Free expression is a core tenet of academic freedom and a guiding principle of education in a democracy. As the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) declared in its 1992 statement “On Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes:”
Freedom of thought and expression is essential to any institution of higher learning. Universities and colleges exist not only to transmit knowledge. Equally, they interpret, explore, and expand that knowledge by testing the old and proposing the new. This mission guides learning outside the classroom quite as much as in class, and often inspires vigorous debate on those social, economic, and political issues that arouse the strongest passions. In the process, views will be expressed that may seem to many wrong, distasteful, or offensive. Such is the nature of freedom to sift and winnow ideas.
In recent weeks, we have seen institutions of higher education threatened to have federal funding withheld for allowing “illegal demonstrations,” which have not been clearly defined, and others have had funds cut for allowing members of their campus communities to speak critically of the actions of the Israeli government.
Antisemitism is a deplorable reality in our nation and world, and its insidious head is raised on college campuses in ways that are sadly reflected across broader society, but socio-political arguments are not inherently uncivil, prejudicial, nor inhumane. They are ideas. They are questions whose asking should help us shape deeper understandings of pernicious problems, which in turn may allow us to find richer more successful solutions to challenges whose resolutions have eluded us for generations.
A question shouldn’t be precluded because it is controversial. There are certainly topics that I would hope are accepted as universal truths: it is wrong to violate individual human rights, murder is wrong, racism is wrong, religious prejudice is wrong. These are human truths, but the actions of nations and organizations are rarely as monolithically clear.
Free inquiry, including examining positions we find uncomfortable helps us to develop a stronger worldview. Susquehanna’s Statement on Ethical and Inclusive Living lifts this up as an institutional value:
Susquehannans commit to having safe, respectful, and authentic dialogues. We emphasize freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech. We believe benefits are derived from sharing perspectives, understandings, and expectations with others – even when they may be in conflict with those held by some in the community. These conflicts are not to be avoided, but threatening or hateful acts are never tolerated. Talking across difference is an opportunity for learning and growth.
Examining broad perspectives is fundamental in developing effective solutions and meaningful strategies. In a 2014 article in Scientific American, then Senior Vice President of the Columbia Business School, Katherine W. Phillips demonstrated “How Diversity Makes Us Smarter.” The findings of numerous studies have shown that heterogeneous groups are much more likely to solve complex problems successfully than homogeneous groups. Ironically, the more accurate mixed groups were often significantly less sure of their conclusions than the less accurate unmixed groups.
Heterogeneous groups achieve better results because they “kick all the tires.” They challenge and test all perspectives rather than succumbing to group-think. Their diminished confidence is the result of having heard numerous alternative views, while the overly confident, and often wrong homogeneous cohorts have had their confidence inflated by the echo chamber in which they have worked. We see these same challenges more broadly in the current tribalization of social media.
Inquiry within heterogeneous groups in higher education requires that liberal and conservative voices share in the engagement. I have had a number of conversations with elected officials and their staffs expressing concerns about conservative voices being stifled on campuses, but a new study, “Beyond the Headlines: The Reality of Free Speech on College Campus,” published by the Lumina Foundation and Gallup, suggests that this is a false narrative.
Among many of the findings, “74% of bachelor’s degree students say their university does an ‘excellent’ or ‘good’ job of promoting free speech, including 73% of Republican students and 75% of Democrat students.” About two-thirds of students feel they can freely discuss issues of race, gender and sexual orientation, and religion. As one might expect, only about half felt comfortable discussing issues about Israel and Hamas.
If we have any hope of solving our world’s thorniest problems, we need to engage diverse and divergent voices. We can’t begin to understand the challenges without them. The Lumina/Gallup data affirm that our colleges and universities are well equipped to navigate these difficult conversations when our intellectual autonomy is secure and academic freedom is assured.
A better future is dependent upon protecting these fundamental principles.