b. Academic Freedom
The MGH Institute affirms its commitment to academic freedom and rights of free speech and expression as essential to the Institute’s mission.
Academic Freedom. According to the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), academic freedom is the freedom of teachers or researchers in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in their academic fields, and to teach or disseminate findings without interference from political figures, boards of trustees, donors, school leadership, administrators, or other entities. Academic freedom for MGH Institute faculty exists across four areas: freedom in teaching; freedom in research and scholarly pursuits; freedom to speak up on institutional governance matters; and freedom to speak as public citizens.
Academic Freedom versus Free Speech. Academic freedom and free speech are related but distinct. Freedom of speech, created through the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, is a legal right afforded to every person against government interference. Free speech is a right focused on the individual. Academic freedom is a professional right that is held to scholarly standards that free speech is not. Academic freedom rights are regulated by peers that determine what constitutes disciplinary competence.
The MGH Institute is committed to the advancement of academic knowledge, which is predicated on inequality of status between differing ideas. Expert faculty members reject certain ideas as lesser than others and prepare their students to do the same, informed by rigorous evaluation and high-quality evidence. This process of designating specific ideas as less worthy than others is fundamental to advancing knowledge.
Limits on Academic Freedom. Faculty members are entitled to freedom in their scholarly pursuits and the dissemination of results, but these are subject to professional guidelines on ethics, institutional policies and administrative processes, applicable laws and regulations, and rules on conflicts of interest. Faculty members are entitled to freedom in teaching, but they are not protected when discussing topics that have no relation to their subjects.
MGH Institute faculty members are both citizens and members of learned professions. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline. When they speak as faculty members on academic matters, they should recognize that society may judge their profession and the Institute by their utterances. Therefore, faculty members must commit themselves to ensure accuracy in their teaching and research, appropriate restraint, respect for the values of the MGH Institute and opinions of others, and clarity when they are speaking individually and not on behalf of the Institute (e.g., avoid use of institutional-related titles, email, social media, etc.).
Academic Freedom and the Common Good. Academic freedom is not absolute and can be properly and reasonably restricted. For example, academic freedom exists for the common good and is not intended to be used to further the interests of any individual faculty member. The AAUP describes the “common good” as the good of society as a whole, which benefits from the “free search for truth and its free exposition.” Academic freedom does not protect a faculty member from incompetence or misconduct, nor does it protect faculty members from discussing matters that have no relevance to their courses or fields of study. Faculty members are not free to teach content that would be deemed categorically false by their academic peers. Academic freedom does not protect hate speech, nor does it permit engagement in bullying, discrimination, or harassment.
While academic freedom protects faculty members from retaliation or discipline for expressing their views, it does not offer protection from or insulate them from critique for their views. It is important to note that protected speech may periodically come into conflict with other deeply held values of our community, such as justice, equity, inclusion, and belonging. Such conflicts may generate strong criticisms, intense debate, or protest. In these circumstances, the MGH Institute is committed to making space for civil debate, which is demonstrative of a healthy diversity of viewpoints. At all times, the Institute expects civility and respect be honored across our community, and that controversial speech be challenged on its substance, through evidence-based examination, not with unacceptable actions such as defamation or coercion for disciplinary or administrative action.
___________________________________________________________________________________
(This statement was endorsed by the MGH Institute Faculty Senate on April 18, 2024).