Information from the Faculty Handbook Chapter III

A. Academic Freedom

The University of Oregon has a long and illustrious history in the area of academic freedom and freedom of speech. Most recently the university¹s students established a free-speech plaza at the EMU where anyone can come and express views. Each year the faculty bestows a free speech award in the honor and memory of former university president, Charles Johnson, who advocated for freedom of speech for dissenters during the Vietnam War.

The State Board of Higher Education has promulgated the following rule outlining the rights and responsibilities related to Academic Freedom:

Academic Freedom OAR 580-22-005

• "(1) All teachers in OUS institutions are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing subjects, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter that has no relation to the subject.
• (2) As a matter of policy the Board does not attempt to control or sway the personal opinion of any person on the faculty or otherwise on the payroll of any of the institutions or divisions, nor the public expression of that opinion. In the exercise of this freedom of expression, faculty members should manifest appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not institutional spokesmen."
• The rule is short and simple and leaves many questions unanswered. What kinds of things have no relation to the subject? What kinds of behavior show disrespect for the opinions of others? What are the exceptions to the rules? The best guidance is that of the senior faculty in the discipline, but often issues of academic freedom come into an instructional context in ways that are not planned. World events may have little to do with algebra, but such topics may come up and challenge even the most experienced teachers. Good judgment about proper behavior before a practically captive audience, and a willingness to discuss less related subjects with students outside the class will usually satisfy the responsibilities imposed by the rule. Faculty are encouraged to consult with colleagues and to use university resources for strategies that assure freedom of expression in ways that support diversity and civility of discourse in all venues.
• The state board rule does not speak to freedom in research. However the university faculty has addressed itself to this issue in our longstanding practices of not conducting classified research on university property or with university facilities. This position has been adopted in order to promote the free exchange of ideas essential to the missions of universities.
• The faculty and administration have adopted policy on misconduct in research described later in this chapter.

Information from OAR 580-022-0005

Academic Freedom

(1) All teachers in Department institutions are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing subjects, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter that has no relation to the subject.

(2) As a matter of policy the Board neither attempts to control, sway nor limit the personal opinion or expression of that opinion of any person on the faculty or otherwise on the Department's payroll. In the exercise of this freedom of expression, faculty members should manifest appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they do not speak on behalf of the Department or institution.

Stat. Auth.: ORS 351.070 Stats. Implemented: ORS 351.070 Hist.: HEB 3-1978, f. & ef. 6-5-78; HEB 1-1993, f. & cert. ef. 2-5-93; HEB 5-1996, f. & cert. ef. 12-18-96

The Mission statement

The University of Oregon is a comprehensive research university that serves its students and the people of Oregon, the nation, and the world through the creation and transfer of knowledge in the liberal arts, the natural and social sciences, and the professions. It is the Association of American Universities flagship institution of the Oregon University System.

The university is a community of scholars dedicated to the highest standards of academic inquiry, learning, and service. Recognizing that knowledge is the fundamental wealth of civilization, the university strives to enrich the public that sustains it through

• a commitment to undergraduate education, with a goal of helping the individual learn to question critically, think logically, communicate clearly, act creatively, and live ethically
• a commitment to graduate education to develop creators and innovators who will generate new knowledge and shape experience for the benefit of humanity
• a recognition that research, both basic and applied, is essential to the intellectual health of the university, as well as to the enrichment of the lives of Oregonians, by energizing the state's economic, cultural, and political structure
• the establishment of a framework for lifelong learning that leads to productive careers and to the enduring joy of inquiry
• the integration of teaching, research, and service as mutually enriching enterprises that together accomplish the university's mission and support its spirit of community
• the acceptance of the challenge of an evolving social, political, and technological environment by welcoming and guiding change rather than reacting to it
• a dedication to the principles of equality of opportunity and freedom from unfair discrimination for all members of the university community and an acceptance of true diversity as an affirmation of individual identity within a welcoming community
• a commitment to international awareness and understanding, and to the development of a faculty and student body that are capable of participating effectively in a global society
• the conviction that freedom of thought and expression is the bedrock principle on which university activity is based
• the cultivation of an attitude toward citizenship that fosters a caring, supportive atmosphere on campus and the wise exercise of civic responsibilities and individual judgment throughout life
• a continuing commitment to affordable public higher education

Recommendations by AAUP on Campus Level

To our colleagues at the campus level, however their collective views may best be expressed, we offer these specific recommendations.
• 1.1. The faculty should undertake a systematic review of institutional policies on academic freedom and free expression to ensure that the policies contain adequate safeguards against political pressures from within and outside the institution. Specific attention should be given to the freedom to invite and hear controversial speakers, to freedom of political utterance on and off the campus, and to freedom of teaching. Reference to AAUP policies and reports, which have withstood the test of earlier challenges, would be appropriate and beneficial. These policies make clear that the freedom to invite to campus those who hold varied views should not be constrained by any notion of "balance"‹that any view, even the most repugnant, should be heard. On freedom of teaching, institutional policy should recognize that as long as an instructor has observed professional standards of care in drawing conclusions on a subject and has treated students with respect, he or she is free to engage in passionate advocacy no less than in dispassionate dissection.
• 2.It is essential that, with full and meaningful faculty participation, institutional policies be established to protect academic freedom against governmental constraints and threats of the type this report has described. These policies would address such vital issues as acceptance of classified research grants and contracts, access to personal computer files, and sharing of information with external agencies about library and student records. Where pertinent policies already exist, they should be reviewed and refined, with faculty governance bodies playing a central role in that review process, to ensure the adequacy and efficacy of the policies in addressing current threats to academic freedom. The existence (or absence) of such policies should be widely publicized at each institution.
• 3.The office or person responsible for maintaining and enforcing such policies should be clearly identified within the institutional structure, making certain that adequate accountability exists to ensure the highest level of responsibility for actions (or omissions) that may imperil academic freedom.
• 4.Faculty organizations bear a responsibility for establishing and maintaining regular contact with the offices and individuals charged with interpreting and applying relevant policies; those organizations should also keep their colleagues and the campus community well informed about the stewardship of vital faculty, staff, and student interests.
• 5.Recognizing the special importance of potentially sensitive information being turned over to government hands, we believe that it is essential to know what information is collected (by the college or university itself and by external agencies) about members of the campus community, as well as by whom and for what purposes. It is also critical to guard against the misuse of such information for unauthorized, potentially damaging, purposes.
• 6.It may be especially valuable in perilous times for faculty to establish substantially closer ties with several campus offices with which they may be unfamiliar unless an urgent personal need takes them there‹the offices of the dean of students or the chief student personnel administrator, the director of international student affairs, the campus police, and the university legal or general counsel. These offices are likely to have heightened responsibilities in tense times and may be helpful in anticipating potential trouble spots. Moreover, in the performance of their regular functions, they may assist in reducing potential risks to academic freedom.
• 7.Where an administration or a governing board has firmly defended academic freedom against external threats, faculty commendation and support would be not only welcome within the institution, but also highly visible beyond the campus. Recent examples of such leadership occurred, for example, in the university systems of North Carolina and Texas, on the CUNY board, and in Columbia University's administration.
• 8.Faculty, faculty unions, and other faculty organizations should use the mechanisms available to them, including all-campus programs, teach-ins, and campus print and broadcast media, to inform the entire university community of faculty concerns about national security measures and the effect of these measures on academic freedom and free inquiry of faculty, staff, and students. There must also be resistance to pressures from individuals and groups, on and off the campus, who seek to bar speakers whose views they oppose, to ban events for purposes they loathe, or to punish or silence faculty, students, and staff whose opinions they cannot abide.