Do Students Have Academic Freedom?
Read my latest report for the Menzies Research Centre
We all know that academic freedom is a foundational principle of Western university education. Democracy indices include it as an indicator of democracy itself. But in our solicitousness to ensure our own academic freedom, have we academics forgotten about students? We certainly talk a good talk about encouraging students to question institutions and challenge power. But what about our institutions and our power?
In 2021, Australia became the first country in the world to legislate protections for the academic freedom of university teachers—and the “intellectual freedom” of their students. The paper trail suggests that the implications of this were not fully thought through. The 2019 French Review into academic freedom at Australian universities recommended a code to include protections for both teachers and students, but Chief Justice Robert French seems not to have considered that they might come into conflict.
I am currently writing a series of papers prompted by this disconnect. But first, some data. In line with the 2021 incorporation of academic freedom protections into the Higher Education Support Act, the Australian government inserted a question on student intellectual freedom into its annual Student Experience Survey. The survey results reported national averages, but not university-specific results. So I asked for them. And to my amazement, I got them. You can find the full results online at:
Menzies Research Centre | Freedom of Expression at Universities
The results for some universities are pretty shocking. At the University of Melbourne, 38.8% of domestic undergraduate students do not agree with the statement “I am free to express my views at The University of Melbourne.” For postgraduates, it’s 40.2%.
Note that I restricted my analyses to domestic students, since most of our international students come from China, and may have very different expectations for intellectual freedom.
At my own university the results aren’t much better. At the University of Sydney, 34.0% of domestic undergraduates and 35.3% of domestic postgraduates do not feel free to express their views.
Among students in the Society & Culture disciplines of the humanities, social sciences, and law the figures are even worse: 44.3% of domestic undergraduates at Melbourne and 37.2% at Sydney do not feel free to express their views.
The best universities score better, but not much better.
I started down this research path last year when it was reported that a group of undergraduate law students at Macquarie University (26.6% not free) objected to being required to make a “heartfelt,” “thoughtful,” “culturally respectful,” and “exceptionally well-written” acknowledgment of country as part of a final presentation. For my international readers: an acknowledgment of country is a statement of respect for indigenous custodianship over the land on which one is speaking; the officially-recommended acknowledgment of country at Macquarie University is:
We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the land on which Macquarie University stands – the Wallumattagal Clan of the Dharug Nation – whose cultures and customs have nurtured, and continue to nurture, this land since time immemorial. We pay our respects to the Elders, past and present.
Many individual academics and (especially) lawyers routinely make acknowledgments of country that are much more elaborate, often including position statements on sovereignty and historical injustices. For example, the Australian Centre for International Justice offers this acknowledgment:
We acknowledge the Traditional Owners and Custodians of the lands on which we work and pay our respects to Indigenous Elders past, present and emerging. Sovereignty has never been ceded. It always was and always will be, Aboriginal land.
We recognise the past atrocities against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of this land and that Australia was founded on the genocide and dispossession of First Nations people. We acknowledge that colonial structures and policies remain in place today and recognise the ongoing struggles of First Nations people in dismantling those structures. The struggle to seek justice, to remember and address this nation’s past is ongoing and is a necessary requirement for individual and collective healing process.
We support the Uluru Statement from the Heart to achieve justice, recognition and respect for First Nations people and a referendum to enshrine a First Nations Voice in the Constitution. We accept the invitation contained in the Statement to walk together with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.
Presumably, by being graded on their ability to offer an “exceptionally well-written” acknowledgment of country, the complaining Macquarie University law students were being expected to offer something beyond the standard university form.
Acknowledging country is, of course, a political statement, and the degree to which a teacher’s “academic freedom” extends to setting class requirements that include forced speech of this kind is unclear—especially in Australia, where student “intellectual freedom” is protected by legislation. The teacher argued that the students would, in professional practice, routinely be required to offer acknowledgments of country, whether they agreed with them or not. The university ultimately decided to sidestep the issue, letting the students decline to give an acknowledgment while defending the teacher’s right to set the assignment.
This is an area that is ripe for theorizing. I published two papers on academic freedom last year, and I have two more in the works. Although the Macquarie case will appear shocking to some people, it really is not obvious where the line between the teacher’s academic freedom and the student’s intellectual freedom should be drawn. Even in this case, the teacher has a point, though it was probably a bridge too far to require that the acknowledgment be “heartfelt.”
So expect a lot more from me on this issue. I’ve already requested the student freedom of expression scores for Macquarie University’s law school. Watch this space.
The Salvatore Babones Newsletter will return.