Defending Academic Freedom

No one reading American Educator would likely question the assertion that 2023 and 2024 have been difficult for education in the United States. K–12 teachers across the country are facing ongoing consequences from the pandemic, devastating teacher shortages, low student attendance, and divisive school boards. In higher education, colleagues are also facing significant challenges: enrollment pressures, declining public confidence in the value of a college degree, and campus turmoil related to national and global events.

As if these weren’t enough, educators at all levels are also grappling with growing legislative efforts to restrict what teachers can say and do in the classroom. Often focused on issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), these legislative efforts initially targeted the supposed threat of critical race theory but have more recently expanded to include a broad range of issues, including classroom discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity. In some cases, entire disciplines—African American history, gender studies, sociology—have been restricted. PEN America, which has been tracking educational “gag orders” since 2021, estimates that 1.3 million public school teachers and 100,000 higher education faculty have been directly affected. PEN America’s estimate of the effect on students is far higher: “The students who have been directly affected—through canceled classes, censored teachers, and decimated school library collections—likely number in the millions.”¹ As Eduardo J. Padrón, former president of Miami Dade College and a 2016 recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, has explained, “Make no mistake: this is censorship at work.”²

I have had a front-row seat to the rapid escalation of these threats to US education. Florida, where I have lived for almost three years, is an instructive case study of how quickly this censorship movement has developed. In October 2020—less than four years ago—the Board of Governors (which oversees all 12 universities in the State University System) issued a bold white paper declaring its “steadfast commitment to prioritize and support diversity, racial and gender equity, and inclusion in the State University System.” The Board of Governors charged each university with ensuring that its “strategy plan, as well as its mission statement, should prioritize diversity, equity, and inclusion and provide clear direction for the total integration of  D.E.I. initiatives throughout the institution.”³ (Emphasis added.)

This was the political climate in which I applied to be president of  New College of Florida, a small public liberal arts college that is part of the State University System. Known for its innovative and rigorous curriculum, New College is designated by the Florida legislature as the state’s residential honors college. I joined the institution in July 2021, thrilled to be chosen as New College’s sixth president. One of the many things that attracted me to the institution was the state’s commitment to DEI, and I was especially excited that DEI in Florida did not appear to be a partisan issue. While there were differences of opinion about its impact and methods, DEI was embraced by state educational leaders, including the Board of  Governors, whose members were closely aligned with the state’s Republican administration. The fact that the Board of Governors was both conservative and committed to DEI made sense to me at the time. Florida’s population, after all, was becoming increasingly diverse, with the state’s Latino population increasing by almost 35 percent between 2010 and 2020, in contrast to the state’s overall population growth of less than 15 percent.⁴

In 2024, educators in Florida—in higher education and K–12—face an entirely altered landscape. The state legislature and the Board of Governors have joined the growing chorus of state leaders attacking DEI, including initiatives that the Board of Governors had itself required. The new mantra, as Governor Ron DeSantis has so frequently proclaimed, is that Florida is where “woke goes to die.” Florida now leads the nation in book bans⁵—with many of the books targeted for discussions of race, sexual orientation, or gender identity—and the state has passed some of the nation’s most restrictive anti-DEI legislation, including HB 1557 (a.k.a. the “Don’t Say Gay” law) and SB 266 (eliminating or severely restricting DEI initiatives at state universities). In addition to affecting extracurricular programming available to students, these laws are already impacting what is taught in our classrooms.

Sadly, many other states are following Florida’s lead. As PEN America’s 2023 report makes clear, 22 states had passed 40 educational gag orders into law or policy as of November 1, 2023—with 6 more gag orders either passed or pending as of March 2024. The effect on higher education and K–12 classrooms has been profound, with many teachers reporting self-censorship out of fear of losing their jobs.⁶

And at New College of Florida, this anti-DEI movement has expanded to include central questions of academic freedom, governance, and institutional autonomy. Nineteen months after I became president, seven new trustees were appointed with a mandate to turn this public honors college into a “Hillsdale of the South.” (Hillsdale College is a conservative, private Christian college in Michigan.) Within days of these appointments, one of the new trustees, Christopher Rufo, proclaimed on X, “We are organizing a ‘hostile takeover.’ ”⁷

Although the future of New College is far from certain, the intents of the “takeover” are not hard to decipher. Some of the ideas initially proposed by the new trustees included eliminating tenure, canceling the contracts of all faculty and staff, and abolishing DEI and gender studies. Even before the new board had met, the press was reporting that a close ally of   DeSantis had been selected as the new president. That rumor proved true at their first meeting on January 31, 2023, when the newly constituted Board of Trustees fired me and began to implement its plan to transform the institution.

