Rising fears for academic freedom

Leigh Baker / ANU Reporter v.32, n.7 11may01

The ANU reporter is published by The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200, AUSTRALIA

A report by The Australia Institute claims government funding cuts to Australian universities have greatly reduced academic freedom.

In a survey of 165 social science academics from 13 Australian universities, Dr Clive Hamilton, a Visiting Fellow in The Australian National University’s Graduate Program in Public Policy and Executive Director of the Australia Institute, found 17 per cent said they had been prevented from publishing contentious research results and half reported a reluctance to criticise institutions that funded research.

Preliminary briefings on the report “Academic Freedom and Commercialisation of Australian Universities” prompted recent media claims of soft marking in Australian universities.

Dr Hamilton said that, because academics were now forced to compete with each other for external grants, they were increasingly choosing uncontroversial research topics. Commercial and government bodies were often reluctant to be associated with contentious research.

“Universities are supposed to stand for the truth and that means researching and publishing without fear or favour. Yet it is apparent that a large proportion of academics are reluctant to criticise or stand up to those who provide the money,” Dr Hamilton said.

“When one sixth of academics say that they have been prevented from publishing their research, we have to acknowledge that this is a very serious issue. In my view, one per cent is too high.”

Dr Hamilton said the survey was directed at academics in the social sciences because previous discussions of commercial pressures had focused on the physical and biological sciences, but he believed other academic areas would show similar results if surveyed.

“Many academics said that, when applying for research funding, they knew their chances of success would be substantially increased if they stuck to safe, conventional research areas. A large proportion simply carry out their research unfunded.

“They believe that new research that challenges or threatens established ideas is unlikely to be funded so they do not even bother to put in an application. That means that research is becoming more dull and conventional.”

In the survey, 92 per cent of the participants said they had a degree of concern for the state of academic freedom in Australia and 37 per cent said they felt major concern.

“Most respondents said that they understood ‘academic freedom’ to mean that academics should feel no constraints on their ability to do research and publish their results without fear of retribution or damage to their careers. A high proportion of academics feel they can no longer do that.”

More than 70 per cent felt there had been a deterioration of academic freedom over the past four years and nearly half of those surveyed classified the deterioration as major.

Dr Hamilton said the respondents overwhelmingly blamed federal funding cuts for the problem, stating their research was being restricted and monitored by external funding providers. However, Dr Hamilton believes university administrations are partially to blame for the problem.

“In my view, many university administrators have failed to defend the principles of academic freedom that universities have traditionally upheld,” he said. “Many have put commercial considerations before the need to maintain standards in research and teaching.”

Although he believes universities need more funding, Dr Hamilton said it is also essential to rebuild morale eroded by the conflict between commercial considerations and academics’ traditional pursuits.

“Over the past decade there has been a collapse in morale among academics. They are disillusioned, weary and bitter about the changes that they have had to endure.

“I think we are going to have to develop a new culture in our universities that protects academic standards in a world that has changed irreversibly,” he said. “If universities do not stand for the truth, then what do they stand for?”

source: http://www.anu.edu.au/pad/reporter/V32/7/freedom.html