1 2 academic freedom and tenure michael j. grubiak, ed.d. vice president, student services centralia...

22

Academic Academic FreedomFreedom

and Tenureand Tenure

Michael J. Grubiak, Ed.D.Michael J. Grubiak, Ed.D.

Vice President, Student Vice President, Student ServicesServices

Centralia CollegeCentralia College

33

IntroductionIntroduction

Academic freedom is a concept that Academic freedom is a concept that is both easy to define and difficult to is both easy to define and difficult to define. It is easy to define because define. It is easy to define because most college officials are likely to most college officials are likely to claim to know exactly what it is and claim to know exactly what it is and what it is not. It is difficult to define what it is not. It is difficult to define because each of these answers is because each of these answers is likely to be different.likely to be different.

55

Pre-Test: True or False?Pre-Test: True or False?

1.1. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom prohibits the institution from placing prohibits the institution from placing restrictions on a faculty member’s off-restrictions on a faculty member’s off-campus teaching or consulting campus teaching or consulting activities.activities.

2.2. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom prohibits administration from changing prohibits administration from changing a student’s final grade in a course a student’s final grade in a course without the concurrence of the faculty without the concurrence of the faculty member who originally assigned the member who originally assigned the grade.grade.

66

3.3. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom prevents administration from prevents administration from disciplining faculty members who use disciplining faculty members who use abusive language towards students in abusive language towards students in their classroom.their classroom.

4.4. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom permits faculty members to teach permits faculty members to teach controversial matter that is not related controversial matter that is not related to the subject matter or content of the to the subject matter or content of the course.course.


77


5.5. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom places no restraints on off-campus places no restraints on off-campus speech.speech.

6.6. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom prevents administration from prevents administration from determining how faculty members determining how faculty members must change teaching manner or must change teaching manner or course methodology to accommodate course methodology to accommodate students with disabilities.students with disabilities.

88


7.7. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom permits faculty members to determine permits faculty members to determine which courses they will teach.which courses they will teach.

8.8. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom permits individual faculty members to permits individual faculty members to use their own teaching methods, even use their own teaching methods, even if such methods are at variance with if such methods are at variance with college rules and regulations.college rules and regulations.

99


9.9. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom permits individual faculty members to permits individual faculty members to use their own grading system, even if use their own grading system, even if such methods are at variance with such methods are at variance with college rules and regulations.college rules and regulations.

10.10. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom protects faculty freedom of speech protects faculty freedom of speech even if such speech substantially even if such speech substantially disrupts the operations of the disrupts the operations of the institution.institution.

1010


11.11. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom protects faculty members who use protects faculty members who use profane or vulgar language in the profane or vulgar language in the classroom as part of their personal classroom as part of their personal teaching style.teaching style.

12.12. The principle of academic freedom The principle of academic freedom allows individual faculty members allows individual faculty members to select the textbooks for their own to select the textbooks for their own courses.courses.

1111


13.13. The principle of tenure provides an The principle of tenure provides an unconditional guarantee of lifetime unconditional guarantee of lifetime employment between the granting employment between the granting institution and the faculty member.institution and the faculty member.

14.14. The principle of tenure protects The principle of tenure protects incompetent faculty members from incompetent faculty members from dismissal.dismissal.

15.15. The principle of tenure protects The principle of tenure protects insubordinate faculty members from insubordinate faculty members from dismissal.dismissal.

1212

Answer SheetAnswer Sheet

The answer to each of The answer to each of the questions in the Pre-the questions in the Pre-Test is: “Test is: “FALSEFALSE””

1313

Defining Academic FreedomDefining Academic Freedom

The term, “Academic Freedom” tends The term, “Academic Freedom” tends to be difficult to define because its to be difficult to define because its technical definitions come from technical definitions come from preferred educational custom and preferred educational custom and practice (professional norm), faculty practice (professional norm), faculty contracts (professional norm), and from contracts (professional norm), and from legal findings related to constitutional legal findings related to constitutional and contract law (legal norm).and contract law (legal norm).

In its everyday usage, its definition is In its everyday usage, its definition is more likely to come from the folkways more likely to come from the folkways and mythology that often define the and mythology that often define the educational culture. educational culture.

1414

Your Freedom Ends Where My Your Freedom Ends Where My Nose BeginsNose Begins

There are three groups that There are three groups that shareshare academic freedom protections:academic freedom protections:

1.1.The FacultyThe Faculty2.2.The InstitutionThe Institution3.3.The StudentsThe Students

Conflict often arises where these Conflict often arises where these groups intersect.groups intersect.

