Academic Freedom and Shared Governance Strengthen Institutional Autonomy

Certain state and federal actions currently threaten the autonomy of colleges and universities. This moment calls for governing boards to increase their engagement and support for the pillars of institutional independence. Two of the most important pillars are academic freedom and shared governance.

Academic freedom is a tradition that has made U.S. higher education the envy of the world because it enhances truth-seeking, generates innovation, enhances our economic competitiveness through research, protects institutions from shifting political winds, and protects controversial positions that enhance the marketplace of ideas.

It is widely understood that shared governance, when it operates effectively, promotes open and transparent decision-making, encourages robust consideration of difficult decisions, and champions meaningful engagement of trustees, faculty members, and administrators.

What is less understood is that these traditions are congruent: academic freedom strengthens shared governance, and shared governance strengthens academic freedom.

The Relationship Between Academic Freedom and Shared Governance

Academic freedom is a necessary component of effective shared governance. Without it, many faculty members might hesitate to participate in faculty-governance structures that determine curricula in academic programs and influence the hiring and promotion of faculty. They might fear reprisal if they take positions that are inconsistent with those of institutional leaders, including the president and board members. Faculty and other stakeholders must be free to criticize the policies of their institution, often for its betterment—even if it makes those in power at the institution feel uncomfortable. In other words, faculty members need to be able to argue for policies that advance their institution, even when they point out an “inconvenient truth.”

Importantly, effective shared governance can protect academic freedom. Under the principles of shared governance, faculty have primacy in matters of curriculum and methods of instruction. When boards, administrators, or legislators start to cross the line into what is taught in the classroom or what is researched (including what topics may be off limits), they violate the tenets of shared governance.

Board members should remember that their institution’s mission includes the pursuit of knowledge. When overbearing boards or administrators disenfranchise faculty from making decisions in these areas, most faculty members are not shy about asserting that shared governance has been violated. Trustees should take these assertions seriously and do their part to protect shared governance, the academic freedom of faculty, and the academic integrity of the program. Trustees should also remember that persistent failures of shared governance are likely to invite scrutiny from accreditors and can create serious reputational risks for the institution, among other concerns.

My own experience as president of Augustana College for 19 years made it clear to me that academic freedom advances strong shared governance and better policy decisions. During my time, faculty members working through the processes of shared governance criticized the college’s inadequate support for inclusive excellence (such as international students), the college’s environmental sustainability policies, and aspects of the college’s initial COVID-19 response. Although that criticism required me to “put on my coat of armor,” it yielded policies, developed through shared governance, that earned the college national recognition for its student support and inclusive excellence, engaged the entire college community in reducing our environmental footprint, and allowed the campus to reopen after the initial COVID closure in a way that had the confidence of students, faculty, and staff.

None of this would have been possible if faculty had not had the freedom to speak up and challenge the administration’s initial judgments. That freedom is part of effective shared governance.

Threats to Institutional Independence

Recent efforts by states and the federal government to impinge on academic freedom, shared governance, and institutional independence require trustees to be vigilant.

Government intrusion into the independence of colleges and universities is not new—it goes back to early times in our nation’s history. In the 1819 Supreme Court case of Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward, the court stopped the New Hampshire legislature from taking control of Dartmouth College when the college took positions the legislature did not like. The case firmly established the principle that private universities should be independent from excessive government interference. Courts have expanded this principle to include public universities and, more generally, to protect academic freedom.

Attacks on institutional independence today might be less blunt than the attempt to take over Dartmouth, but they are equally pernicious. Instead of direct attempts to revoke the charters of colleges and universities, recent attacks on institutional independence have centered on both shared governance and academic freedom.

According to Benitez, Reid, and Friedman at PEN America, more than 70 bills have been introduced in 26 states to restrict freedom of speech and academic freedom. Of these, at least 22 have become law in 16 states. Through restrictive legislation, states have attempted to diminish the role of faculty senates with respect to curriculum, declare that certain topics cannot be discussed in class, exert control of faculty hiring and how faculty are assessed, and create new academic departments to express a political agenda without consulting faculty.

On top of these state incursions into institutional independence, there are federal efforts that include funding cuts, attacks on programs that support inclusive excellence, and a proposed compact that could make it easier to access federal funds if an institution surrenders its institutional autonomy.

These developments are becoming more widespread and warrant the attention of and action by boards of both private and public institutions.

Board Responsibilities for Institutional Independence

Even amidst these aggressive state and federal governmental actions, governing boards can still take action to blunt all but the worst attacks on institutional independence.

Most colleges and universities have solid, time-tested policies concerning academic freedom. Trustees should ask whether these policies are built to support academic independence in today’s environment, including the right of faculty to freely participate in governance without fear of reprisal.

However, many institutions do not have a strong shared governance policy. Board members first should ask if they have a board policy affirming the importance of shared governance. Strong policies should state the importance of shared governance, define shared governance as a decision-making system with shared responsibilities, and generally define the roles of the board, faculty, and staff in that system. An example of such a policy can be found in my book, Shared Governance for Agile Institutions: A Practical Guide for Universities and Colleges.

But in addition to playing defense, boards must also go on the offense. Trustees need to actively advocate for institutional autonomy and take time to understand any bill introduced at the state or federal level that might impact institutional autonomy, shared governance, or academic freedom.

Boards should ask these questions:

1. How does the board educate new board members about academic freedom, shared governance, and institutional autonomy?
2. Has our academic freedom policy been reviewed by legal counsel and the administration to ensure that it protects faculty rights to participate in governance?
3. Has the board adopted a clear policy supporting and defining shared governance?
4. Have board members considered adopting a policy of institutional independence? Have they reviewed the AGB publication, How to Govern for Institutional Autonomy: A Practical Guide for Higher Education?

These are challenging times for higher education. Strong shared governance and clearly protected academic freedom can bolster institutions’ ability to protect their institutional autonomy.

Steven C. Bahls is president emeritus of Augustana College, chair of the board of trustees of Capital University, and an AGB consultant.