In an age of increasing polarization, how do universities safeguard academic freedom?
On Oct. 29, McMaster scholars took on the question for the fourth segment of the McMaster Dialogues, a series of panel discussions aimed at fostering civil conversation on pressing issues facing Canada and the world.
Hosted by McMaster President Susan Tighe and moderated by Vice-provost (International) Bonny Ibhawoh, the panel featured Vice-provost (Equity and Inclusion) Barrington Walker; professor of Political Science Catherine Frost; professor of Mathematics and Statistics Megumi Harada; and professor of Sociology Neil McLaughlin.
In her opening remarks, Tighe reflected on the importance of universities as places where ideas can be explored and freely discussed.
"Universities occupy a unique place in society," said Tighe. "We are dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge, to rigorous inquiry, and to the exploration of ideas, even when those ideas challenge assumptions or provoke disagreement."
The panellists explored what academic freedom means and the responsibility of universities to encourage the free exchange of ideas while ensuring those conversations are grounded in respect, rigour and care.
Academic freedom
The panel started by grappling with the definition of academic freedom itself.
As Walker pointed out, academic freedom is distinct from freedom of expression, as protected by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The former is rooted in membership of an academic institution and carries responsibilities grounded in scholarly expertise and rigorous inquiry.
Addressing his fellow academics, Walker said: "You are somebody who is a representative of, and expert in, a discipline. And you have responsibilities to uphold certain standards of academic rigor in your role as an academic."
Academic freedom is also, argued Walker, rooted in an ethic of care.
"It's not enough for a professor to opine about potentially harmful subjects with absolutely no regard for how that might impact our students or other members of the academic community," he said.
"There is a responsibility that we have as an academic institution to care for all members of the community and to make sure that people feel accepted and welcomed."
Harada added that academic freedom is also based on the freedom of inquiry: to be able to pursue lines of research that may question established knowledge and conventional wisdom.
"The flip side of that is that freedom comes with responsibility," said Harada. "Our obligation is to rigor. You can be held responsible and accountable for any article you publish because it has your name on it."
Modelling respectful disagreement
Debate and critique are at the heart of academic inquiry and should be handled respectfully from all sides of an issue, said Frost.
"When you critically engage with something, it's a form of respect," said Frost. "It's not a form of attack, but it's an effort to really deeply understand that thing, so asking questions is a way of trying to build understanding."
Since respectful disagreement is central to academic life, McLaughlin said, then academics have a responsibility to demonstrate how to have challenging conversations in a civil manner.
"I'd like to see us take a more positive approach to try and model constructive disagreement," he said. "We need to show students how to disagree in civil ways."
The civic institution
The panelists also discussed how universities should approach contentious issues, particularly when controversial speakers are invited to campus.
McLaughlin suggested universities could prepare students to engage with controversial ideas by creating opportunities to explore and discuss them before they become flashpoints on campus.
"Rather than focusing on who gets to speak on campus and what you can or cannot say, I'd like to see us take a more proactive approach to try to model constructive disagreement and show students how it's done," he said.
Matters become more complicated when universities come under pressure to take positions on public issues.
The panel discussed the responsibility of universities to address these calls. For Frost, that means considering the role of the university in the fabric of society.
"The university isn't living in a bubble," said Frost. "Things are going to happen around us and pretending that we can somehow stay isolated from it doesn't ring true to me. But part of our responsibility is taking an incredibly measured approach partially because universities still have credibility and trust."
Echoing that view, Harada stressed that the duty of academics is to think about the world in measured, careful and rigorous ways.
"We have to act with restraint," she said, "and be responsible to who we are as academics. We think carefully and we think rigorously and we consider different viewpoints before we act."
The case for optimism
Reflecting on the challenges that face society and academia, Walker said it's easy to be pessimistic in these times of polarization.
But he pointed out that, in inviting different and often opposing views into campus discussions, universities are succeeding in their mission to explore diverse ideas and perspectives.
"They've done really well to live up to the promise of being institutions that are open," said Walker. "That's why these institutions are often fraught, but we should reflect on the fact that it's because they've been fulfilling their promise."
In many ways, the event provided a reason to be hopeful about academic freedom. The discussion itself reflected many of the themes it raised, bringing together academics from diverse backgrounds and disciplines to examine difficult questions about the university and its place in society.
As Tighe had noted in her opening remarks, universities are dedicated to "the pursuit of knowledge, to rigorous inquiry, and to the exploration of ideas, even when those ideas challenge assumptions or provoke disagreement."