The developments at New College continue to draw national attention. Several national organizations have issued statements about the irregularities in governance and the threats to academic freedom, including the American Association of  University Professors (AAUP). A significant portion of the AAUP’s 2023 report on “Political Interference and Academic Freedom in Florida’s Public Higher Education System” was devoted to events at New College. AAUP’s position was formalized in February 2024, when it officially sanctioned New College, concluding that it “stands as one of the most egregious and extensive violations of AAUP principles and standards at a single institution in recent memory.”⁸

As much as New College represents an important test case, the issues here are much larger. I believe it is time for educators across the nation to reimagine how we protect academic freedom in the United States. Although this work will not be easy, I believe we can build a broad bipartisan coalition in support of academic freedom in the United States. Below, I outline five possible strategies of how to begin.

1. We must articulate a positive defense of academic freedom, grounded in the benefits to our students.

One of the most difficult aspects of defending academic freedom is that there is no shared understanding of what it is. As Brian Rosenberg (president emeritus of Macalester College) has recently written, academic freedom is often confused with freedom of speech and has been used to defend all kinds of activity: classroom discussion, social media posts, and controversial speakers, to name a few.⁹

The popular shorthand descriptions of academic freedom—“I can teach/research what I want”—moreover, do nothing to establish a clear foundation of what it is or why it is essential to our educational system. This focus, almost exclusively on faculty rights, has sadly weakened public confidence in our educational system.

As the AAUP’s “1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure” makes clear, faculty rights are an essential component of academic freedom, which this document defines as including “full freedom in research and in the publication of  the results” and “freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject.”¹⁰

But the 1940 statement does not stop there. It clearly articulates that the reason for academic freedom is the “search for truth.” And that search for truth requires teacher responsibilities in addition to rights. Teachers are charged with taking care “not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.” And both in and out of the classroom, faculty “should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.” Notably, the 1940 statement also specifically addresses “the rights of the teacher in teaching” and “of the student to freedom in learning.”¹¹

We would do well to amplify this essential aspect of academic freedom: that academic freedom exists so that students and teachers alike may search for truth. Our goal is not, of course, to “indoctrinate” our students—to use a term all too popular these days—but to provide them a model of what a search for truth might look like: an emphasis on accuracy, on respect for different opinions, on curiosity.

One of the benefits of articulating a student-centered understanding of academic freedom is that it welcomes K–12 colleagues into the discussion. The AAUP document is, of course, a statement by an organization of university professors, and we must attend to the important differences between K–12 and higher education. But teachers and staff in K–12 and higher education are struggling with many of the same issues: how to create an academically rigorous environment when some want to limit what students can read and study, how to help students engage in respectful debate, and how to help students develop the confidence to ask and answer difficult questions. These are the reasons we need academic freedom.

2. We must develop new alliances among educators.

Our commonalities notwithstanding, education is notoriously siloed. Collaboration across K–12 schools and districts is often difficult, if not impossible. Likewise, in higher education, many of our strongest national organizations focus on specific kinds of institutions (research universities, liberal arts colleges, community colleges, etc.), and faculty members have long identified primarily with their disciplines. Faculty members teaching political science at a regional public college in the Midwest, for example, are far more likely to see themselves as allies of political science faculty members at an East Coast liberal arts college than they are to identify with their local high school social studies teachers or even the community college composition teacher who works five miles away.

And the problem isn’t confined to how faculty organize themselves. On many college campuses, student, faculty, and staff leaders operate independently of each other, often unaware of the strategic priorities of their counterparts on campus. Rather than build a broad, powerful alliance of  faculty, staff, and students, these groups have focused primarily on their relationships with campus administration and vice versa.

These organizational structures have left education politically vulnerable. As a former college president and a long-time faculty member, I recognize and celebrate the unique governance role that the collective faculty have on college campuses. But I also recognize the value in developing coalitions that expand beyond faculty.  Although faculty voices are powerful, combining the voices of faculty, students, and staff is even more so and has greater potential for leveraging actual political power when it is needed most.

Our organizational structures also inhibit statewide coalitions. Although the recent restrictions on higher education are a national phenomenon, all of the actual political work has been enacted at the state level. But we in education have almost no structures to bolster statewide partnerships among educators.