1515

Faculty Academic FreedomFaculty Academic Freedom

Professional Norm:Professional Norm: American Association of American Association of University Professors (AAUP) 1940 Statement of University Professors (AAUP) 1940 Statement of Principles:Principles:

““Institutions of higher education are conducted for Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual teacher or the institution of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free expression.”free search for truth and its free expression.”

““Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the student in learning. teacher in teaching and of the student in learning. It carries with it duties correlative with rights.”It carries with it duties correlative with rights.”

1616

Faculty Academic Freedom Faculty Academic Freedom RightsRights

““Teachers are entitled to freedom in Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching to introduce into their teaching controversial matter that has no controversial matter that has no relation to their subject. Limitations of relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment,” (of the appointment,” (AAUP 1940AAUP 1940))..

1717

Faculty Academic Freedom Faculty Academic Freedom ResponsibilitiesResponsibilities

““College and university teachers are citizens, College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When the speak or write as educational institution. When the speak or write as citizens, they should be free of institutional censorship citizens, they should be free of institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.”they are not speaking for the institution.”

AAUPAAUP

1818

Faculty Academic Freedom Faculty Academic Freedom & the Courts& the Courts

Legal Norm:Legal Norm: Under most Under most circumstances, faculty members do circumstances, faculty members do not give up their first amendment not give up their first amendment rights of freedom of speech and rights of freedom of speech and freedom of association.freedom of association.

Two pivotal Supreme Court Cases:Two pivotal Supreme Court Cases:– Keyishian v. Board of Regents, Keyishian v. Board of Regents,

385 U.S. 589 (1967)385 U.S. 589 (1967)– Pickering v. Board of Education, Pickering v. Board of Education,

391 U.S. 563 (1968)391 U.S. 563 (1968)

1919

Faculty Academic Freedom and Faculty Academic Freedom and the Courtsthe Courts

Legal issues generally arise when the Legal issues generally arise when the academic freedom of one group intersects academic freedom of one group intersects with the academic freedom of another.with the academic freedom of another.

No bright lines exist.No bright lines exist. Courts do complicated balancing.Courts do complicated balancing. Whether a particular ruling can be Whether a particular ruling can be

generalized often depends on the generalized often depends on the particulars of the case.particulars of the case.

Court rulings, although instructive, are not Court rulings, although instructive, are not always binding in other jurisdictions.always binding in other jurisdictions.

2020


KeyishianKeyishian (Faculty members fired for not (Faculty members fired for not signing document that they were Communists; signing document that they were Communists; court sides with the faculty members, citing court sides with the faculty members, citing First Amendment):First Amendment):

““Our nation is deeply committed to Our nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, which is of safeguarding academic freedom, which is of transcendent value to all of us and not merely transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned. That freedom is to the teachers concerned. That freedom is therefore a special concern of the First therefore a special concern of the First Amendment, which does not tolerate a pall or Amendment, which does not tolerate a pall or orthodoxy over the classroom . . . The orthodoxy over the classroom . . . The classroom is peculiarly the ‘marketplace of classroom is peculiarly the ‘marketplace of ideas.’”ideas.’”

2121


PickeringPickering (Teacher fired for letter to (Teacher fired for letter to newspaper critical of school board newspaper critical of school board financial policy; court sides with teacher, financial policy; court sides with teacher, citing First Amendment):citing First Amendment):

Five prong test:Five prong test:1.1. No close relationship to person criticizedNo close relationship to person criticized2.2. Matter of public interestMatter of public interest3.3. No detrimental impact on educational No detrimental impact on educational

systemsystem4.4. Teacher’s duties not impededTeacher’s duties not impeded5.5. Teacher acting as private citizenTeacher acting as private citizen

2222


Hardy v. Jefferson Community CollegeHardy v. Jefferson Community College, 260 F.3d , 260 F.3d 671 (6671 (6thth Cir. 2001). Instructor permitted to use Cir. 2001). Instructor permitted to use words that some people find very offensive, when words that some people find very offensive, when such words are germane to the subject matter.such words are germane to the subject matter.

Hardy taught Interpersonal Communication and Hardy taught Interpersonal Communication and asked for examples of words that historically asked for examples of words that historically served the interests of the dominant culture. served the interests of the dominant culture. College did not renew his contract.College did not renew his contract.

Court found that his speech, “was germane to the Court found that his speech, “was germane to the subject matter of his lecture on the power and subject matter of his lecture on the power and effect of language” and “was limited to an effect of language” and “was limited to an academic discussion of the words in question.”academic discussion of the words in question.”

