DOCSLIB.ORG

Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2018 Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education Karmen Melissa Stephenson University of Tennessee, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Recommended Citation Stephenson, Karmen Melissa, "Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2018. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4944 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Karmen Melissa Stephenson entitled "Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Anthropology. Andrew Kramer, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Graciela S. Cabana, Charles E. Caudill, Bertin M. Louis Accepted for the Council: Dixie L. Thompson Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) Academic Freedom, Critical Thinking, and the Culture of American Science Education A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Karmen Melissa Stephenson May 2018 Copyright © 2018 by Karmen Melissa Stephenson All rights reserved. ii Acknowledgements I thank my advisor and committee chairperson, Dr. Andrew Kramer, for his guidance in the planning and implementation of this project and for his help in correcting the plethora of errors in the first draft of this dissertation. I also thank my committee members, Dr. Graciela Cabana, Dr. Edward Caudill, and Dr. Bertin Louis, for their diverse and unique contributions which helped lay the academic foundation of this project. I very much appreciate the support and patience of my chairperson and committee, as this has been a long journey. Finally, I thank the legislators and teachers who participated in this study, for sharing their time and perspectives with me and making this project possible. iii Abstract Since the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859) the topic of biological evolution has been controversial. While evolutionary theory is considered a foundational concept of the biological sciences, the role of the theory in public school science education remains controversial in the United States. In April 2012 the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act was passed, which provides protection for teachers who teach the “scientific weaknesses” of “controversial” scientific theories that include biological evolution, chemical origins of life, climate change, and human cloning—topics that are, according to mainstream scientific consensus, socially but not scientifically controversial. The law is based on the “Model Academic Freedom Bill” that was crafted, distributed, and promoted by the Discovery Institute. The purpose of this research was to explore the ways in which ideologies and rhetoric regarding American values and identity inform understandings of scientific inquiry and knowledge and influence educational policy and curricula. This project investigated the purposes and impacts of the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act through ethnographic analysis of legislative proceedings, interviews of legislators, and interviews of public and private high school science teachers. Interviews explored the perspectives of legislators and teachers regarding impacts of the law as well as attitudes regarding the influence of political, social, and religious ideologies on science education. This research is grounded in theories of social constructionism and Foucault’s power/knowledge. Data were analyzed using grounded theory methodology and rhetorical and political discourse and frame analysis. The data in this study indicate that the passage of the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act was an ideological victory for anti-science movements and that many of the ideologies that serve to maintain the momentum and salience of anti- science movements are only tangentially related to the scientific theories that these movements reject. Rather, these ideologies embody important American values and therefore serve to broaden the appeal of anti-science to a larger proportion of the population. These values include democracy and the rights of voters to determine policy, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and common sense and individualism. iv Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: Historical Context of Anti-Science Politics, Academic Freedom Legislation, and American Values and Science Education ....................................................................................... 5 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 5 Historical Review of Anti-Evolution and Anti-Science in the United States ............................. 7 Anti-Evolution Laws and the Scopes Monkey Trial ............................................................... 7 Reframing the Issue: Flood Geology and Creation Science ................................................. 10 Creationism Without the Bible: The Intelligent Design Movement ..................................... 14 Academic Freedom Legislation ................................................................................................ 22 Religious Fundamentalism and Anti-Science Movements ....................................................... 26 American Values and Science Education .................................................................................. 31 Science Loses the “Culture War” .......................................................................................... 35 Science in American Society ................................................................................................. 40 Evolution Education in Public Schools ..................................................................................... 46 Chapter 2: Theoretical Frameworks ............................................................................................. 50 Related Scholarship in Anthropology and the Social Sciences ................................................. 50 Social Constructionism and Power/Knowledge ........................................................................ 52 Discourse and Power ................................................................................................................. 55 Knowledge, Truth, and Power ................................................................................................... 58 Chapter 3: Data Collection Methods and Analysis ...................................................................... 61 Overview ................................................................................................................................... 61 Study Participants and Setting ................................................................................................... 62 Data Collection Methods ........................................................................................................... 