September 2014
Outgoing University of Alberta president Indira Samarasekera distinguishes
strongly between academic freedom and freedom of expression.
“Academic freedom is so hopelessly misunderstood,” she said, according to a
report on the CBC News website, 29 May 2014. “Academic freedom is there for you
to be able to speak about things you absolutely are an expert on. We’re talking
about free speech, here.”
The
“here” in that last sentence refers to professors criticizing the policies at
their universities. For Samarasekera, universities allow professors to
criticize their institutions not because those professors enjoy academic
freedom, for academic freedom, again, applies only to professors when they are
speaking as credentialed experts. Rather, universities don’t sanction
professors who speak critically simply because universities value freedom of
expression.
President Samarasekera is not describing the institution of academic freedom as
it actually exists at her university; she is, instead, proposing that things be
changed. The collective agreement at the University of Alberta affirms,
under the heading “Academic Freedom,” that professors are free “to speculate, to
comment, to criticize without deference to prescribed doctrine” (article
2.02.3). Nothing in the agreement restricts that affirmation to
speculations, comments, or criticisms made within a professor’s areas of
academic expertise.
Samarasekera is, then, telling us how things should be, and
not how
they presently
are.
Those
who so hopelessly misunderstand academic freedom might not be making a factual mistake
regarding policies currently in place. They are simply wrong about what
utterances should be protected under academic freedom.
President Samarasekera is not alone in her view that much of what is protected
in collective agreements under the heading “academic freedom” shouldn’t be
included under that heading. It is safe to say that most university
presidents in Canada share her view, for, in 2011, the Association of
Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC), an organization of university and
college presidents, adopted a new statement on academic freedom that
conspicuously fails to include both criticism of the university and public
expression. (The AUCC statement is now being cited by some universities in
their bargaining with professors’ unions. These universities would remove
from collective agreements freedom of expression protections professors
currently enjoy.)
Should
we, then, reform policies of academic freedom along the lines Samarasekera
describes, removing the protection they give to professors who speak on matters
outside their credentialed expertise?
Samarasekera’s proposal certainly raises a host of practical problems concerning
how to determine a professor’s areas of expertise. But that’s not the real
problem with it. The real problem is that it rests on a misunderstanding of the
nature of academic credentials.
It is
true that earning a Master’s or Doctoral degree in a subject makes one an expert
on a topic or two. More significantly, though, one’s degree indicates that one
has acquired a high level of competence in enquiry, interpretation, critical
thinking, and expression. The competence the master or doctor has acquired
is a general competence, one that can be exercised on whatever field or topic to
which the person turns her attention. It also indicates an outlook, a
fondness for enquiry and discussion. An academic degree is not the
credential of a narrow specialist, as a professional title is; first and
foremost, it announces one’s citizenship in the republic of enquiry and letters.
Academic freedom, then, on a correct view of academic credentials, is not an
expert’s freedom to voice her expert judgement, but the freedom of a researcher,
scholar, or intellectual to carry on as researcher, scholar, or intellectual.
(Since researchers, scholars, and intellectuals are skeptical, if not
disdainful, of authority and expertise, they would be embarrassed to claim the
authority of an expert.)
Now,
although Samarasekera would restrict academic freedom to recognized expertise,
she would also defend freedom of expression on campus, as she makes clear both
in her CBC interview and in an article she published in the Globe and Mail,
28 May 2014. In that article, she writes, “Certainly campuses are places where
free debate must reign, even heatedly, and this free speech—just like academic
freedom—must be defended in the strongest terms.” (Unfortunately,
Samarasekera’s defence of expression on campus isn’t, in fact, in the strongest
terms. She endorses, in her Globe and Mail article, Canada’s laws
against defamation and hate speech, laws that deform enquiry and discussion to a
greater degree than they protect anyone’s wellbeing.)
On
Samarasekera’s campus, then, academic freedom would protect only expert opinion,
and freedom of expression would protect what members of the university community
say outside their spheres of expertise. In the end, everything would
remain protected. Why bother to protect professors’ freedom of expression
under the heading of academic freedom, then?
Prudence. When freedom of expression is protected under academic freedom, a
whole faculty union may well mobilize in its defence should it be threatened or
violated. On the other hand, words from a university senate proclaiming
freedom of expression on campus will protect nothing should an administrator
decide that a professor’s speech puts the university’s reputation at risk, say,
or threatens the campus atmosphere of tolerance and respect.
A whole
faculty union may well mobilize. Nothing is for certain, of course,
and there are plenty of examples of faculty unions happily siding with the
administration against talkative professors. Still, if President
Samarasekerawere to have her way, professors would almost immediately enjoy no
more security of expression than their students currently do.
Mark Mercer, is a professor in the Department of Philosophy, Saint Mary’s University, also a member of SAFS Board of Directors.
Prince Arthur Herald, 17 July 2014.
Help us maintain freedom in teaching, research and scholarship by joining SAFS or making a donation.
