͵ÅÄ͵¿ú

The ability to teach and conduct research free from political interference is the cornerstone of higher education and its . Academic freedom, however, has become increasingly threatened.

, a global research organization that monitors indicators of democracy around the world, determined that academic freedom has “” in the United States in recent years. This is largely due to political and social polarization.

New research shows college professors are facing more political pressure to stifle what they want to say.

In recent months, professors across the country have following crackdowns on pro-Palestine protesters on campus. The current conflict, however, is only the latest iteration of an intensifying decline in academic freedom.

As a researcher who examines the , I believe there are five distinct but mutually reinforcing ways that academic freedom has been threatened in the U.S. in recent years.

1. Legislation and academic gag orders

States across the country have passed educational gag orders that ban the teaching of and other concepts. These are sometimes referred to as “” in the laws.

While most of these bills limit what can be said in K-12 classrooms, found that 99 bills were introduced – and 10 passed – between 2021 and 2023 that affect higher education. For example, a bans state universities from hosting discussions of ideas such as “meritocracy is inherently racist.” A outlaws teaching the idea that someone could be “inherently privileged, racist, sexist or oppressive.”

These bills misrepresent what discussions about race and gender identity actually look like in the college classroom. Rather than framing them as discussions about history and theory, bills like Florida’s so-called “” insinuate that teaching students about race and racism is aimed at making them feel guilty. PEN America has described these bills as “ and impose government dictates on teaching and learning.”

2. Activist governing boards

Issues of academic freedom also arise when those without scholarly expertise become involved in academic and curricular decisions. This usually happens through .

Colleges and universities should follow the principles of , according to the American Association of University Professors. Boards oversee the business of running the institution, and faculty oversee the content taught in classrooms. At some institutions, however, the boards have subverted this. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, boards at several schools made unilateral decisions such as . They have also without faculty oversight – a core tenet of shared governance.

/Wikimedia Commons

Nikole Hannah-Jones is interviewed in June 2018 on the Brazilian network TV Globo.

These decisions have serious consequences. The American Association of University Professors, for example, found that politically appointed board members at University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill regularly “” to circumvent faculty autonomy. This includes the board of trustees’ refusal to offer a to Nikole Hannah-Jones, creator of the , a series of essays and articles in The New York Times Magazine about the impact of slavery on American history. The board also came under fire for establishing the on campus. The school appears designed to teach conservative content that the board prefers rather than to fulfill a curricular need identified by the faculty.

3. Donor influence

Donor influence is also a . Ideally, donors would view their gifts simply as donations to an institution they trust. In some cases, however, in determining how their money is used. This could mean dictating which speakers are brought to campus, what books are taught in the classroom and what courses are offered.

One of the most dramatic recent examples is the . Hedge fund billionaire and Harvard donor Bill Ackman , threatening a “ if she stayed.” I believe that if it can happen at Harvard, it could happen at other universities, too.

4. Erosion of tenure

The system of tenure was originally created to . In recent decades, however, fewer and fewer professors have been awarded this privilege. Today, 68% of , often in year-to-year contracts, compared with 47% in 1987. The economic precarity of contract positions creates incentives for faculty to censor the content they teach for .

In some states, such as and , state legislators have passed bills weakening tenure protections through the creation of post-tenure review procedures. This gives administrators greater authority to fire tenured faculty. These bills make faculty increasingly vulnerable to external political influence.

ReasonTV/Wikimedia Commons

American conservative Chris Rufo gives an interview to ReasonTV in 2022.

5. Delegitimization of higher education

As I’ve , right-wing activists have built a political infrastructure of think tanks and media outlets that specialize in portraying higher education in a negative light. This includes bringing intentionally provocative speakers such as and to campus and funding media outlets that specialize in ranting about “” on college campuses.

Partisan political operatives, such as the Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo, have mainstreamed the claims that faculty regularly engage in and that professors teach content that is . For example, days after Hamas’ invasion of Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Rufo posted on X that conservatives should “” between Hamas, Black Lives Matter, the Democratic Socialists of America and “academic ‘decolonization.’”

These narratives are designed to justify and legitimize the ongoing attacks on academic freedom. The implication is that faculty are the enemy and that legislatures, governors and governing boards can save higher education.

Fierce debates about what should be taught at colleges and universities is part of what academic freedom is all about. But attacks on academic freedom seek to displace the voice of faculty experts with those of partisan legislatures, trustees and donors. I believe this should be disconcerting for anyone who values free and critical thinking.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .