Yes. That's the principle for every tenure faculty member. The idea is to severely limit the grounds that trustee boards and the presidents they hire can employ to get rid of faculty they don't like. (The concept of academic freedom grew out of just such behavior about 125 years ago at Stanford.) It is fascinating, indeed, and the streng…
Yes. That's the principle for every tenure faculty member. The idea is to severely limit the grounds that trustee boards and the presidents they hire can employ to get rid of faculty they don't like. (The concept of academic freedom grew out of just such behavior about 125 years ago at Stanford.) It is fascinating, indeed, and the strength of tenure in the US has made the country a magnet for talented faculty coming from other countries, where they have to worry that speaking their minds will cost them their livelihood. There are costs, but the benefits far outweigh them.
That matters absolutely not at all, Rob. Imagine what tenure would be worth if anything you publicly said could become grounds for some board of trustees declaring you unfit. During the Red Scare era, tenure protected professors accused of being communist, including those who actually were, despite the fact that their party affiliation and personal ideologies may have had nothing to do with their jobs.
I imagine it would be that the right of free association of private individuals and institutions is given equal weight to the right of free speech of an individual. Repeatedly, it seems we are completely comfortable with honoring the right of speech and academic freedom of only certain people.
Yes. That's the principle for every tenure faculty member. The idea is to severely limit the grounds that trustee boards and the presidents they hire can employ to get rid of faculty they don't like. (The concept of academic freedom grew out of just such behavior about 125 years ago at Stanford.) It is fascinating, indeed, and the strength of tenure in the US has made the country a magnet for talented faculty coming from other countries, where they have to worry that speaking their minds will cost them their livelihood. There are costs, but the benefits far outweigh them.
Yeah, except the speech in question has nothing to do with her job.
That matters absolutely not at all, Rob. Imagine what tenure would be worth if anything you publicly said could become grounds for some board of trustees declaring you unfit. During the Red Scare era, tenure protected professors accused of being communist, including those who actually were, despite the fact that their party affiliation and personal ideologies may have had nothing to do with their jobs.
I imagine it would be that the right of free association of private individuals and institutions is given equal weight to the right of free speech of an individual. Repeatedly, it seems we are completely comfortable with honoring the right of speech and academic freedom of only certain people.