How can academic freedom and tenure foster innovation and diversity in higher education?

Academic freedom needs to be clearly defined. Here, in response to this question, in my opinion, it empowers scholars and professors to pursue their unique ideas without fear of backlash, promoting diverse exploration of new knowledge. And tenure offers faculty members job security, enabling them to take intellectual risks and explore varied perspectives. Together, these principles ensure a rich tapestry of ideas and viewpoints in higher education, enhancing the learning experience for students and driving progress in knowledge and societal development.//

Academic freedom refers to the principle that members of the academic community, including students, faculty, and researchers, have the right to pursue knowledge and express their ideas without censorship or interference from external authorities or interests. This principle is based on the belief that the pursuit of knowledge and the advancement of learning are essential to a democratic and free society, and that the open exchange of ideas and critical inquiry are necessary for intellectual and social progress. Academic freedom protects the right of scholars to research, teach, and publish on controversial or unpopular topics without fear of retribution or persecution.

We have to be realistic about this because academic freedom is a vague concept fueled by the predatory nature of universities as ideological extensions of particular settings. Entire parts of the world have no or little academic freedoms. Consider for example prosecution of student protests, or academic repression and censorship. If you are within a modern western university, it is highly possible that you have now shared programmes of study, academies or even satellite campuses that exist in a part of the world, whereby a complete polar opposite view of liberal, pro-human academic integrity, freedom and expression is upheld. To begin to answer this, we need to first recognise how economic forces have overtaken values driven leadership.

My experience has been that academic freedom is a tremendous responsibility that needs careful strategic thinking and much thought before using it. A good example of when I used this public trust at my former place of employment - Arizona State University - was in addressing the faculty senate as senate president to argue that the mission of our institution is to create as much opportunity for students and urged the faculty to rally around President Crow's vision of the New American University. There were and still are opponents of this vision for Higher Ed, but I was glad to stand up to his vision and am proud of what ASU has achieved.

It is crucial to work on maintaining the sanctity of higher education institutions by creating a balance between the immunity of faculty members, whether in terms of academic freedom or tenure, in order to create a suitable environment for fulfilling the mission of building individuals and society and ensuring that this immunity is not misused. This can be achieved through the presence of specialized disciplinary councils that regulate and address any misconduct, whether by faculty members or students.

Popular opinion states that tenure is permanent or guaranteed long-term employment. This is not technically true. The granting of tenure adds extra contractual protections to a tenure candidate. Tenured faculty do not, in fact, have permanent jobs. For example, a faculty member with tenure can still be fired for mismanaging money or some other cause. Unlike most employees, however, tenured faculty are able to appeal firing decisions and have additional legal protections. In practice, tenured faculty are rarely fired; the bar for terminating a tenured faculty member’s position is very high. That does not, however, mean that tenured faculty are immune to firing or performance reviews.

Tenure is a form of employment security granted to professors after a probationary period, typically involving a comprehensive review of their contributions to teaching, research, and service. It ensures that educators can engage in rigorous research, innovative teaching methods, and open dialogue without fear of arbitrary dismissal. Tenure provides a stable environment that encourages educators to explore diverse ideas, take intellectual risks, and challenge conventions, thereby fostering innovation in teaching and research. This combination of academic freedom and tenure creates a foundation that not only nurtures innovation but also strengthens diversity and inclusion in the academic community.

Tenure is an US centric notion that is an 'in favour' view of academic work, settings and standards. It rewards, on paper, highly talented staff and service minded leaders, providing them with a sense of security. In reality, however, the process of awarding this is entirely subject to various political and ideological forces, as well as tends to skew in favour of those with the greatest amount of academic resources, input or networking. Ultimately, it also disconnects somewhat from the focus experience of teaching students, aligning often to grants or publication wins. A relationship to academic freedom is equally unclear because it's not always used as a tool for empowerment of faculty or change. New thinking is needed.

Academic freedom provides scholars the liberty to explore unconventional ideas without fear of reprisal, encouraging groundbreaking research and diverse perspectives. Tenure safeguards this freedom, as it ensures job security, enabling professors to take intellectual risks and tackle complex issues. Together, they create an environment where innovation and diverse viewpoints flourish, enriching the educational experience for all.

It's the last wall of protection against powerful interests, both political and corporate, that want you to think in a particular way. Academic freedom goes much beyond the educational institute where it flourishes, and has consequences for society, particularly but not only against war-mongers around the world. Students are trained to think for themselves, just like the teachers, when academic freedom prevails.

With academic freedom, educators have the liberty to explore unconventional ideas, challenge norms, and pursue groundbreaking research. This freedom from external pressures enables them to push intellectual boundaries, contributing to the creation of new knowledge and innovative solutions to complex problems. This environment of freedom and stability encourages educators to experiment with teaching methods, integrate new technologies, and collaborate across disciplines, ultimately driving innovation in both pedagogy and research. As a result, academic freedom and tenure empower higher education institutions to remain at the forefront of innovation, preparing students for a rapidly changing world.

The essential issue is that it points out competition at the core of academia. Does this lend itself to innovation or encourage predatory behaviour? How do we measure equally each and every publication? Can we ensure that it reflects fairly and isn't used to reflect complex inequalities and practices that skew in favour of some? Perhaps a system of open ended contracts with yearly performance management based on SMART and fairly agreed targets would be more appropriate than a 6-8 year process that could lead to the summary dismissal of a hard working academic who simply isn't seen to "have it" in the subjective view of others. This is such a theme it was the plot of a recent comedy show where the protagonist encountered exactly this!

Innovation is the result of a long intellectual process and not an idea that pops up out of the blue. It is the result of a common effort that requires collaboration and time. The initial steps of any innovative process are based on observation and accurate assessment of needs. These needs may require different responses, sometimes radical, which must be explored and also assessed. The whole process also requires tolerance to errors and capacity to restart. Without an academic environment based on respect and freedom and in which disparate options may be considered and discussed, high-quality innovation is not really possible.

Academic freedom allows scholars to pursue research topics and draw conclusions based on evidence, even if those conclusions may be controversial or challenge prevailing beliefs or ideologies. It also enables scholars to teach and share their findings openly and without fear of reprisal, and to participate in public discourse on matters of importance to society.

Nunca debemos olvidar que el primer criterio de diversidad es la propia singularidad de cada uno como ser humano, siendo todos únicos e irrepetibles como personas. El otro siempre es distinto; y como tal, la diversidad queda garantizada simplemente al permitirle ser. En este sentido, la libertad -académica y cualquier otra- es imprescindible para cualquier inclusión real. La censura - incluyendo la autocensura y la corrección política- va justo en sentido contrario.

By ensuring that scholars can freely express diverse perspectives, experiences, and viewpoints, institutions create an inclusive environment where various voices are valued. This freedom allows educators to address underrepresented topics, explore marginalized narratives, and engage in critical conversations about social issues. This encourages scholars from diverse backgrounds to contribute their unique insights without fear of reprisal. Moreover, the tenure process itself can enhance diversity by recognizing and retaining diverse faculty members who bring varied cultural perspectives and academic expertise.

I agree that we have to uphold academic freedom and encourage diverse perspectives and inclusive debates. However, due to the nature of tenure and the pressure it puts on individual performances, I'd question the argument that tenure is a great path to do this. To achieve tenure colleagues need to meet many requirements and therefore be strategic.

While academic freedom is crucial for fostering innovation, research, and educational excellence, there have been instances where it has been misused or exploited. In some cases, institutions with excessive autonomy might operate without adequate checks and balances, leading to a lack of accountability. This can result in financial mismanagement, nepotism in hiring practices, and a lack of transparency in decision-making processes. It can also lead to the commercialization of education. Some institutions might prioritize profit-making over academic integrity, engaging in unethical practices to generate revenue. Regulatory frameworks could help curb the misuse of academic freedom while promoting educational standards and innovation.

An example of the challenges in academic freedom was in the early days of what became known as the company Theranos. When we heard about their tech, my university colleagues and I agreed that the technology as described did not make sense, but I did not pursue what is my academic freedom to publicly state that this and other technologies in research articles were overselling the potential of rapid blood testing at a low price. I only voiced my concerns to try and explain to some potential investors of rapid analyses what the pitfalls would be in believing the hype. I did not see any reason to go out of my way to explain why this type of tech was unfeasible.

Should we expect any person to enter a career path whereby they will be constantly evaluated towards the promise of eventual career security, or should we foster a system built around a transparent system of performance whereby security is guaranteed in any regard if the candidate excels in their own form of best practice? Essentially we have built into the core of academic practice that academics have to compete with each other, rather than collectively shape a collaborative philosophy in Higher Education? This seems a direct contradiction to the concept of academic freedom. There is no singular 'type' of academic and each contribution is unique- this is why the DORA framework is so popular, as it focuses on research quality not metrics.

-In my experience, I totally agree with you. At some point, the universities will loose the talented and passionated teachers due to heavy load of teaching while remaining the staff who only do research and lack the pedagogical skills and passion for teaching. With the heavy load of teaching you lack academic freedom while this is not the case for those who only carry out research and mostly not transferred to the students classes. There must be two tracks for staff who focus on teaching but also doing research and the staff only doing research. According, the criteria for two tracks selection and promotion should be different.

By recognising that we should collaborate and not compete with each other to secure permanent positions, by leveraging university institutions to rethink entirely how they pay, condition and support their staff. Equally, by normalising other routes towards success and status in universities that focus on pedagogic practice, ethical integrity, service, engagement with communities in addition to simply measuring performance in research and grant buy-in power!

Incentivisation, acknowledgement and promotion can support tenure and academic freedom whilst being cognisant of the need to eliminate academic competition. Ordinances for grading and promotion should be adhered to whilst contacts and sabbaticals should aid academic rewards and welfare.

The take home message for the readers of this post is that like all freedoms, academic freedom is very important and needs much attention. Perhaps other tenure professors are more willing to say whatever they want in social media and in articles, but I would caution that academic freedom brings with it a tremendous responsibility to make sure that it is not misused.

The academic freedom and job security that tenure provide are indeed important values. But there are significant equity-related issues that affect which teachers and professors are eligible for tenure. The impediment to fixing the system can be a college or university. More often it seems to be the tenured faculty themselves, who prioritize protecting their privilege over ensuring equity for all. It's easy to subscribe to the principles of DEI in theory. The true test occurs when actually living those values might cost someone something. And too few tenured and tenure-track faculty are willing to advocate for their less-privileged colleagues.

Academic freedom and tenure is a huge misnomer. I was told this joke when I was getting my PhD. In your grad program you do what your committee says, when you get your first job you do what tenure cmte says. When you get tenure you do what promotion boards say. Only when you retire do you have freedom. During my coursework, I once told a professor what I wanted to study, and was told “if you study that, you’ll never get a job” What we mean by academic freedom is we have freedom as long as we don’t step on administrative toes. Otherwise, tenure is on the line. Tenure from a gameification standpoint was intended to incentivize positive behaviors, but that’s questionable as politics played on both sides of this discussion.