2323


DiBona v. MatthewsDiBona v. Matthews, 269 Cal Rptr. 882 , 269 Cal Rptr. 882 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). (Cal. Ct. App. 1990).

Court provided a measure of protection for Court provided a measure of protection for a professor’s artistic and literary a professor’s artistic and literary expression in choice of class content.expression in choice of class content.

Court held that the College could not Court held that the College could not cancel a controversial play and related cancel a controversial play and related class because some of the play’s content class because some of the play’s content was vulgar and that the religious was vulgar and that the religious community might object. community might object.

2424


Each faculty member has the right to remove Each faculty member has the right to remove a student from the classroom for the a student from the classroom for the remainder of that class period for disruptive remainder of that class period for disruptive behavior.behavior.

Disruptive behavior (disorderly conduct) is a Disruptive behavior (disorderly conduct) is a physical thing not a viewpoint.physical thing not a viewpoint.

Constantly talking without being called on – YESConstantly talking without being called on – YES Saying homosexuals will go to hell for their sins – NOSaying homosexuals will go to hell for their sins – NO Slamming the door – YESSlamming the door – YES Saying only white people should be allowed to vote - Saying only white people should be allowed to vote -

NONO

2525


But, the courts are not sympathetic to the “I am But, the courts are not sympathetic to the “I am sovereign in my classroom,” approach to faculty sovereign in my classroom,” approach to faculty academic freedom.academic freedom.

Both institutional academic Both institutional academic freedom and student freedom and student academic freedom may academic freedom may trump, and often do trump, trump, and often do trump, faculty academic freedom.faculty academic freedom.

2626

Institutional Academic Institutional Academic FreedomFreedom

Justice Frankfurter, in a concurring opinion, Justice Frankfurter, in a concurring opinion, Sweezy v. New HampshireSweezy v. New Hampshire::

““It is the business of a university to provide It is the business of a university to provide that atmosphere in which there prevail that atmosphere in which there prevail ‘‘the the four essential freedoms’ of a four essential freedoms’ of a university---to determine for itself on university---to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to studyand who may be admitted to study.’” 354 .’” 354 U.S. at 263 (1957).U.S. at 263 (1957).

2727

Institutional Academic Institutional Academic Freedom Freedom

The curriculum belongs to the The curriculum belongs to the institution, not the faculty.institution, not the faculty.

The institution can demand certain The institution can demand certain standards of teaching and evaluate standards of teaching and evaluate the faculty against those standards.the faculty against those standards.

The admission process belongs to the The admission process belongs to the institution, not the faculty.institution, not the faculty.

2828


Edwards v. California University of PennsylvaniaEdwards v. California University of Pennsylvania, , 156 F.3d 488 (3156 F.3d 488 (3rdrd Cir 1998). Faculty member Cir 1998). Faculty member disciplined for failing to conform his course content disciplined for failing to conform his course content to the syllabus provided by the departmental chair.to the syllabus provided by the departmental chair.

The court ruled that the The court ruled that the University is the University is the speakerspeaker when it hires faculty members to teach: when it hires faculty members to teach: “The First Amendment does not place restrictions “The First Amendment does not place restrictions on a public university’s own academic freedom to on a public university’s own academic freedom to decide what shall be taught in the classroom. . .”decide what shall be taught in the classroom. . .”

“ “ . . . a public university professor does not have a . . . a public university professor does not have a right to decide what will be taught in the right to decide what will be taught in the classroom.”classroom.”

2929

Textbooks: Who Decides?Textbooks: Who Decides?

Since curriculum belongs to the Since curriculum belongs to the institution, there is no academic institution, there is no academic freedom right for individual faculty freedom right for individual faculty members to choose textbooks.members to choose textbooks.

However, administration should be However, administration should be cautious about viewpoint cautious about viewpoint discrimination, if it decides to choose discrimination, if it decides to choose the textbook.the textbook.

3030


Clark v. HolmesClark v. Holmes, 474 F.2d 928 (7, 474 F.2d 928 (7thth Cir 1972): Teacher not Cir 1972): Teacher not rehired due to teaching methods and classroom behavior.rehired due to teaching methods and classroom behavior.

The court held that "we do not conceive academic freedom The court held that "we do not conceive academic freedom to be a license for uncontrolled expression at variance with to be a license for uncontrolled expression at variance with established curricular contents and internally destructive of established curricular contents and internally destructive of the proper functioning of the institution." the proper functioning of the institution."

