Statement on Academic Freedom

Final Report of the Academic Council Task Force

November 2011 (updated on 21 April 2022)

Background
In February 2011 the President of UCD requested the Academic Council to
develop a policy statement on Academic Freedom. While the principle of
academic freedom has been enshrined in the Universities Act (1997)1, and was
endorsed in 2011 by both the Governing Authority and the Academic Council
of the University, a formal policy providing the context for its understanding and
recommending principles and guidelines for its operation has hitherto not been
defined. Such a policy statement would highlight the fundamental importance
of the principles underpinning the proper functioning of the University, as well
as the benefits to society, together with the privileges and commensurate
responsibilities of all stakeholders that are associated with academic freedom.
A clear policy, approved by the Academic Council, would assist in informing
decision-making, while the clarity afforded by a formal policy would help
improve the overall operation of the University.

The Task Force that developed the policy document was representative of all
five colleges in the University. It was chaired by Professor Pat Shannon (School
of Geological Sciences), with the five college representatives being Professor
Kathleen James-Chakraborty (College of Arts & Celtic Studies), Professor Bill
Roche (College of Business & Law), Dr Mícheál Ó Searcóid (College of
Engineering, Mathematical & Physical Sciences), Professor Dermot Moran
(College of Human Sciences) and Professor Tom Bolger (College of Life
Sciences). This report, submitted to the Academic Council, is the product of the
deliberations of the committee, based upon analysis of the legislative
framework, current understanding across a broad range of disciplines and
traditions, the ethos of the University, and best international policy and practice
in the area of academic freedom.

Introduction
Among the major purposes of a university, as outlined in the Universities Act
(1997), are the advancement of knowledge through teaching, scholarly
research and scientific investigation, to promote learning in its student body and
in society generally, and to foster a capacity for independent critical thinking.
Academic freedom is at the very core of the mission of a university to achieve
these goals and a fully developed higher education system cannot exist without
it. It has historically and globally been a defining characteristic of universities,
necessary for the freedom of thinking and expression in teaching, learning and
research. Article 13 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European
Union (2000)2 recognised such freedom in stating that

1
Universities Act (1997). http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1997/en/act/pub/0024/index.html
2
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000). Official Journal of the European
Communities. C364. 22pp. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/default_en.htm

1
 “The arts and scientific research shall be free of constraint. Academic
freedom shall be respected”.

Within Ireland, academic freedom was acknowledged in the Universities Act

(1997) which stated that a university, in performing its function shall:
“… have the right and responsibility to preserve the traditional principles
of academic freedom in the conduct of its internal affairs”.

The obligations of a university to safeguard this right are clear with the
statement in the Act that
“…if, in the interpretation of this Act, there is a doubt regarding the
meaning of any provision, a construction that would promote that ethos
and those traditions and principles shall be preferred to a construction that
would not so promote”.

At the level of the individual, the Act is specific in stating that

“A member of the academic staff of a university shall have the freedom,
within the law, in his or her teaching, research and any other activities
either in or outside the university, to question and test received wisdom,
to put forward new ideas and to state controversial or unpopular opinions
and shall not be disadvantaged, or subject to less favourable treatment by
the university, for the exercise of that freedom”.

This freedom, within the law, to put forward new ideas and controversial or
unpopular opinions was enshrined in Statute 25 (Chapter 1) of University
College Dublin3. This statute (Chapter 6) also decrees that the control of the
academic affairs of the University is subject to the traditional principles of
academic freedom.

These underlying principles of academic freedom are also echoed in the policy
statements of many outstanding universities and groups of universities. The
1998 Policy Statement of the International Association of Universities (of which
UCD is a member) on Academic Freedom, University Autonomy and Social
Responsibility4 recalls the three indissociable principles for which every
university should stand, namely: the right to pursue knowledge for its own sake
and to follow wherever the search for truth may lead; the tolerance of divergent
opinion and freedom from political interference; the obligation as social
institutions to promote, through teaching and research, the principles of
freedom and justice, of human dignity and solidarity, and to develop mutually
material and moral aid on an international level. It defines the principles of
academic freedom as the freedom for members of the academic community –
scholars, teachers and students – to follow their scholarly activities within a
framework determined by that community in respect of ethical rules and
international standards, and without outside pressure.

