By Dr. Kathleen Bortolin
Introduction
In the fall of 2023, Dr. Mark Blackell and I shared a position paper we wrote about academic freedom at VIU. Prior to drafting this paper, Mark and I hadn't really worked together. We had, however, both been sharing our ideas and concerns about academic freedom at VIU with various colleagues. One of those colleagues happened to sit right in the middle of our relational Venn diagram. They put us in touch and through our exchanges we became curious about who else might be interested in academic freedom at VIU, and what we might learn from broader discussions. We set out to invite those conversations by writing a position paper.
In that paper we identified that VIU was one of only a few institutions in BC that had neither a policy nor a statement on academic freedom. We were curious about this difference, and wondered if the lack of a policy or statement was impacting our institutional culture in a negative way. Articulating these thoughts, and sharing them with our community launched us into a year of discussing, thinking, policy-writing, and head-scratching. In this update, I’d like to share that process and where we’re at now.
Sharing the Paper
We shared the paper with VIUFA faculty via the VIUFA newsletter, and directly with faculty councils and some non-VIUFA colleagues. From there it circulated further through direct access and sharing. We encouraged feedback, and a number of colleagues reached out to us to share their thoughts. From those conversations and feedback, we sensed that we weren't the only ones at VIU interested in academic freedom or curious about the lack of a policy and what it might mean. We decided that there was enough interest to invite a live discussion with some of these key colleagues. This discussion encouraged us to start thinking seriously about how to push for a policy for academic freedom at VIU.
In subsequent discussions with the University Secretariat and Provost, we saw two pathways forward to possibly develop a VIU policy for academic freedom. One option was to approach Senate, outlining the issue of academic freedom at VIU and requesting a policy be developed. The second option was to draft a policy ourselves and then take it to Senate to be reviewed. We decided to write the policy ourselves. Our thinking in choosing this option was mostly related to efficiency. We felt that we had a fair bit of momentum from the paper and discussions, as well as a group of advisors in mind who we could work with. The grassroots approach also appealed to us, and seemed in alignment with a desire to see more bottom-up engagement with Senate.
Creating an Advisory Group
With the support of a representational advisory group from a variety of areas on campus we believed we could draft a policy, iterating on it through rounds of feedback with that key group until it was ready for Senate. The composition of this group was determined partly by who was interested and partly by who we felt had expertise to support the policy development. The members were:
• Dr. Kathleen Bortolin
• Dr. Mark Blackell
• Dr. David Livingstone
• Dr. Nicole Vaugeois
• Dr. Sally Vinden
• Dr. Katharine Rollwagen
• Dr. Heather Wiebe
• Dr. Aggie Weighill
• Dorcas Nganga
Dr. Eve Stringham
Within this group there was a core writing group (Mark, Kathleen and Nicole), and this writing group collaborated and created two drafts of the policy that were then shared with the advisory group for feedback.
Drafting the Policy
Drafting a policy on academic freedom was an interesting but challenging task. The nuances and complexities of academic freedom alone, along with challenges of having to write one policy that would meet the needs of all the people, stretched us. Despite our “less is more” approach, we still struggled wordsmithing the policy, taking into consideration various permutations and hypotheticals. However, in the spring of 2024 we felt that were getting there, and the policy was taking shape and almost to a final draft stage.
A key experience during the policy drafting stage was meeting with Gina DeVeaux from UBC. As an Academic Governance Officer, Gina was leading the process of redefining UBC’s academic freedom policy. Just listening to Gina discuss UBC’s approach and her thoughts on academic freedom policy shaved weeks, maybe longer, off of our process. It was a productive example of the power of collaborating across institutions to discuss shared values and the policy development needed to support those values.
The Policy Dies (at the Hands of Procedure)
In May 2024, at the table with our VIU academic freedom advisory group, we began to discuss a procedure that would accompany our draft policy on academic freedom. Most policies have procedures that outline how the policy will be enacted or upheld. As we discussed this procedure, digging into existing models attached to other VIU policies, questions were raised related to who would ultimately have the power to decide issues of academic freedom at VIU. The language of the procedure and what it started to represent began to complicate and perhaps compromise our original intentions. Some of us began to question if the procedure, as it was coming together, had the potential to actually inhibit academic freedom at VIU. We paused.