The lack of collaboration is especially concerning across K–12 and higher education. Virtually every college campus has a K–12 school district in the vicinity, yet with the exception of dual enrollment, we have limited opportunities for K–12 and higher education collaboration.

Our inability to create thriving coalitions among educators at all levels limits our ability to advocate for our students’ right to read and learn in a climate of intellectual independence. There are, no doubt, important differences between higher education and K–12, but we are increasingly facing more similarities than differences. To cite one promising area of collaboration, I wonder how a coalition of K–12 and higher education teachers might address the decline of public confidence in education. According to Gallup polls, public confidence in higher education dropped to just 36 percent in 2023, down from 57 percent in 2015 and 48 percent in 2018.¹² Numbers for public K–12 schools show similar declines.¹³ Perhaps a fresh look at the value of the US educational system, with input from educators from K–12 and beyond, might begin to reverse this troubling decline.

3. We must establish communication training as a requirement for leaders on campus, not just campus administration.

Having followed dozens of campus crises, and been involved with two that gained national attention (one at the University of Missouri,¹⁴ the other at New College), it seems to me that few institutions are well prepared to communicate with the campus or broader community during a crisis. And when crises develop, faculty and staff leaders are often discouraged from communicating key messages to the public. My comments here are not intended to question the valuable work that central communication experts provide. But as important as their work is, in most cases we also need to hear from faculty and staff leaders with direct knowledge of the issues involved, especially when those issues include academic freedom. With ongoing training and practice, educators can become key communicators as we seek to raise awareness of and support for the foundational principles of  US education.

4. We must recommit ourselves to meaningful community engagement.

One of the most interesting results regarding Americans’ view of education is the difference in perspectives about our K–12 system between the public and parents of K–12 students. When US adults were asked how satisfied they were with K–12 education, only 36 percent indicated satisfaction. When parents were asked the same question about their oldest child’s education, however, 76 percent were satisfied.¹⁵

Presumably, the more one knows about K–12 education (or perhaps more precisely, the more one knows actual K–12 teachers), the more positively one views K–12. People who know teachers know that they are not trying to indoctrinate students, as so many of our detractors try to suggest; rather, teachers are focused on making sure students have a well-rounded education so that they are prepared to navigate the world.

I am not advocating for a system in which higher education faculty communicate directly with parents. Our students are adults, and we have reasonable policies for treating them as such. But could we collectively do more to ensure that more members of our local communities know more about us and know what we are teaching and why?

Most higher education faculty members are not trained in such public engagement, and our usual practices for presenting our work in academic conferences are extremely inappropriate models for community engagement. But people across this nation are interested in what we teach. People from all political persuasions read books, spend time in nature, listen to music, try to improve their health, and puzzle over our political system. We have experts on all of these and more. Surely it is in our collective self-interest for higher education faculty to spend some portion of our time sharing our passion for our fields with the public. Doing so will require investments of time and resources, and we may well have to reconsider faculty workloads and even promotion and tenure standards. But we cannot let the obstacles keep us from this work. How else will we ever reverse the trends regarding the public’s view of education? No one is better situated to advocate for academic freedom than the people who spend day after day directly with students.

5. The new education coalition must be bipartisan.

It is difficult to imagine finding common ground since so many recent education bills are deeply partisan. But there is increasingly solid evidence of the potential for bipartisan support for academic freedom. Book bans are notoriously unpopular with the public, regardless of  political affiliation.¹⁶ And just last year, it was Republican leaders who voiced the most persuasive objections to eliminating gender studies at the University of Wyoming, on the basis that universities—not state governments—are best able to decide what should be taught on college campuses.¹⁷ Not coincidentally, recent polling suggests that 68 percent of Americans have similar beliefs.¹⁸

I even see hope for bipartisan support for academic freedom among our students themselves. As much as higher education is sometimes portrayed as an oasis of radical liberals (or perhaps we are imagined as the desert), my own experience is that the political leanings of college students are far more nuanced. While it is true that nationally, college students are more likely than the general public to identify themselves as liberals, most college campuses, especially large public ones, have vibrant student organizations for students from a range of political views.¹⁹

Even at New College of Florida, which I believe has wrongly been portrayed as having an extremely left-leaning student body, I found the reality on campus to be quite different. One of my fondest memories of New College was my almost weekly Wednesday lunch in the cafeteria. I would randomly pick a table, ask to sit down, and talk about whatever the students wanted to talk about. In all those wonderful conversations, I cannot recall a single one about politics. Yes, there were some students who were activists on key social issues. Every campus has such students, and I am proud of their commitment to their causes. But those students, from my perspective, were not the norm at New College. In fact, the three things students most wanted to talk about during our informal lunches were how much they loved their classes and professors, how much they loved their clubs, and how much they loved their pets. I know this sounds like a fantasy, but I can assure you that anyone who knows New College students knows that, almost without exception, they love what they study. And they found their way to that school not for the fine dining or a culture of political activism but rather to be part of an intellectual community that celebrates the joy in intellectual pursuits.

Historically, US classrooms have long been places in which students can learn with and from people with whom they do not agree politically. Surely, this is one of the greatest achievements of  the US educational system—and something that is critical to the health of our democracy.

My hope is that thoughtful action now by educators in all sectors can strengthen and protect academic freedom and, in so doing, make our educational system once again a source of pride for all Americans, regardless of political affiliation.

Patricia Okker is the former president of New College of Florida, dean emerita and professor emerita at the University of Missouri at Columbia, and currently a higher education leadership coach. She is the 2024 recipient of the Modern Language Association’s Francis Andrew March Award for her contribution to the profession of English at the postsecondary level.

Endnotes

1. J. Young and J. Friedman, America’s Censored Classrooms (New York: PEN America, 2023), pen.org/report/americas-censored-classrooms.

2. Young and Friedman, America’s Censored Classrooms.

3. B. Lamb and M. Criser, Memo to State University System Presidents and State University System Board of Trustees Chairs, “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Strategic Priorities,” October 22, 2020, flbog.edu/wp-content/uploads/DEI-Workgroup_MEMO_Final.pdf.

4. National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, “2020 Census Profiles Florida,” November 30, 2021, naleo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2020-Census-Profiles-FL.pdf.

5. K. Meehan et al., Banned in the USA: The Mounting Pressure to Censor (New York: PEN America, 2023), pen.org/report/book-bans-pressure-to-censor.

6. Young and Friedman, America’s Censored Classrooms.

7. C. Rufo, X/Twitter post, January 9, 2023, 7:44 pm, twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1612611362978672640?lang=en.

8. American Association of University Professors, “AAUP Votes to Sanction New College of Florida and Spartanburg Community College,” February 26, 2024, aaup.org/news/aaup-votes-sanction-new-college-florida-and-spartanburg-community-college.

9. B. Rosenberg, “Whatever It Is, I’m Against It”: Resistance to Change in Higher Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press, 2023), 123.

10. American Association of University Professors, “1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure,” 1940, aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure.

11. American Association of University Professors, “1940 Statement.”

12. M. Brenan, “Americans’ Confidence in Higher Education Down Sharply,” Gallup News, July 11, 2023, news.gallup.com/poll/508352/americans-confidence-higher-education-down-sharply.aspx.

13. L. Saad, “Confidence in Public Schools Turns More Partisan,” Gallup News, July 14, 2022, news.gallup.com/poll/394784/confidence-public-schools-turns-partisan.aspx.

14. Chronicle of Higher Education, “Turmoil at Mizzou,” chronicle.com/package/turmoil-at-mizzou.

15. M. Brenan, “K-12 Education Satisfaction in U.S. Ties Record Low,” Gallup News, August 31, 2023, news.gallup.com/poll/510401/education-satisfaction-ties-record-low.aspx.

16. We Believe, “Most Americans Say They Are Less Likely to Support a Candidate Who Stands for Curriculum Restrictions or Book Bans in 2024,” webelieveineducation.org/banned-books-week-ipsos; and S. Hlywak, “Large Majorities of Voters Oppose Book Bans and Have Confidence in Libraries,” ALA News, March 24, 2022, ala.org/news/press-releases/2022/03/large-majorities-voters-oppose-book-bans-and-have-confidence-libraries.

17. C. McFarland, “Wyoming Legislators Try and Fail—Again—to Defund UW Gender Studies Program,” Cowboy State Daily, February 4, 2023, cowboystatedaily.com/2023/02/04/wyoming-legislators-try-and-fail-again-to-defund-uw-gender-studies-program.

18. E. Pettit, “Who Should Shape What Colleges Teach?” Chronicle of Higher Education, September 13, 2023, chronicle.com/article/who-should-shape-what-colleges-teach.

19. W. Miller, Student Engagement as a Political Catalyst (Boca Raton, FL: Anthology, June 2022), anthology.com/sites/default/files/2022-06/Student_Engagement_as_a_Political_Catalyst_White_Paper_102618.pdf.

[Illustrations by Pep Montserrat]