3
Statutes of University College Dublin, The National University of Ireland, Dublin.
http://www.ucd.ie/govauth/statutes.html
4
1998 Policy Statement of the International Association of Universities. Academic Freedom,
University Autonomy and Social Responsibility. www.unesco.org/iau/he/af/index.html

2
The rights of academic freedom confer responsibilities on the University and
upon each member of the academic profession, notably the obligation to
strive for excellence, challenge received opinion, advance the frontiers of
knowledge through research, and disseminate results through teaching and
publication. These are articulated in documentations such as the IAU 1998
Policy Statement. Under UCD’s Statute 25 (Chapter 19) the responsibilities and
broad duties of academics are outlined as follows:
“Faculty shall carry out their duties with due regard to the statutes and
regulations of the University and the policies and procedures determined
by the Governing Authority and shall engage in research and scholarship,
shall instruct students of the University and shall perform such other
appropriate duties as the President, Head of College, Head of School or
Research Institute Director or such other senior member of staff to whom
the President has delegated the appropriate authority may reasonably
assign to them. Faculty shall serve on such committees and perform such
administrative functions as may be required.”

Academic freedom cannot be an excuse for not carrying out the teaching,
research and such administration duties as may reasonably be required for the
efficient functioning of the University. Neither can it be used as a cloak for
underperformance in these duties.

Benefits to Society
Although the benefits of a free press and open discussion of ideas are broadly
recognised as being at the very heart of a modern democracy, the concept of
academic freedom is equally central, although perhaps this is not as widely
appreciated by the public. The general understanding is that it embodies the
freedom, and indeed the responsibility, to question and test wisdom, and to
put forward new opinions (including dissenting, controversial or unpopular
views) based upon informed experience, research and consideration, without
the fear of losing jobs, privileges or career prospects at educational institutions.
Moreover, creative academic work, essential in order to advance knowledge,
overcome prejudice, inform and benefit society in the present and for the future,
takes time and experience to develop and hone; there is the presupposition that
the academic has the appropriate time to complete the task.

Society, the major sponsor of universities is also the major benefactor of the
products of academic freedom. Its students are educated and taught to learn.
Its industries receive the benefits of research. Its future depends on current
basic research that provides both the structures from which new ideas will
emerge and flourish, and the foundation on which undreamed-of technological
advances will be conceived and realised. New technologies and spin-off
industries arise from ideas developed under the freedom to innovate. These
yield medical, pharmaceutical, technological, engineering, and numerous other
products. Cultural aspects of society are enriched by the books, plays and
multiple forms of artistic and literary expression and endeavours nurtured by
universities. Powerful social, educational and political ideas are discovered that
contribute to driving social change and to the development of publicpolicy.
The outputs of research, through publication and dissemination, increase
knowledge and enhance the reputation of the individuals, the institution and
ultimately the society that sponsors and provides the environment and the
freedom to complete the work of knowledge generation and dissemination.

3
However, the purpose of a university is sometimes mistakenly seen as narrowly
utilitarian, and thus as largely limited to providing technological skills and to
stimulating industrial and cultural developments. Developing society’s skills in
imaginative vision and critical thinking is one of the greatest benefits that a
university can provide, and this is clearly linked to the protection afforded by
academic freedom. Such critical thinking contributes to the shaping of
government policy, and to informing public opinion on the development of a
civilised society.

Academic freedom conveys an obligation on academic staff to inform society

through independent research, analysis and discourse. The lack of such
independent analysis and the fear of sanctions for questioning decisions were
referred to in the Nyberg Report (2011)5 on the banking crisis, which affirmed
that “.. the reported lack of challenging discourse and analysis …, together with
occasional mention of alleged or feared sanctions against contrarians… ”
contributed to the problem. The receipt of well-grounded, independent advice,
unshackled by fear or favour, on many areas critical to the survival,
development and optimal functioning of society, is probably more important to
Ireland now than at any time since the foundation of the State.

The University and the State

Universities in Ireland, as in most other European countries, are heavily reliant
on state funding. Both academic staff and students should be aware of their
dependence on the state, and increasingly on industry and other benefactors,
to support them in their work. The receipt of such funding carries with it the duty
of accountability for how it is deployed and for the results it achieves. However,
such accountability does not encompass a right to control or dictate the manner
in which the university conducts its core business of teaching and research nor
should it curtail academic freedom. Only by autonomy to govern their own
affairs can universities and academics protect an environment in which they are
free to exercise their rights of freedom of speech and thought, and ultimately
provide an independent voice on matters in which they are expert. For example,
the standards of degrees can only be defended if recognised as purely
academic matters in which the State does not enter. As argued by Russell
(1993)6, if this principle is not accepted, universities should cease to exist as
they will serve no purpose other than to ‘rubber stamp’ uninformed decisions
reached by the State. This university/state symbiosis, in which each is
dependent on and benefits from the other, will always involve a degree of
tension regarding the value of the contribution of each party and the degree to
which that contribution engenders obligations and entitles control.

