Academic freedom is the principle that scholars and educators have the freedom to teach, conduct research, and express ideas without undue interference or restriction from external forces, including the government, institution administrators, or outside groups.

Key aspects of academic freedom include:

• Freedom in Teaching: Educators are allowed to teach and discuss ideas, even if those ideas are controversial or unpopular. This includes the freedom to determine course content, teaching methods, and materials.
• Freedom in Research: Scholars have the right to conduct research and disseminate their findings without fear of censorship or retribution. This allows for the exploration of controversial or unpopular topics.
• Freedom to Criticize District Policies: Academic freedom includes the right of educators to criticize institutional policies, practices, and administration without fear of retribution. This ensures that faculty can advocate for change and participate in the governance of their institutions.
• Freedom in Public Expression: Faculty members can express their views publicly or privately, including on matters outside their professional expertise, without fear of institutional punishment or censorship.
  
  

Notable Definitions:

American Association of University Professors (AAUP): Academic Freedom is the right of educators and researchers to explore, discuss, teach, and publish findings within their academic fields without interference from political entities, trustees, donors, or other external bodies. It also includes the freedom to participate in institutional governance and to express personal views as citizens.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC): Academic Freedom allows scholars, researchers, and educators to pursue and disseminate knowledge without fear of censorship, retaliation, or interference. It encompasses the freedom to explore controversial or unpopular topics, challenge established beliefs, and engage in open debate—creating an environment where intellectual inquiry and academic rigor can flourish, free from external pressures.

American Federation of Teachers (AFT): Academic Freedom is the essential right of faculty members, both individually and collectively, to determine college curricula, course content, teaching methods, student evaluation, and the conduct of scholarly inquiry without external interference. This principle is upheld by shared governance and tenure, ensuring that academic institutions remain "safe havens" for challenging conventional wisdom across all disciplines.

Academic freedom is a constitutional right for both faculty and students. While the term "academic freedom" does not explicitly appear in the Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently recognized it as protected under the First Amendment.

Key U.S. Supreme Court Cases:

• Sweezy v. New Hampshire (1957)
  The Court recognized the vital role of academic freedom, stating, "Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding; otherwise, our civilization will stagnate and die." It further emphasized that "to impose any straitjacket upon the intellectual leaders in our colleges and universities would imperil the future of our nation." The decision also highlighted that academic freedom is essential "to preserve the freedom to think, to speak, and to teach as one sees fit within the academy."
  
  
• Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967)
  The Court reinforced that academic freedom is a core First Amendment right, asserting, "The classroom is peculiarly the ‘marketplace of ideas.’ The Nation’s future depends upon leaders trained through wide exposure to that robust exchange of ideas which discovers truth out of a multitude of tongues, rather than through any kind of authoritative selection." The ruling also stated, "The constitutional right of free expression in a democratic society applies with no less force to the teacher in the classroom than to any other individual."
  
  
• Epperson v. Arkansas (1968)
  In overturning a law banning the teaching of evolution, the Court emphasized, "Government must... permit teachers to teach and students to learn in an atmosphere free from orthodoxy, coercion, and other official pressures." The decision further argued, "The First Amendment does not tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom," underscoring that academic freedom is crucial to "the free and unfettered exchange of ideas."
  
  
• Healy v. James (1972):
  The Court affirmed that academic freedom extends to students' rights to free expression, noting, "The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the community of American schools." The decision also highlighted that "the college classroom with its surrounding environs is peculiarly the ‘marketplace of ideas,’" and "we break no new constitutional ground in reaffirming this Nation’s dedication to safeguarding academic freedom." The ruling further underscored the principle that "the college classroom and its surrounding environments must be a haven for free expression, where students and faculty alike are encouraged to pursue truth without fear of retaliation or censorship."
  
  

Promotes Intellectual and Pedagogical Freedom

• Protects Teaching Methods: Grants faculty significant freedom in how they teach their courses, ensuring the integrity of their pedagogical philosophies.
• Encourages Open Debate: Allows faculty and students to engage in intellectual discussions without fear of censorship or retaliation.
• Expands Learning Boundaries: Supports comparisons across diverse subjects and historical periods, enriching academic exploration.
• Protects Grading Integrity: Ensures that faculty can assign grades fairly and maintain academic standards without external interference.
  
  

Safeguards Free Expression and Research

• Ensures Free Expression: Protects the right to express views in speech, writing, and electronic communication, both on and off campus, unless it infringes on others' rights or demonstrates professional incompetence.
• Supports Independent Research: Allows the freedom to choose research topics and draw conclusions, while opposing censorship from corporate or governmental entities.
  
  

Defends Against External Pressures

• Resists Imposed Beliefs: Shields the academic community from having external political, religious, or philosophical beliefs imposed on them.
• Encourages Intellectual Challenge: Allows students and faculty to challenge each other’s views without fear of penalty, fostering a dynamic academic environment.
• Protects Against Reprisals: Guards against retaliation for opposing administrative policies or expressing differing opinions.
  
  

Behavioral Conduct

• Faculty members cannot harass, threaten, intimidate, ridicule, or impose their personal views on students.
• Faculty members are not protected if they decline to teach the content or subject matter outlined in the course record or if they fail to cover essential components of the course's academic standards.
• Faculty members are not protected from sanctions for professional misconduct or incompetence.
  
  

Legal and Disciplinary Accountability

• Faculty members are not exempt from legal consequences outside the university.
• Faculty members are not immune from university disciplinary action, though they are entitled to fair treatment and due process.
• Faculty members are not protected from investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct or violations of university policies.
  
  

Academic Freedom and Institutional Standards

• Student academic freedom does not prevent faculty from requiring students to master course material and the fundamentals of their disciplines.
• Faculty members are not shielded from challenges or disagreements with their educational philosophy and practices from colleagues or students.
• Intentionally disrupting a talk or performance is inconsistent with the principles of academic freedom.
  
  

While both academic freedom and freedom of speech aim to protect the expression of ideas, they differ in principles and contexts. Academic freedom is a professional right grounded in disciplinary expertise, recognized within specific fields or communities of inquiry. In contrast, freedom of speech is an individual right that protects a person’s ability to express ideas in the public sphere, regardless of the truth or falsity of those ideas, shielding them from government interference based on their opinions or expressions.

Below are some examples that illustrate the boundaries of academic freedom and how it differs from freedom of speech:

Teaching Contradictory Information

• A biology professor who teaches that evolution is a myth, contrary to established principles of the field, would not be protected under academic freedom. Academic freedom requires faculty to adhere to the accepted standards and knowledge within their discipline. However, outside the classroom, the professor is free to express their personal views about evolution under freedom of speech, even if those views are scientifically unsupported.
  
  

Promoting Pseudoscience in the Classroom

• A physics professor who teaches that the Earth is flat would not be protected by academic freedom because this contradicts established scientific knowledge. Academic freedom does not shield educators who spread misinformation within their field of expertise. However, outside of their academic role, the professor could publicly express their belief in a flat Earth under freedom of speech.
  
  

Unrelated Political Advocacy in Class

• An english professor who uses class time to advocate for a specific political candidate, unrelated to the course content, would not be covered by academic freedom. Academic freedom is meant to protect scholarly inquiry and pedagogical choices within the context of the discipline, not to provide a platform for unrelated political advocacy. However, the professor could campaign for that candidate in the public sphere under freedom of speech, provided it is done outside the classroom.
  
  

Denial of Historical Events in Class

• A history professor who teaches that the Holocaust did not happen, despite overwhelming historical evidence, would not be protected by academic freedom. Academic freedom requires adherence to established historical facts and scholarly consensus. However, the professor could express Holocaust denial outside the classroom as a private citizen under freedom of speech, though such views would likely be widely condemned and could have legal consequences depending on local laws.
  
  

Religion in Science Education

• A chemistry professor who incorporates religious teachings into a science curriculum, claiming that certain chemical processes result from divine intervention rather than natural laws, would not be protected by academic freedom. Academic freedom requires teaching based on scientific principles and evidence within the discipline. However, the professor could discuss their religious views publicly outside of their academic responsibilities under freedom of speech, as long as these views are not presented as scientific fact within the classroom.
  
  

Harassment Under the Guise of Academic Debate

• A philosophy professor who repeatedly targets a student during class discussions with derogatory remarks about their gender or sexual orientation, claiming it as part of a "debate," would not be protected by academic freedom. While academic freedom supports rigorous debate, it does not excuse behavior that constitutes harassment. The professor might argue that their speech is protected under freedom of speech outside the classroom, but within the academic setting, such behavior would be subject to institutional discipline.
  
  

Sexist Classroom Policies

• A professor who enforces sexist classroom policies, such as segregating students by gender and giving preferential treatment to one gender over the other, would not be protected by academic freedom. Such actions violate the principles of equality and fairness that are fundamental to academic standards. While the professor could express sexist opinions outside the classroom under freedom of speech, enforcing discriminatory policies in the classroom would be subject to disciplinary action.
  
  

Racist Grading Practices

• A professor who grades students differently based on their race—such as giving lower grades to students of a particular race or higher grades exclusively to students of a particular race or to compensate for past injustices—would not be protected by academic freedom. Academic freedom does not support grading practices based on race or gender rather than academic performance. While the professor may advocate for these views under freedom of speech outside of grading and classroom practices, doing so could attract significant criticism and potentially lead to institutional response.