CR's December 12, 2025 Times Standard Education Matters Article--In Defense of Academic Freedom and First Amendment Rights
Published on Dec 8 2025Education matters. The freedom to pursue truth and explore academic topics unconstrained by political and religious influence is critical for the development of a just and equitable society. I contend that the health of our democracy is unquestionably linked to faculty’s autonomy to seek truth and model how to critically examine thoughts and ideas.
A December 3rd press release from the U.S. Secretary of Education makes clear why we must continue to articulate the purpose of higher education. In describing the White House roundtable titled “Biased Professors, Woke Administrators, and the End of Free Inquiry on U.S. Campuses,” the Secretary stated that “activist-driven ideologies have reshaped universities both ideologically and administratively,” and “DEI policies have turned universities from free marketplaces of ideas to purveyors of manufactured ideological conformity.”
Although this may sound like an effort to restore rigor, it is not. It is an excuse for telling faculty what to teach and institutions how to govern. It is an intrusion on the scholarly autonomy that defines academic freedom. So now we find ourselves navigating a new political reality. What we have to do is preserve the tenets of our institutions, our integrity, and our credibility within this new reality. Rather than looking in the rearview mirror with nostalgia for the old ways, we have to prove that higher education, free from external control, really matters.
I have consistently affirmed that the College will protect our faculty’s academic freedom and the free speech rights of every employee. However, I have found that people misunderstand these terms and use them interchangeably. To better understand these concepts, Molly Blakemore and I invited Professors John Johnston and Natalia Margulis to our November 18, 2025 Free Speech with CR podcast.
While free speech is rooted in the notion that all ideas and opinions are equally protected under the First Amendment, academic freedom rests on the understanding that some ideas are more valid than others. To advance learning, faculty must be able to evaluate and dismiss ideas that do not meet disciplinary standards. According to Academic Freedom and Free Speech by Lincoln Caplan in Harvard Magazine, “Because of the standards that guide each academic discipline, tenured scholars have the authority to veto the ideas and speech of untenured scholars and students if they don’t meet those standards. In this institutional sense, all that speech in search of truth is not equal.”
Professors Johnston and Margulis assert that academic freedom includes the right of faculty to choose their course materials and determine their approach to curriculum. They acknowledge that academic freedom is a privilege that comes with great responsibility. It does not give faculty the liberty to include content that is not academically relevant or supported by disciplinary standards. Faculty should not stray into topics that are irrelevant to the course or motivated by personal beliefs. However, if those topics stimulate debate and directly support the subject students are endeavoring to learn, it should be protected.
Think about reading The Communist Manifesto in a Critical Reading and Writing class, for example. While the subject may be controversial, this is well within the bounds of academic freedom if it enhances students’ analytical skills. This distinction is at the heart of criticisms from President Trump and other Republican leaders.
In addition to the conversation about academic freedom, we also discussed the growing trend of students using social media or other platforms to “inform” on faculty who teach topics that they find offensive or that do not align with their political or religious beliefs. This creates a kind of self-censorship that is itself a constraint on academic freedom, though not from the usual sources.
Professor Johnston illustrated this point when we talked about the book The Coddling of the American Mind by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. Their argument that tolerating an academic culture where students and faculty are afraid to speak honestly interferes with a student’s social, emotional, and intellectual development resonates with me.
Thankfully, CR is not alone in supporting academic freedom. An American Council on Education 2022 national study found that bipartisan majorities said that all topics, if fairly presented, should be open for discussion on college campuses, because college students are adults who can and should come to their own conclusions. The study also identified strong opposition to federal and state policymakers imposing restrictions or conditions on campus speech or curricula.
I believe that CR belongs to the people, and we must provide relevant, rigorous, and current educational programs to our community. Our commitment to academic freedom is central to this. It allows us to teach what is true, rather than water it down to appease political pressures or soften material that may be challenging. The challenge we face is finding a way to work alongside the current Administration’s agenda without giving up academic freedom and becoming further politicized.