The court further held that "certain legitimate interest of The court further held that "certain legitimate interest of the state may limit a teacher's right to say what he (sic) the state may limit a teacher's right to say what he (sic) pleases: for example, (1) the need to maintain discipline or pleases: for example, (1) the need to maintain discipline or harmony among coworkers; (2) the need for confidentiality; harmony among coworkers; (2) the need for confidentiality; (3) the need to curtail conduct which impedes the teacher's (3) the need to curtail conduct which impedes the teacher's proper and competent performance of his daily duties; and proper and competent performance of his daily duties; and (4) the need to encourage a close and personal relationship (4) the need to encourage a close and personal relationship between the employer and his superiors, where that between the employer and his superiors, where that relationship calls for loyalty and confidence."relationship calls for loyalty and confidence."

3131


Martin v. ParrishMartin v. Parrish, 805 F.2d 583 (5, 805 F.2d 583 (5thth Cir. Cir. 1986). 1986). Faculty member fired for using profane Faculty member fired for using profane language in the classroom.language in the classroom.

Court held, “such language was not germane to the Court held, “such language was not germane to the subject matter in his class and had no educational subject matter in his class and had no educational function.”function.”

Court further held that the instructor’s use of Court further held that the instructor’s use of language was unprotected because, “it was a language was unprotected because, “it was a deliberate, superfluous attack on a ‘captive deliberate, superfluous attack on a ‘captive audience’ with no academic purpose or audience’ with no academic purpose or justification.”justification.”

3232


Bishop v. AronovBishop v. Aronov, 926 F.2d 1066 (11, 926 F.2d 1066 (11thth Cir 1991). Cir 1991).University required professor to stop introducing his University required professor to stop introducing his personal religious beliefs into his human physiology personal religious beliefs into his human physiology class.class.

““In short, Dr. Bishop and the University disagree about In short, Dr. Bishop and the University disagree about a matter of content in the course he teachers. The a matter of content in the course he teachers. The University must have the final say in such a dispute. . . University must have the final say in such a dispute. . . The University conclusions about course content must The University conclusions about course content must be allowed to hold sway over an individual professor’s be allowed to hold sway over an individual professor’s judgments. . . We have simply concluded the judgments. . . We have simply concluded the University as an employer and educator can direct Dr. University as an employer and educator can direct Dr. Bishop to refrain from expression of religious Bishop to refrain from expression of religious viewpoints in the classroom and like settings.”viewpoints in the classroom and like settings.”

3333


Webb v. Board of Trustees of Ball Webb v. Board of Trustees of Ball State UniversityState University, 167 F.3d 1146 (7, 167 F.3d 1146 (7thth Cir. 1999)Cir. 1999)

Court reaffirmed University’s right to Court reaffirmed University’s right to assign instructors to particular assign instructors to particular courses.courses.

3434

Grading: Whose Right Is It?Grading: Whose Right Is It?

Parate v. IsiborParate v. Isibor 868 F.2d 821, 829-830 (6 868 F.2d 821, 829-830 (6thth Cir. Cir. 1989):1989):

““We conclude that by forcing [Professor] Parate to We conclude that by forcing [Professor] Parate to change, against his professional judgment, student change, against his professional judgment, student ‘Y’s’ grade, the defendants unconstitutionally ‘Y’s’ grade, the defendants unconstitutionally compelled Parate’s speech and chose a means to compelled Parate’s speech and chose a means to accomplish their supervisory goals that was unduly accomplish their supervisory goals that was unduly burdensome and constitutionally infirm. . .”burdensome and constitutionally infirm. . .”

““Parate, however, has no constitutional interest in Parate, however, has no constitutional interest in the grades which his students ultimately receive. If the grades which his students ultimately receive. If the defendants had changed student “Y’s” course the defendants had changed student “Y’s” course grade, then Parante’s First Amendment rights grade, then Parante’s First Amendment rights would not be an issue.”would not be an issue.”

3535

Grading: Whose Right Is It?Grading: Whose Right Is It?

Lovelace v. Southeastern Massachusetts Lovelace v. Southeastern Massachusetts UniversityUniversity, 793 F.2d 419 (1st Cir 1986). Faculty , 793 F.2d 419 (1st Cir 1986). Faculty member non-renewed after failing to lower the member non-renewed after failing to lower the academic standards he used in grading.academic standards he used in grading.