5
Nyberg, P. (2011). Misjudging Risk: Causes of the Systemic Banking Crisis in Ireland. Report of the
Commission of Investigation into the Banking Sector in Ireland. Government Publications. 156 pp.
http://www.bankinginquiry.gov.ie/
6
Russell, C. (1993). Academic Freedom. Routledge, London & New York. 119 pp.

4
Current Sources of Threats to Academic Freedom
The nature and operation of universities in Ireland has changed significantly
within the past decade, both in response to changes in society and in the way
the universities see their place in society. These changes have brought with
them a set of new challenges and circumstances that could run into conflict with
academic freedom. In setting the context for the description and discussion of
key principles of Academic Freedom in the following sections, a few of these
are outlined here.

Perception of universities by outside bodies. There is a mistaken impression

that the working time of a university academic can be measured entirely by the
hours spent lecturing in the classroom. There is often no appreciation that the
primary purpose of a university, determined in the Universities Act (1997), is the
advancement of knowledge through research and its communication in
teaching. Academics are primarily researchers, working in the classroom, the
laboratory and the library, and collaborating with other universities, research
institutions and industry. Academics are required by their contracts to engage
in research and this has to be carried out along with lecturing, mentoring, and
examining students, as well as supervising graduate students and directing
research staff. They run research groups and laboratories, and spend
significant time in preparing grant applications, and in writing and peer
reviewing scholarly publications. They provide input to public policy and their
output in some areas of research can lead to the development of patents or
spin-out companies. Acknowledgement of the academic’s administrative duties
within the University, or service to society and to the subject/discipline
necessary to build and maintain international reputation for the University and
the country, is also typically neglected in public discussions on the nature of
academic life. The effect of such limitations is a negative perception on the part
of outside bodies and of society in general, which risks the withdrawal of, or
decrease in support for, the needs and maintenance of academic freedom and
its responsibilities and benefits.

Changes in university governance. Mistakes identified in the governance of

financial and other institutions in Ireland have resulted in a greater awareness
of the need for appropriate governance. They have highlighted the need to
review and change, where appropriate, the methods of corporate governance
in business and public institutions7. They have often pointed towards a method
of governance comprising boards, governing authorities or councils involving
smaller numbers of members predominantly from outside the organisation.
Executive management teams are made clearly accountable to such
institutions. This enables more accountable as well as swifter and more direct
decision-making. Within a university, governance and management of this
character may, however, hinder individual and collegiate input into direction and
decision making, and may limit the university’s autonomy in deciding its
teaching and research programmes. The academic freedom and

7
OECD. Corporate Governance and the Financial Crises: Key Findings and Main Messages. 2009.
58pp. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/3/10/43056196.pdf

5
responsibility to provide independent and rigorously researched information
and opinion to society may also be inhibited.

Resources and resource allocation. State funding of specific areas of teaching

and research can serve as an attraction for staff working in these and cognate
areas, both in terms of recruitment of academic, research staff and graduate
students, as well as in infrastructure. However, allocation of resources can
serve to penalise those areas that find it more difficult to attract non- exchequer
funding or those areas where student numbers are unlikely to rise significantly
for justifiable reasons. There is a significant danger that, if unchecked, resource
allocation rather than free and well-founded academic enquiry will drive the
direction and intensity of university research and teaching.

Strategic planning and internal management systems. Such planning is vital for
the operation of a modern university. However, some areas of teachingand
research are unlikely to feature in the strategic objectives of the university and
in the way in which such planning is implemented through internal management
systems. This can result in exclusion from full participation in the university’s
operation, with consequent negative impact upon the individual, the
subject/discipline and the school. It also risks stifling academic curiosity to
explore the unconventional. Great discoveries and inventions are rarely
planned, either in universities or in businesses and cultural organisations.

Measurements of performance. Key performance indicators (KPIs) are a

feature of most schools, colleges and universities. There is continued debate
as to the optimum performance metrics between and within subject areas. The
choice and application of KPIs may influence the nature of research or teaching
carried out. Inappropriate methods and metrics may distort the assessment of
a work’s quality and inhibit true innovation. If they are not chosen correctly, with
due appreciation of the need to support the diversity of teaching and research
across the University, they may serve to limit the freedom to explore beyond
the current research areas dictated by funding, or teaching areas and methods
as determined by student numbers or perceived satisfaction levels.

Fixed-term contracts. Most informed discussions of academic freedom

acknowledge the necessity for tenure. However, fixed-term contracts are also
commonly and appropriately used for project-related and post-doctoral
appointments, which are an established part of the early career development
system in many disciplines. Academic freedom applies to people appointed to
all academic positions in the University. However, it is recognized that a trend
towards the greater use of fixed-term contracts by universities as a hedge
against financial uncertainty consigns academics to ongoing insecurity beyond
early career, limits the benefits associated with research and inhibits the ethos
of scholarly and rigorous research that is essential to a university.

6
Academic Freedom: Principles
In order to achieve the optimum efficiency and effectiveness in the operation
of a university, academics must have confidence in the governance and
management of the institution to articulate and implement its strategy and to
account for its use of public funds. University management must likewise have
the confidence to trust the wisdom and collegial integrity of academic staff in
the operation of the university. The relevant State agencies, acting on behalf
of society, must also have confidence that the universities fulfil their
responsibilities of accountability for funding received. Only by the operation of
such three-way trust and belief can the full benefits to all of academic freedom
be realised. Therefore, we should recognise a number of key principles of
academic freedom. These are grounded within the legislation of the Universities
Act (1997) and the policy statement of the International Association of
Universities, and are broadly in line with similar principles adopted in other
universities abroad8 and in Ireland9. They should underpin the application of
university policy in a number the key areas that impinge on academic freedom.

Three key principles that should serve to inform the Academic Council, together
with other governance and management units in the University, regarding
issues of academic freedom are as follows:

1. Freedom of Expression. Policies of the University should recognise that

freedom of expression is a core value of university life that has served it well
throughout its history. No policy should be adopted that would deliberately
or inadvertently diminish or inhibit freedom of expression among members
of the university – either staff or students. Staff and students should
understand and be mindful of the obligations and responsibilities that are
gifted through freedom of expression.

2. Teaching and Learning. The University, through its policies, should foster
a teaching and learning environment that encourages the search for the
truth, facilitates the exchange of informed opinion between teacher and
student, and values diversity of opinion and critique articulated in a
constructive manner. Diversity of opinion in all facets of teaching and
learning, including teaching and learning styles, subject matter and learning
outcomes, should be a natural consequence of academic freedom.
Academics should not be required to present as valid what they believe, on
the basis of experience and informed opinion, to be untrue or inaccurate.
Students should be empowered to question that for which inadequate
evidence is presented. Notwithstanding the facets of freedom articulated
above, the teaching staff of the University should be expected to deliver a
curriculum arrived at through collegial discussion at discipline, school,
college or university level as appropriate.

8
1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure with 1970 Interpretive Comments.
American Association of University Professors.
http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/1940statement.htm
9
Trinity College Dublin Policy on Academic Freedom. 2010. 10 pp.
http://www.tcd.ie/about/policies/academic-freedom.php

7
3. Research and Dissemination. The University should ensure the
maintenance of an environment, both intellectual and physical, that fosters
the search for truth and excellence in research. Policies should facilitate
individuals and groups in pursuit of their research goals and aspirations.
Support for specific areas of research, such as those deemed key university
strategic areas, should not be pursued in a manner that would actively
disadvantage other types or areas of research. History has shown that many
of the greatest research advances came as a result of a long period of
dedicated research in areas that were not at the time deemed profitable,
useful, desirable or important. However, the lack of funding or other
opportunities in a particular area does not negate the obligation of all
academic and research staff in the University to conduct research to the
highest possible standard and to communicate the results in the most
appropriate manner.

Academic Freedom and University Responsibility

It is well understood internationally that internal university management
systems and processes can have a major bearing on academic freedom. These
include, in particular, systems and processes commonly introduced in recent
decades to allocate resources to priority areas, to promote performance and
to manage accountability.

The Universities’ Act (1997), Section 14, entitles the University to regulate its
affairs and obliges it to do so by using its resources in an efficient and effective
manner and subject to public accountability. The University is charged with
regulating its affairs in accordance with its ethos of independence and the
traditional principles of academic freedom. This means that the management
systems and processes established by the University must be cognisant of the
merits of the breadth of disciplines and subjects, especially smaller ones which
are vulnerable when key staff retire, and must regulate its affairs must operate
in a manner that preserves and promotes academic freedom.

In addition to its legal obligations, UCD, like many other modern universities,
has acquired multiple roles as agents of state- and industry-funded research
and innovation, as a source of policy expertise and advice and as educatorsof
students for a range of professional activities. Universities have responded to
these new roles by instituting planning and resource allocation processes. They
are also held accountable for their widening range of activities through external
evaluation, often paralleled by internal assessment processes. Universities are
increasingly expected to demonstrate the value which they contribute to
communities, economies and students who fund them, and to show all their
major stakeholder groups that the resources entrusted to them are being
efficiently utilised. They have also acquired specific obligations under public
policy initiatives, such as public service modernisation programmes and
associated collective agreements, in areas like performance management and
development and workload allocation. The multiple roles of the modern
university and the external and internal processes of

8
accountability, planning, resource allocation and management that they bring
with them must also be undertaken in a manner that preserves and encourages
academic freedom.

The University’s management policies and processes, whatever their

provenance, must therefore be implemented in a manner that preserves and
encourages the freedom of academic staff. This principle has significant
implications in particular for the human resources policies and practices through
which these various institutional obligations, roles and priorities interface with the
teaching and research of academic staff, and with their career plans and
aspirations.

The preservation and encouragement of academic freedom requires a balance

to be struck in the operation of these management processes between the
obligations on the University and its constituent colleges, schools, subject areas
and research programmes and the freedom of individual academic staff.
University policies and management processes must be implemented so as
to preserve and promote academic freedom,while also meeting the obligations
of the University to be accountable and supporting its priorities in teaching,
research and resource allocation.

The University and its constituent colleges, schools and subject areas are
obliged to ensure that duties are allocated in a fair and transparent manner. The
administrative burden of teaching programmes and of general university
governance must also be shared equitably and transparently. These objectives
are best achieved on a collegiate basis within schools and their constituent
subject areas.

Subject to these obligations and the attendant requirement that core teaching
modules and programmes are properly resourced, the process of allocating
workloads should seek to accommodate and thereby benefit from the academic
and research priorities of staff, where appropriate. It should be recognised that
new teaching and research priorities constitute a normal part of university
academic activity and represent a source of innovation and a driver of new
knowledge acquisition by students and the community. Scope should exist,
subject to core teaching being covered, to allow academic staffto seek and
undertake new teaching and research opportunities. The allocation of workloads
should not operate in such a way that staff are confined indefinitely to teaching
particular modules, or that may infringe their freedom to undertake inquiry in new
and evolving fields or to disseminate the knowledge gained through research
and teaching.

The operation of the University’s Performance for Growth framework seeks to

encourage academic staff to set objectives and development priorities with
respect to personal scholarship, teaching and university duties in the wider
context of University, College and School plans and priorities. Such a process is
intended to support the development of academic staff over the course of their
evolving careers. It is important that the Performance for Growth process and
allied processes be operated in such a way that the research, teaching and
other development priorities of individual staff be respected and supported, and
specifically that they should not be operated in a manner that infringes academic
freedom, or that seeks toconstrain academic staff to respond only to institutional
9
plans and priorities, without taking due regard of priorities that flow from
individuals’ disciplinesand the evolving research and knowledge base.

The University has developed a promotion system (up to Full Professor) based
on an assessment of the following categories of activity: Research, Scholarship
and Innovation; Teaching and Learning; Leadership and Contribution. The
operation of the promotion system should pivot on the making of appointments
on the basis of personal scholarly and teaching attainments and merit, as
underscored by peer review, and on the basis of contribution to the University,
academic field and the community. Staff who are following research
programmes, or who are involved in delivering modules and programmes that
may not be seen as reflecting institutional priorities, should not be put at any
disadvantage in respect of promotion. Nor shouldstaff who are engaged in
testing wisdom or questioning received opinion, or who are involved in
controversies arising therefrom, suffer any disadvantage in respect of
opportunities for promotion.

Summary
1. One of the major purposes of a university, outlined in the Universities Act
(1997) is the advancement of knowledge. Academic freedom is essential for
such advancement. It protects and nurtures the freedom of thinking and
expression in teaching, learning and research that is at the very core
mission of a university. It is a defining characteristic of universities both
historically and globally.
2. Academic freedom is recognised in European law and is enshrined in
national university legislation and in university statutes. The principle and
ethos of academic freedom have been endorsed by both the Academic
Council and Governing Authority of UCD.
3. Academic freedom carries with it obligations both within the academic
institution and also to society. It cannot be used as a cloak for the
underperformance of teaching, research or administrative duties.
4. Society is a major benefactor of university academic freedom through
graduates, basic research, research output, technological advances, books,
artistic endeavours, informed independent social and political critique,
analysis and policy advice.
5. A number of threats to academic freedom exist, reflecting changes in the
nature and operation of universities in the context of changing national and
international environments. These threats require careful management to
ensure that the ethos and societal benefits of academic freedom are not
inhibited.
6. The three key principles regarding the management of academic freedom
centre on (a) freedom of Expression, (b) freedom within Teaching and
Learning and (c) freedom within Research and Dissemination.
7. A framework of the responsibilities associated with fostering academic
freedom within the University is articulated.

10