By Jens Ringsmose, Rector, 2/3/2022

In recent years, we have witnessed several examples where academic freedom has been called into question. At SDU, too, we have had our share of ‘cases’ that have led to considerations about how to balance the considerations of research, teaching and debate freedom vis-à-vis other considerations. There is no reason to believe that the coming years will offer fewer challenges. Therefore, there are also strong arguments for us as a university to reconsider our values. Without an express and explicitly worded basis that can serve as a compass or map and provide answers to what the basic values of the University are, it will be difficult to come to a decision as to the specific cases that without any doubt are lurking around the corner.

Create a common set of values

At SDU, we are now taking the consequences and initiating work to formulate a basic set of values. It must be concise, set out an overall – but clear – direction and then be formulated very much through the involvement of the collegiate bodies. The values will not provide concrete answers to specific questions. But they should tell us something pivotal about who we fundamentally are, what our priorities are and how we should navigate in very difficult waters.

The starting point is as follows:

Universities have an enormous responsibility these years. Today’s major societal challenges are complex, interwoven and multifaceted – we call them ‘wicked problems’ – and what they have in common is that they cannot be solved without new, research-based knowledge and understanding. Whether it is pandemics, climate change, health inequality or sustainable growth and welfare, it is obvious that research and education, as well as new insights and technologies, must be key parts of the solution.

Provide more prosperous communities

Universities are well-equipped for the task. For centuries, the institutions of higher education have produced knowledge and provided research-based education that has helped to enrich the societies of which they were and are a part. Materially, but also in a far broader sense. Especially since the Enlightenment, universities have been key driving forces in the development of everything from new medical preparations and therapies to our understanding of human behaviour, the arts and various social institutions. It is therefore difficult to reach any other conclusion than that the university as an idea and institution has been – and is – a sweeping success.

Academic freedom is crucial to the success of universities – and thus to their ability to contribute to today’s grand challenges. In its essence, academic freedom is first and foremost a classic negative liberty (‘freedom from...’) intended to secure institutions, researchers and lecturers from subjective interference in the work of generating and disseminating new knowledge. Princes, churches, parliaments, administrations, grantors and economic interests must, in principle, refrain altogether from ‘polluting’ or intervening in the research process if universities are to realise their full potential. To paraphrase a Norwegian report from 2006: Research and research-based education flourishes most in freedom.

Real freedom of research

But true academic freedom also requires resources and time. If the researcher does not have access to equipment, books, travel, IT equipment, laboratories, and whatever research projects otherwise require, then the necessary formal freedom from subjective interference cannot be translated into true freedom of research. The same is true if the researcher does not have time allocated to the research effort. In this sense, true academic freedom also has the character of being a positive liberty (“freedom to...”). Formal freedom from subjective interference is thus an essential but insufficient condition for academic freedom.

Should academic freedom be completely unlimited then? No, of course not. A number of legitimate limitations exist to its unfolding. For example, freedom of method does not mean that a psychiatrist wishing to investigate the mental effects of torture has the freedom to conduct experiments in which torture is actually used. And while true academic freedom requires resources and time, universities are also subject to budgetary restrictions, which make it necessary to prioritise scarce resources. The sum of requests for research equipment and projects far exceeds the available funding opportunities. However, it is important in this context that the restrictions must be legitimate and objective.

Academic freedom is accompanied by obligations

Specifically, academic freedom has developed historically as part of an agreement or understanding between the surrounding community and the university and its inhabitants. The surroundings – and in particular grantors, whether prince or parliament – have recognised that universities are most useful and valuable when, roughly speaking, they are left alone and given room for the free expression of critical thinking. As formulated by The American Association of University Professors in a 1940 Statement of Principles: ‘Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth.’

But the academic freedom that has been granted to the university, researchers, lecturers and students, has been – and is – accompanied by a commitment. Thus, in the unspoken agreement or understanding between grantors and universities, the latter has a duty to ensure that research and education are based on some basic standards of good scientific practice. If researchers, research groups or institutions do not comply with some very basic principles of scientific production, the agreement breaks down. Once again paraphrasing the Norwegian report: ‘A researcher who goes beyond the framework of science, cannot easily claim the freedom which applies to research – simply because what she is engaged in is something else. In that sense, freedom is conditional’.

Freedom of research, freedom of teaching and freedom of debate

In my opinion, academic freedom includes three main elements: Freedom of research, freedom of teaching and freedom of debate.

Freedom of research is guaranteed by §2 subsection 2 of the University Act, which states that ‘the university must safeguard the academic freedom of the university and the individual and the ethics of science’. The freedom of research is primarily about the freedom to choose research topics and questions, the freedom to choose methodology and data, and the freedom to present hypotheses, reasoning and results in public. In addition, the university must ensure plurality and academic openness in research environments so that critical thinking and argumentation can be unfolded freely.

Closely connected to the freedom of research is the freedom of teaching. This part of the overall academic freedom is not regulated by the University Act in the same way as the freedom of research. The core of freedom of teaching is that the university’s lecturers have the right to choose the material, methodology and specific academic content for teaching – taking into account the programme regulations and other substantive and legitimate constraints such as legislation. Part of the freedom of teaching is that the educational environment is characterised by the freedom to discuss and ask critical questions. The respect for free discussion and the ability of students to take an independent stand trumps the regard for those who may feel uncomfortable or offended for political, religious or identity reasons.

Critical analysis and debate

The third and final key element of academic freedom – freedom of debate – is perhaps also the most elusive. But in short, it is the university’s job to encourage critical analysis and debate. Any debate should, of course, keep a civil tone, but the university cannot and should not protect individuals or groups from an academic debate of topics or opinions, even if these may be perceived by some as incorrect or even offensive. Such disagreements must also be included and tolerated in the debate. For as Hanna Holborn Gray, former President of the University of Chicago, once put it: ‘Education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think’.

Read more about SDU's work with a new set of values here