[GOAL] [SCHOLCOMM] On Academic Freedom

[David Wojick]

I cannot speak for Danny but this seems to confuse intellectual freedom, 
which the term "academic freedom" usually means, with freedom from 
regulation. Academics are governed by a great many rules, each of which may 
restrict their freedom in some way. None of this necessarily has anything 
to do with academic freedom.

So I would say that things like contract requirements have nothing to do 
with academic freedom, unless they specify what cannot be said. Copyright 
does not do this.

David

David Wojick
http://insidepublicaccess.com/

At 03:26 PM 3/24/2018, SANFORD G THATCHER wrote:
>So, Danny, let me ask if you are ok with funders requiring authors to publish
>under a CC BY license and waive all rights they otherwise would have to have
>input into how and where their writings get translated and how and where their
>works are republished (e.g., in edited form that distorts the author's meaning
>and associates the author with a cause, ideology, etc. that the author finds
>abhorrent)?
>
>Is these rights do not pertain to academic freedom, please explain why.
>
>The same might be asked of those universities that require immediate OA 
>posting
>of dissertations, allowing no time for an author to revise it and find a
>publisher for it. Various associations (in history, medieval studies, etc.)
>have adopted recommended embargo periods to deal with this problem. You are
>saying that those associations are wrong to be concerned about this problem?
>That this has nothing to do with academic freedom either?
>
>Sandy thatcher
>
>
>
>On Sat, Mar 24, 2018 04:07 AM Danny Kingsley <dak45 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Hi all,
> >
> >Can we have a quick chat about Academic Freedom? I am frankly fed up 
> with this
>being trotted out in multiple discussions in relation to open access. It is
>akin to the PhD student who recently tearfully told me that the University’s
>requirement for her to provide a digital version of her thesis in addition to
>the hardbound one was a ‘breach of her human rights’. I feel the academic
>freedom argument is moving into similar levels of hysteria.
> >I wrote a blog recently that addresses this issue: Scare campaigns, we have
>seen a few<https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05>
>https://unlockingresearch-blog.lib.cam.ac.uk/?p05 (relevant bits below)
> >Usually I hear ‘Academic Freedom’ thrown in in relation to being able to
>choose where to publish. On the SCHOLCOMM and GOAL lists in the discussion
>about Willinsky’s copyright proposal, academic freedom has been thrown into
>the mix again. Given, there is potentially some validity in the statement 
>that:
>“Policies that impact academics that are not developed and supported by
>academics are not consistent with academic freedom.” But copyright ownership
>(other than the moral right to be identified as an author of a work), and the
>place of publication are NOT enshrined in academic freedom.
> >
> >Academic Freedom is not being threatened by copyright licensing 
> requirements.
>This is a stupid side issue. We are fiddling while Rome burns. The real threat
>to academic freedom is the systematic undermining of expertise and 
>academia. As
>the UK justice secretary recently said - “People in this country have had
>enough of experts”
>https://www.ft.com/content/3be49734-29cb-11e6-83e4-abc22d5d108c Let’s not
>even begin to talk about what is happening in the land of stripes and stars.
> >
> >Let’s keep focus on the issues that matter.
> >
> >Danny
> >
> >*****************************************
> >The new scare ­ threats to ‘Academic Freedom’
> >
> >The term ‘Academic Freedom’ comes up a fair bit in discussions about 
> open
>access. In his tweet sent during  the Researcher to Reader conference*, one of
>my Advisory Board colleagues Rick Anderson tweeted this
>comment<https://twitter.com/Looptopper/status/968463945190313984>:
> >
> >“Most startling thing said to me in conversation at the #R2RConf:
> >“I wonder how much longer academic freedom will be tolerated in IHEs.”
>(Specific context: authors being allowed to choose where they publish.)
> >
> >In this blog I’d like to pick up on the ‘Academic Freedom’ part of the
>comment (which is not Rick’s, he was quoting).
> >
> >Academic Freedom, according to a summary in the Times Higher
>Education<https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2010/12/21/defining-academic-freedom> 
>is  primarily that “Academic freedom means that both faculty members and 
>students can engage in intellectual debate without fear of censorship or 
>retaliation”.
> >
> >This definition was based on the American Association of University 
> Professors’ (AAUP) Statement on Academic 
> Freedom<https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure> 
> which includes, quite specifically, “full freedom in research and in 
> the publication of results”.
> >
> >Personally I read that as meaning academics should be allowed to 
> publish, not that they have full freedom in choosing where.
> >
> >Rick has since contacted the 
> AAUP<https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2018/03/05/open-letter-aaup-faculty-authors-full-freedom-publication/> 
> to ask for clarification on this topic. Last Friday, he tweeted that the 
> AAUP has declined to revisit the 1940 statement to clarify the ‘freedom 
> in publication’ statement in light of evolution of scholarly 
> communication since 1940.
> >
> >The reason why the Academic Freedom/ ‘restricting choice of 
> publication’ threat(s) is so concerning to the research community has 
> changed over time. In the past it was essential to be able to publish in 
> specific outlets because colleagues would only read certain publications. 
> Those publications were effectively the academic ‘voice’. However 
> today, with online publication and search engines this argument no longer 
> holds.
> >
> >What does matter however is the publication in certain journals is 
> necessary because of the way people are valued and rewarded. The problem 
> is not open access, the problem is the reward system to which we are 
> beholden. And the commercial publishing industry is fully aware of this.
> >
> >So let’s be clear. Academic Freedom is about freedom of expression 
> rather than freedom of publication outlet and ties into Robert Merton’s 
> 1942 norms of science 
> <http://www.collier.sts.vt.edu/5424/pdfs/merton_1973.pdf> which are:
> >§  “communalism”: all scientists should have common ownership of 
> scientific goods (intellectual property), to promote collective 
> collaboration; secrecy is the opposite of this norm.
> >§  universalism: scientific validity is independent of the 
> sociopolitical status/personal attributes of its participants
> >§  disinterestedness: scientific institutions act for the benefit of a 
> common scientific enterprise, rather than for the personal gain of 
> individuals within them
> >§  organized scepticism: scientific claims should be exposed to 
> critical scrutiny before being accepted: both in methodology and 
> institutional codes of conduct.
> >
> >If a publisher is preventing a researcher from publishing in a journal 
> based on their funding or institutional policy rather than the content of 
> the work being submitted then this is entirely in contravention of all of 
> Robert Merton’s norms of science. But the publisher is not, as it 
> happens, threatening the Academic Freedom of that author.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Dr Danny Kingsley
> >Deputy Director - Scholarly Communication & Research Services
> >Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
> >Cambridge University Library
> >West Road, CB3 9DR
> >e: dak45 at cam.ac.uk<mailto:dak45 at cam.ac.uk>
> >p: 01223 747 437
> >m: 07711 500 564
> >t: @dannykay68
> >w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk<http://www.osc.cam.ac.uk/>
> >b: https://unlockingresearch.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
> >o: orcid.org/0000-0002-3636-5939
> >
> >[/Users/dak45/Library/Containers/com.microsoft.Outlook/Data/Library/Cache 
> s/Signatures/signature_404167699]
>
>
>Sanford G. Thatcher
>Frisco, TX  75034
>https://scholarsphere.psu.edu
>
>"If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying."-John Ruskin (1865)
>
>"The reason why so few good books are written is that so few people
>who can write know anything."-Walter Bagehot (1853)
>
>"Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance
>with the limitations and incapacities of the human
>misunderstanding."-Ambrose Bierce (1906)