65 Data Analysis and Interpretation ............................................................................................... 67 Use of Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software NVivo ............................... 67 Data Analysis Methodologies and Techniques ..................................................................... 68 Grounded Theory Methodology ....................................................................................... 68 Discourse and Frame Analysis.......................................................................................... 69 Data Coding Processes .......................................................................................................... 70 Chapter 4: Results ........................................................................................................................ 74 The Role of Government in Public Education .......................................................................... 74 Legislator Perspectives on the Role of Government in Public Education ............................. 74 Teacher Perspectives on the Role of Government in Public Education ................................ 75 Perspectives on the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act ..................... 80 Legislator Perspectives on the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act 80 Teacher Perspectives on the Tennessee Teacher Protection and Academic Freedom Act ... 84 Perspectives on Science ............................................................................................................ 86 Legislator Perspectives
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals
    UNDERSTANDING THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: ITS TRUE NATURE AND GOALS A POSITION PAPER FROM THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY OFFICE OF PUBLIC POLICY AUTHOR: BARBARA FORREST, Ph.D. Reviewing Committee: Paul Kurtz, Ph.D.; Austin Dacey, Ph.D.; Stuart D. Jordan, Ph.D.; Ronald A. Lindsay, J. D., Ph.D.; John Shook, Ph.D.; Toni Van Pelt DATED: MAY 2007 ( AMENDED JULY 2007) Copyright © 2007 Center for Inquiry, Inc. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for noncommercial, educational purposes, provided that this notice appears on the reproduced materials, the full authoritative version is retained, and copies are not altered. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the Center for Inquiry, Inc. Table of Contents Section I. Introduction: What is at stake in the dispute over intelligent design?.................. 1 Section II. What is the intelligent design creationist movement? ........................................ 2 Section III. The historical and legal background of intelligent design creationism ................ 6 Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) ............................................................................ 6 McLean v. Arkansas (1982) .............................................................................. 6 Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) ............................................................................. 7 Section IV. The ID movement’s aims and strategy .............................................................. 9 The “Wedge Strategy” .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The 1925 Monkey Trial
    The “Monkey Trial” March 1925. • On 21st March 1925 Tennessee passed the Butler Act which stated: • That it shall be unlawful for any teacher in any of the Universities, Normals and all other public schools of the State which are supported in whole or in part by the public school funds of the State, to teach any theory that denies the Story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals. Proposer of the act: John Washington Butler. Religion vs. Science. • (State Representative) John W. Butler, a Tennessee farmer and head of the World Christian Fundamentals Association, lobbied state legislatures to pass the anti-evolution law. The act is challenged. • John Thomas Scopes' involvement in the so-called Scopes Monkey Trial came about after the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) announced that it would finance a test case challenging the constitutionality of the Butler Act if they could find a Tennessee teacher willing to act as a defendant. • Photograph of John Scopes taken one month before the trial. Opportunistic Bush Lawyers? • A band of businessmen in Dayton, Tennessee, led by engineer and geologist George Rappleyea, saw this as an opportunity to get publicity for their town and approached Scopes. • Rappleyea pointed out that while the Butler Act prohibited the teaching of human evolution, the state required teachers to use the assigned textbook, Hunter's Civic Biology (1914), which included a chapter on evolution. • Rappleyea argued that teachers were essentially required to break the law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Academic Freedom Policies on Critical Thinking Instruction
    The Impact of Academic Freedom Policies on Critical Thinking Instruction Shirley Fessel, MA, MEd Instructor of English Park University Critical thinking enjoys almost universal support, except when applied to controversial topics. Yet it is these topics that are often the most effective initiators of critical thinking exercises that improve students’ rational approaches to challenging problems. The use of controversial issues to promote critical thinking requires an institutional commitment to academic freedom in order to survive. In some institutional contexts, the most crucial need for critical thinking is the very condition under which it is least likely to be applied. Instead, avoidance of controversy seems to be the predominant policy of institutions fearful of expensive lawsuits or damaging public relations. Several trends are decreasing the likelihood that critical thinking is applied in the classroom to challenging topics: demands for increased accountability from legislatures; scrutiny of adopted content standards; oversight of Internet and other intellectual work of professors affiliated with the universities; student challenges to faculty instruction; and attempts to curtail ideological diversity. This paper describes these current dynamics which erode academic freedom and thus the ability to apply critical thinking to controversial topics. The paper also recommends that institutions and faculty adopt clearly delineated policies related to academic freedom in order to ensure faculty freedom to promote critical thinking. Awareness of how these trends impact the instructional climate enables teachers to design instruction and be more proactive in guaranteeing that critical thinking about controversial topics is able to flourish under academic freedom. Critical thinking is defined as making judgments about the truthfulness and worth of the statement.
    [Show full text]
  • Fruit of the Poison Tree: a First Amendment Analysis of the History and Character of Intelligent Design Education Todd R
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 2006 Fruit of the Poison Tree: A First Amendment Analysis of the History and Character of Intelligent Design Education Todd R. Olin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Olin, Todd R., "Fruit of the Poison Tree: A First Amendment Analysis of the History and Character of Intelligent Design Education" (2006). Minnesota Law Review. 22. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/22 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OLIN_3FMT 04/24/2006 10:41:43 AM Note Fruit of the Poison Tree: A First Amendment Analysis of the History and Character of Intelligent Design Education Todd R. Olin∗ During a press conference on August 1, 2005, a reporter asked President George W. Bush his opinion as to whether the theory of Intelligent Design should be taught alongside evolu- tion in public schools.1 “Bush avoided a direct answer, constru- ing the question instead as a fairness issue: ‘you’re asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.’”2 That simple exchange has refueled a national debate in the popular media, the academic world, and the courts over the propriety of teaching evolution and other theories of human origin in public schools.3 But the question remains: does teaching the theory of Intelligent Design in pub- lic school science classrooms violate the separation of church ∗ J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Cell Cell History Cell Structures and Functions
    Introduction to the cell cell history cell structures and functions CK-12 Foundation December 16, 2009 CK-12 Foundation is a non-profit organization with a mission to reduce the cost of textbook materials for the K-12 market both in the U.S. and worldwide. Using an open-content, web-based collaborative model termed the “FlexBook,” CK-12 intends to pioneer the generation and distribution of high quality educational content that will serve both as core text as well as provide an adaptive environment for learning. Copyright ©2009 CK-12 Foundation This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA. Contents 1 Cell structure and function dec 16 5 1.1 Lesson 3.1: Introduction to Cells .................................. 5 3 www.ck12.org www.ck12.org 4 Chapter 1 Cell structure and function dec 16 1.1 Lesson 3.1: Introduction to Cells Lesson Objectives • Identify the scientists that first observed cells. • Outline the importance of microscopes in the discovery of cells. • Summarize what the cell theory proposes. • Identify the limitations on cell size. • Identify the four parts common to all cells. • Compare prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. Introduction Knowing the make up of cells and how cells work is necessary to all of the biological sciences. Learning about the similarities and differences between cell types is particularly important to the fields of cell biology and molecular biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization Of
    ACADEMICS NO LONGER THINK: HOW THE NEOLIBERALIZATION OF ACADEMIA LEADS TO THOUGHTLESSNESS by JUSTIN MICAH PACK A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Philosophy and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy December 2015 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Justin Micah Pack Title: Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization of Academia Leads to Thoughtlessness This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Philosophy by: Bonnie Mann Chairperson Alejandro Vallega Core Member Rocío Zambrana Core Member Jerry Roziek Institutional Representative and Scott L. Pratt Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded December 2015 ii © 2015 Justin Micah Pack iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Justin Micah Pack Doctor of Philosophy Department of Philosophy December 2015 Title: Academics No Longer Think: How the Neoliberalization of Academia Leads to Thoughtlessness In my dissertation, I argue that the neoliberalization of higher education results in the university becoming less and less a place of wonder, self-cultivation and thinking and instead more and more a place to specialize, strategize and produce. This is a result of the volatile infusion and mixing of the logic of calculative rationality at work in consumer capitalism with the logic of scientific instrumental rationality already hegemonic in academia. This adds to the demands of the academic world of production the demands of the world of consumption. Now the academic (and also the student) is interpellated not only as a producer of knowledge but also as an object of consumption (to be consumed by others).
    [Show full text]
  • Mi Científica Favorita 2
    MI CIENTÍFICA FAVORITA 2 GOBIERNO MINISTERIO GOBIERNO MINISTERIO GOBIERNO MINISTERIO DE ESPAÑA DE CIENCIA, INNOVACIÓN DE ESPAÑA DE CIENCIA, INNOVACIÓN DE ESPAÑA DE CIENCIA, INNOVACIÓN Y UNIVERSIDADES Y UNIVERSIDADES Y UNIVERSIDADES MI CIENTÍFICA FAVORITA 2 FAVORITA MI CIENTÍFICA MI CIENTÍFICA FAVORITA 2 MI CIENTÍFICA FAVORITA 2 Instituto de Ciencias Matemáticas (CSIC, UAM, UC3M, UCM) GOBIERNO MINISTERIO DE ESPAÑA DE CIENCIA, INNOVACIÓN Y UNIVERSIDADES Índice 07 Presentación 08 Agnodice 10 María Sibylla Merian 12 Emilie du Châtelet 14 Mary Anning 16 Sofia Kovalevskaya 20 Hertha Ayrton 22 Nettie Stevens 24 Henrietta Swan Leavitt 26 Mileva Maric´ 28 Lise Meitner 34 Emmy Noether 36 Inge Lehmann 38 Janaki Ammal 40 Grace Hopper 42 Rachel Carson 44 Rita Levi-Montalcini 46 Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin 50 Chien-Shiung Wu 52 Ángeles Alvariño 54 Jane Cooke Wright 56 Stephanie Kwolek 58 Inmaculada Paz Andrade 60 Gabriela Morreale 64 Valentina Tereshkova 66 Lynn Margulis 70 María del Carmen Maroto Vela 72 Wangari Maathai Matemáticas 74 Françoise Barré-Sinoussi Física 76 Ingrid Daubechies Química Biología 80 Ameenah Gurib-Fakim Ciencias de la Tierra 82 Lisa Randall Medicina 84 Begoña Vila Ingeniería e informática 86 Sara Zahedi Nota: 89 Glosario de términos Ciertas fechas se desconocen, por ello no aparecen indicadas en las líneas de tiempo. 92 Fuentes INTRODUCCIÓN Las mujeres han contribuido al desarrollo de la ciencia a lo largo de toda la historia aunque, en muchas ocasiones, su trabajo no ha sido reconocido como se merecía. En este libro presentamos la vida y obra de algunas de ellas, es- cogidas por estudiantes de 5º y 6º de primaria de centros educativos de toda España como sus científicas favoritas.
    [Show full text]
  • Where Did We Come From?
    Reading 10.2 Where Did We Come From? Lottie L. Joiner or a year, Martha Wise listened to presentations, vis- investigate and critically analyze all aspects of evolutionary ited constituents’ homes, took phone call after long theory.” The statement made Ohio the first state to require F phone call, and spent hours answering e-mail. She districts to let criticisms of evolution be examine din class- was often up until the wee hours of the morning, trying to rooms. However, a disclaimer insists that the board did not understand the latest issue dividing her state: the teaching support “the teaching or testing of intelligent design,”a the- of “intelligent design,” one of the alternative theories of the ory that the complex features of life are the result of intelli- origin of species. gent planning and activity. “I’m not a scientist. I don’t know much about science,” For many, it was a compromise that satisfied both sides. says Wise, a member of the Ohio State Board of Education. Some felt that it was not enough. Others believed that the “There’s nothing the intelligent design people showed me Ohio board had caved to the pressure of Darwin’s critics. that the science people couldn’t say,‘That’s not evidence,’or “Science education has not convinced a lot of ‘That’s not a fact.’ I can’t refute them because I don’t know Americans that Darwin was right,”says Charles Haynes, se- that much about it. I can’t believe either side.” nior scholar at the Freedom Forum’s first amendment The question of which side you believe is central to the Center, based at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cell-Theory: a Restatement, History, and Critique Part III
    *57 The Cell-theory: A Restatement, History, and Critique Part III. The Cell as a Morphological Unit By JOHN R. BAKER (From the Department of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy, Oxford) SUMMARY A long time elapsed after the discovery of cells before they came to be generally regarded as morphological units. As a first step it was necessary to show that the cell-walls of plants were double and that cells could therefore be separated. The earliest advances in this direction were made by Treviranus (1805) and Link (1807). The idea of a cell was very imperfect, however, so long as attention was con- centrated on its wall. The first person who stated clearly that the cell-wall is not a necessary constituent was Leydig (1857). Subsequently the cell came to be regarded as a naked mass of protoplasm with a nucleus, and to this unit the name of protoplast was given. The true nature of the limiting membrane of the protoplast was discovered by Overton (1895). The plasmodesmata or connective strands that sometimes connect cells were prob- ably first seen by Hartig, in sieve-plates (1837). They are best regarded from the point of view of their functions in particular cases. They do not provide evidence for the view that the whole of a multicellular organism is basically a protoplasmic unit. Two or more nuclei in a continuous mass of protoplasm appear to have been seen for the first time in 1802, by Bauer. That an organism may consist wholly of a syn- cytium was discovered in i860, in the Mycetozoa.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scopes Trial, Antievolutionism, and the Last Crusade of William Jennings Bryan
