpose that puts academic freedom at the centre:
Within the unique university context, the most crucial of all human rights are the rights of freedom of speech, academic freedom, and freedom of research. And we affirm that these rights are meaningless unless they entail the right to raise deeply disturbing questions and provocative challenges to the cherished beliefs of society at large and of the university itself.
It is this human right to radical, critical teaching and research with which the University has a duty above all to be concerned; for there is no one else, no other institution and no other office, in our modern liberal democracy, which is the custodian of this most precious and vulnerable right of the liberated human spirit. (See link for full statement)
A collection of Academic Freedom Articles from University Affairs: https://www.universityaffairs.ca/opinion/dispatches-academic-freedom/
CAUT Policy on Academic Freedom: https://www.caut.ca/about-us/caut-policy/lists/caut-policy-statements/policy-statement-on-academic-freedom
Leave a Reply
Comments