““Whether a school sets itself up to attract and Whether a school sets itself up to attract and serve only the best and the brightest students or serve only the best and the brightest students or whether it instead gears its standard to a broader, whether it instead gears its standard to a broader, more average population is a policy decision which, more average population is a policy decision which, we think, universities must be allowed to set. And we think, universities must be allowed to set. And matters such as course content, homework load, matters such as course content, homework load, and grading policy are core university concerns, and grading policy are core university concerns, integral to implementation of this policy decision.”integral to implementation of this policy decision.”

3636

Grading GuidelinesGrading Guidelines

Academic judgment belongs to the facultyAcademic judgment belongs to the faculty Grading belongs to the administrationGrading belongs to the administration Grading may not be arbitrary or capricious Grading may not be arbitrary or capricious

or issued in bad faithor issued in bad faith Administration cannot order a faculty Administration cannot order a faculty

member to change a grademember to change a grade Administration can change or assign a gradeAdministration can change or assign a grade The faculty may not use grades to punish The faculty may not use grades to punish

students for unpopular opinionstudents for unpopular opinion

3737

Student Academic FreedomStudent Academic FreedomProfessional Norm: AAUP Joint Professional Norm: AAUP Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students.Students.

““The professor in the classroom The professor in the classroom should encourage free discussion, should encourage free discussion, inquiry and expression. Student inquiry and expression. Student performance should be evaluated performance should be evaluated solely on academic basis, not on solely on academic basis, not on opinions or conduct in matters opinions or conduct in matters unrelated to academic standards.” unrelated to academic standards.” (See (See SettleSettle))

3838

Student Academic FreedomStudent Academic Freedom

In the classroomIn the classroom, , student speech is student speech is protected ifprotected if

– Pertinent to classroom discussion and subject Pertinent to classroom discussion and subject mattermatter

– Not expressed in a disruptive mannerNot expressed in a disruptive manner

OROR– SilentSilent– PassivePassive– Non-disruptiveNon-disruptive

3939


Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District School District, 393 U.S. 503 (1969)., 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

Students suspended for wearing armbands to Students suspended for wearing armbands to protest the war: Court overturned suspension!protest the war: Court overturned suspension!

““First amendment rights, applied in the light First amendment rights, applied in the light of the special characteristics of the school of the special characteristics of the school environment, are available to teachers and environment, are available to teachers and students” and “Students are possessed of students” and “Students are possessed of fundamental rights the state must respect.”fundamental rights the state must respect.”

4040


Not Absolute:Not Absolute: Salehpour v. University of Salehpour v. University of Tennessee, 159 F.3d 199 (6Tennessee, 159 F.3d 199 (6thth Cir. 1998) Cir. 1998)

Student disciplined for sitting in last row against Student disciplined for sitting in last row against class policy. Court sides with University.class policy. Court sides with University.

““[The student’s] expression appears to have no [The student’s] expression appears to have no intellectual content of even discernible purpose, intellectual content of even discernible purpose, and amounts to nothing more than expression of and amounts to nothing more than expression of a personal proclivity designed to disrupt the a personal proclivity designed to disrupt the educational process ... such expression is not educational process ... such expression is not protected and does violence to the spirit and protected and does violence to the spirit and purpose of the First Amendment.”purpose of the First Amendment.”

4141


Salehpour continued:Salehpour continued:

““The rights afforded to students to freely The rights afforded to students to freely express their ideas and views without fear express their ideas and views without fear of administrative reprisal, must be balanced of administrative reprisal, must be balanced against the compelling interest of the against the compelling interest of the academicians to educate in an environment academicians to educate in an environment that is free of purposeless distractions and that is free of purposeless distractions and is conducing to teaching. Under the facts of is conducing to teaching. Under the facts of this case the balance clearly weighs in this case the balance clearly weighs in favor of the University [159 F.3d at 208].”favor of the University [159 F.3d at 208].”

4242


Settle v. DicksonSettle v. Dickson County School County School Board, 53 F.3d 152 (6Board, 53 F.3d 152 (6thth Cir. 1995). Cir. 1995).

Teacher may limit speech in the Teacher may limit speech in the classroom in the name of learning.classroom in the name of learning.

Establishes teacher as manager but Establishes teacher as manager but not as absolute monarch.not as absolute monarch.

4343


Settle Settle continued:continued:““ Like judges, teachers should not punish or Like judges, teachers should not punish or

reward people on the basis of inadmissible reward people on the basis of inadmissible factors—race, religion, gender, political factors—race, religion, gender, political ideology—but teachers, like judges, must ideology—but teachers, like judges, must daily decide which arguments are relevant, daily decide which arguments are relevant, which computations are correct, which which computations are correct, which analogies are good or bad, and when it is analogies are good or bad, and when it is time to stop writing or talking. Grades must time to stop writing or talking. Grades must be given by teachers in the classroom, just be given by teachers in the classroom, just as cases are decided in the courtroom.as cases are decided in the courtroom.

4444


Settle Settle continued:continued:

. . . It is the essence of the teacher's . . . It is the essence of the teacher's responsibility in the classroom to responsibility in the classroom to draw lines and make distinctions– in draw lines and make distinctions– in a word to encourage speech a word to encourage speech germane to the topic at hand and to germane to the topic at hand and to discourage speech unlikely to shed discourage speech unlikely to shed light on the subject . . .”light on the subject . . .”

4545

Student Academic FreedomStudent Academic Freedom& Mandatory Attendance& Mandatory Attendance

Q.Q. Does a student have an academic Does a student have an academic freedom right not to have attendance freedom right not to have attendance graded?graded?

A.A. Even though there has not been a Even though there has not been a court case specifically on this question court case specifically on this question (however, (however, SettleSettle may be instructive), the may be instructive), the answer is probably “answer is probably “nono”, provided the ”, provided the faculty member can demonstrate a faculty member can demonstrate a legitimate pedagogical reason for legitimate pedagogical reason for requiring attendance.requiring attendance.

4646

Student Academic FreedomStudent Academic FreedomSome pedagogical arguments for Some pedagogical arguments for attendance requirements (OCR letter, attendance requirements (OCR letter, Cabrillo Community College):Cabrillo Community College):– Is there classroom interaction between the Is there classroom interaction between the

instructor and students, and among students?instructor and students, and among students?

– Do student contributions constitute a Do student contributions constitute a significant component of the learning process?significant component of the learning process?

– Does the fundamental nature of the course rely Does the fundamental nature of the course rely upon student participation as an essential upon student participation as an essential method for learning?method for learning?

– To what degree does a student's failure to To what degree does a student's failure to attend constitute a significant loss to the attend constitute a significant loss to the educational experience of other students in the educational experience of other students in the class?class?

4747

Tenure: DefinitionTenure: Definition

Tenure is a conditional contract, as Tenure is a conditional contract, as specified by contract or statute, that an specified by contract or statute, that an institution offers to a member of the institution offers to a member of the faculty. It establishes a reasonable faculty. It establishes a reasonable expectancy of continued employment expectancy of continued employment except in special circumstances.except in special circumstances.

From its earliest history tenure was From its earliest history tenure was viewed as the protection of academic viewed as the protection of academic freedom. freedom.

4848

Tenure: ExceptionsTenure: Exceptions

Financial exigencyFinancial exigency Program eliminationProgram elimination Just causeJust cause

– IncompetenceIncompetence– Material breech of contractMaterial breech of contract

InsubordinationInsubordination Neglect of dutyNeglect of duty Moral TurpitudeMoral Turpitude

4949

ResourcesResources Pavela, G., (2007). Defining the scope of Pavela, G., (2007). Defining the scope of

faculty and student academic freedom, faculty and student academic freedom, (Available from Magna Publications, (Available from Magna Publications, http://www.magnapubs.com/). http://www.magnapubs.com/).

Grubiak, M. J. (1996). A comparison of Grubiak, M. J. (1996). A comparison of Washington State community college faculty Washington State community college faculty and administrators’ opinions and beliefs on and administrators’ opinions and beliefs on academic freedom and tenure (Doctoral academic freedom and tenure (Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, 1996).dissertation, University of Washington, 1996).

Kaplin, W.A., & Lee, B.A.(2006). The law of Kaplin, W.A., & Lee, B.A.(2006). The law of higher education, (4th ed.). San Francisco, higher education, (4th ed.). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.Jossey-Bass.

5050

Closing Thoughts:Closing Thoughts:

““ Teachers and students must always Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire, to study, and remain free to inquire, to study, and to evaluate, to gain new maturity to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding; otherwise our and understanding; otherwise our civilization will stagnate and die . . . civilization will stagnate and die . . . Mere unorthodoxy or dissent from Mere unorthodoxy or dissent from the prevailing mores is not to be the prevailing mores is not to be condemned. The absence of such condemned. The absence of such voices would be a symptom of grave voices would be a symptom of grave illness in our society,” (Sweezy).illness in our society,” (Sweezy).

5151

Thank YouThank You

5252

Questions