    University of Mississippi eGrove Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate School 2012 Six Days of Twenty-Four Hours: the Scopes Trial, Antievolutionism, and the Last Crusade of William Jennings Bryan Kari Lynn Edwards Follow this and additional works at: https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd Part of the History of Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Edwards, Kari Lynn, "Six Days of Twenty-Four Hours: the Scopes Trial, Antievolutionism, and the Last Crusade of William Jennings Bryan" (2012). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 96. https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/96 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at eGrove. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of eGrove. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SIX DAYS OF TWENTY-FOUR HOURS: THE SCOPES TRIAL, ANTIEVOLUTIONISM, AND THE LAST CRUSADE OF WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN A Thesis presented in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Southern Studies The University of Mississippi by KARI EDWARDS May 2012 Copyright Kari Edwards 2012 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT The academic study of the Scopes Trial has always been approached from a traditional legal interpretation. This project seeks to reframe the conventional arguments surrounding the trial, treating it instead as a significant religious event, one which not only altered the course of Christian Fundamentalism and the Creationist movement, but also perpetuated Southern religious stereotypes through the intense, and largely negative, nationwide publicity it attracted. Prosecutor William Jennings Bryan's crucial role is also redefined, with his denial of a strictly literal interpretation of Genesis during the trial serving as the impetus for the shift toward ultra- conservatism and young-earth Creationism within the movement after 1925.
    [Show full text]
  • Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover Or Eliminate God?
    University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy Volume 4 Issue 1 Fall 2009 Article 5 January 2009 Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover or Eliminate God? Peter M.J. Hess Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp Part of the First Amendment Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter M. Hess, Creation, Design and Evolution: Can Science Discover or Eliminate God?, 4 U. ST. THOMAS J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 102 (2009). Available at: https://ir.stthomas.edu/ustjlpp/vol4/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UST Research Online and the University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Public Policy. For more information, please contact the Editor-in-Chief at [email protected]. CREATION, DESIGN AND EVOLUTION: CAN SCIENCE DISCOVER OR ELIMINATE GOD? PETER M. J. HESS, PH.D.* NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth his handiwork." Psalms 19:1 INTRODUCTION: THE PLAYING OUT OF THE DESIGN ARGUMENT IN THE WEST Every culture has its views about the universe, about the human person, and about the great metaphysical questions that confront us. How ought we to think about the relationship between cosmology, anthropology, and theology? This may be a challenge for us in our increasingly secular post- modem culture, but for most of human history it was not an issue. In the Judeo-Christian tradition these areas of human reflection were naturally bound up together, as in the Hebrew psalmist's proto-statement of the argument from design: "the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows forth his handiwork."' The scholastic university culture of the High Middle Ages held as its ideal the "unity of knowledge," or unitas scientiae, approaching the study of the universe as a coherent and knowable whole.
    [Show full text]
  • The Freedom of Academic Freedom: a Legal Dilemma
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 48 Issue 2 Article 4 October 1971 The Freedom of Academic Freedom: A Legal Dilemma Luis Kutner Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Luis Kutner, The Freedom of Academic Freedom: A Legal Dilemma, 48 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 168 (1971). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol48/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. THE FREEDOM OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM: A LEGAL DILEMMA Luis KUTNER* Because modern man in his search for truth has turned away from kings, priests, commissars and bureaucrats, he is left, for better or worse, with professors. -Walter Lippman. Complete liberty of contradicting and disproving our opinion is the very condition which justifies us in assuming its truth for purposes of action.... -John Stuart Mill, On Liberty. I. INTRODUCTION IN THESE DAYS of crisis in higher education, part of the threat to aca- demic freedom-which includes the concepts of freedom of thought, inquiry, expression and orderly assembly-has come, unfortunately, from certain actions by professors, who have traditionally enjoyed the protection that academic freedom affords. While many of the professors who teach at American institutions of higher learning are indeed competent and dedicated scholars in their fields, a number of their colleagues have allied themselves with student demonstrators and like organized groups who seek to destroy the free and open atmosphere of the academic community.
    [Show full text]