Those of us who were apprehensive about how the procedure was unfolding sought the counsel of key VIUFA executive members. We shared where we were at with our process and our growing concern that the policy, as well-intentioned as it may be, could be evolving to unintentionally threaten academic freedom in some circumstances. Ultimately, we began to question if an institutional-wide academic freedom policy was worth this risk. We again reviewed the existing collective agreement, discussing with VIUFA its process in handling academic freedom concerns. We all agreed that VIUFA members would be best protected by the existing language of the collective agreement.
Initially, VIUFA, like many others on campus, was supportive of pursuing a policy related to academic freedom. But what we all discovered was that in the process of drafting the language of that policy and its procedure, the intention of which was to broaden and deepen our colleagues' protections related to academic freedom, we risked lessening the protections of some and maybe even undermining the collective agreement.
And here is where we may have answered our own question regarding why some institutions do not have a policy on academic freedom. Where we may have wondered previously that the absence of a policy indicated less academic freedom, we now wondered if a policy could compromise academic freedom even further. Had other institutions uncovered this as well? And then opted not to take that risk? I now believe that a strong collective agreement may offer the best protection for academic freedom.
What problem are you trying to solve?
In one of the many meetings we had on academic freedom at VIU, a question was posed to us: "What problem are you trying to solve?” For me, I think the problem may be less of a policy concern and more of an institutional culture one. Based on the feedback we received and conversations we engaged in, I still wonder if VIU, and key members of this community, understand and respect academic freedom to the extent we need them to. I also worry that more marginalized members of our community might have less equity of voice and less freedom to express their thoughts than others. I still wonder if VIU as an institution is committed to defending academic freedom, or does it fall mostly to VIUFA with its collective agreement language? Would others defend it, if need be? And would they defend it equally for all those who have it?
I am now wondering if an institutional statement on academic freedom is the answer we've been searching for--something that can articulate the institution's commitment to academic freedom and reinforce its importance to our community and our work, but without the risks that may come with a policy and procedure.
The New Way Forward
I'd like to continue to work toward understanding the complexities of academic freedom, and raising the collective understanding and awareness of academic freedom at VIU. We've already done a lot of work toward this over the last year, but there's more to be done. I’d like to create more opportunities for us to talk about academic freedom, and in doing so also create opportunities to grapple with it, embrace it, use it, and defend it. I imagine guest speakers and reading circles; curated resources; podcast episodes; opinion pieces; a good debate. In as many ways as I can, I’d like to create space for more dialogue about academic freedom, fully accepting that some of that dialogue will be messy. I see an "Academic Freedom Committee" in our future.
With Gratitude
I would like to thank all the voices who shared their thoughts and time this year, in emails and in person. I extend my gratitude to the members of the the focus group and the members of our advisory group and core writing group--all of you have impacted this process through what feels like one big discursive inquiry into our voices and policy at VIU. Together, I believe we are moving VIU closer to a better place in terms of expression and voice. But it will take more work and more time. Every conversation gets us somewhere but we need more conversations. And ultimately, we need a greater sense of security and freedom to have those conversations.
Special thanks to Dr. Mark Blackell and Dr. Nicole Vaugeois for all their contributions in thinking, discussing and drafting. I’m grateful that our paths crossed on this initiative.
Finally, in our original paper, we stated:
“Our hope in sharing this paper is to broaden the dialogue on academic freedom at VIU, and move our institution toward a place where all members of our community trust that they have a level of academic freedom that aligns with working at a university. In our pursuit of intellectual openness, equity of voice, and the scholarly pursuit of creating and sharing knowledge, we believe that VIU needs to support and defend the voices of its people and articulate its commitment to the value of academic freedom.”
This is still my hope, and I am still committed to working toward this goal. I just no longer think that policy is the only way there. But I am optimistic that we can get there through shared discourse, and with the respect and freedom needed to engage in that discourse.
Image credit: Wix AI Image Generator
Commentaires