Why academic freedom matters

Given the recent string of incidents involving the police or military entering universities, I am afraid it is high time we confront the problematic views we have over academic freedom.

In many ways, our understanding of academic freedom is often tainted by how we understand education. Our universities are the biggest learning facilities we have, the ones that cultivate advanced skills and produce necessary knowledge. Yet even within primary and secondary education, there is a pervasive tendency to view education as having some form of utility, whether it is to produce laborers or performers for major examinations.

What happened with the so-called rescue of Lumads in a certain campus in Cebu City, whatever you make of it, is a consequence of ignoring how important it is for schools to be safe spaces where no violence or force must take place. Authorities have every right to establish educational institutes, of course. However, they cannot impede the process of learning by any means, including disregarding the principle of academic freedom. There are two reasons for this: First, because we are a democracy; and second, education should, in some sense, not be limited or defined by the agenda of any regime.

As we should have learned in our classes about politics, it is citizens who create their government and it is in their participation and involvement that we have democracy. The origin and source of the power and necessity of government and its means to govern comes from the people.

Burgh and Yorshanky, in their 2011 article, “Communities of Inquiry: Politics, Power, and Group Dynamics”, discuss the value of participative citizenry shaping our democracies through principles such as education for democracy and democratic education. The two differ in that education for democracy prepare people for their civic duties, such as voting in elections and critical thinking over policies but democratic education emphasizes how youth shape democracy itself through involvement in decision-making processes, whether in classes or in actual social engagement.

On my second point, we need to dismiss the idea that educators must follow an ideological or regime-based agenda. This is an old debate that appears in works like Donovan and Larkin's 2006 article, "The Problem of Political Science and Practical Politics". The law's purpose when it comes to education is to ensure its freedom and the flourishing of ethics. The law must guide people but for the law to continue its work, people must be involved, not stay as damsels in distress waiting for knights in shining armor to keep them from danger.

To force education into a corner with violent means or to curtail its proliferation based on ideology, whether from the left, right or institutional, keeps people from expressing their full selves and determining their futures. Academic freedom, if anything, is a consequence of humanity's natural right to be wholly free and rational beings.

Mar Louie Vincent Reyes