I'm always saying on this blog that the term "academic freedom" is as poorly understood as it is intensely contested. It means many things to many people, and many of the folks who invoke it to forward their arguments and agendas about academe either don't know the first thing about it--or, more cynically, know quite a bit about its history and meaning, but are capitalizing on the ignorance of others to advance a self-serving redefinition of the term. The AAUP is, ironically, one of the key actors in that less-than-intellectually-honest endeavor; its recent "Freedom in the Classroom" statement departs rather dramatically from the AAUP's own historical definition of academic freedom. But the AAUP is not alone.

One thing we all need to do--if we're interested in moving beyond stupid culture war posturing and moving toward actual substantive discussion--is get back to basics. We need a shared, working understanding of how the concept of academic freedom emerged, how the AAUP and other organizational players have historically defined it (and subtly redefined it), how the courts have engaged the concept (as kind of a First Amendment issue, but not always and not really), and, finally, of what all that means for practical day-to-day academic life--for institutions, trustees, administrators, departments, professors, and students. If we could do that, we might be able to begin actually talking to one another, instead of talking past one another.

University of Wisconsin professor Donald Downs is one of our better thinkers on the subject of academic freedom, and he's trying to help us do just that. Check out his new paper, "Academic Freedom: What It Is, What It Isn't, and How to Tell the Difference."

Crucial to Downs' discussion is his careful explanation of the checks and balances built into academic freedom--which is not an unqualified right, but is, rather, a highly specific mode of professionalism that combines privileges with duties, obligations, and accountability. See what you think.