New Zealand academia is experiencing a ¡°constraining of voice¡± that undermines the university¡¯s legislated role as critic and conscience of society, a conference has heard.

Tertiary Education Union (TEU) national secretary Sandra Grey said a ¡°narrowing of the definition¡± of academic freedom had convinced many staff that their right to speak out was limited to their research expertise.

This was a misinterpretation of both international norms and national legislation, with the Education and Training Act assigning academics broader scope to engage in public discussion ¨C particularly around teaching, learning and assessment.

¡°People are feeling a chilling effect,¡± Dr Grey told the TEU¡¯s?. ¡°They [see] their colleagues reprimanded or pulled up when they speak up publicly, and then they don¡¯t want to join in. The idea that you owe more to your institution and their brand than to broader concepts has come into people¡¯s feelings about academic freedom.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Dr Grey said that this had been evident in the thousands of responses to TEU¡¯s three ¡°state of the sector¡± surveys in 2013, 2016 and 2018. The union¡¯s latest exploration of the issue, a smaller 2021 survey focusing specifically on academic freedom, had revealed a ¡°narrowing of the right to speak¡± ¨C with 80 per cent of respondents blaming management.

¡°The surveys¡­are showing a crisis in academic freedom,¡± she told the conference. ¡°We haven¡¯t been using it. We don¡¯t really know what it is. We are getting it mixed up with other freedom of speech rights.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

The new survey attracted about 350 respondents, with most saying the institutional environment only ¡°somewhat¡± upheld the freedom of staff and students to put forward new ideas or express unpopular opinions. Participants described a ¡°climate of fear¡± fostered by threats of dismissal, denial of promotion and funding and workload constraints.

Criticising the operations and financial affairs of one¡¯s own institution was considered a particular no-go area, with fewer than half of respondents believing academic freedom encompassed such rights ¨C and only about 10 per cent exercising them.

More than?one-third of respondents also nominated ¡°academic culture¡± as a key inhibitor, with some cautioning against ¡°no platform¡± responses to controversial topics.

Academic freedom made the headlines in New Zealand last year, when University of Canterbury political scientist Anne-Marie Brady?faced investigation?over a paper criticising Chinese foreign influence.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Massey University faced accusations that it had attempted to gag staff through a media commentary policy introduced amid controversial?cuts to its science offerings. In 2018, Massey was also criticised after a planned address by former conservative political leader Don Brash was cancelled at short notice.

Massey vice-chancellor Jan Thomas said New Zealand¡¯s approach to academic freedom was better than in Australia. ¡°I recognise that people feel it¡¯s being eroded, but there¡¯s an awful lot of good here,¡± she told the conference.

Professor Thomas said more work was needed in tackling ¡°self-censorship¡± by precariously employed academics ¨C an issue that particularly affected women, M¨¡ori, Pacific Islanders and immigrants. ¡°[It] means the voice of the academy is not as diverse as the population of the academy.¡±

She said that scholarly contributions on controversial topics too often unleashed a ¡°tsunami of trolling¡± and letters of complaint. ¡°That has really amped up in the last few years. Universities have a key role in protecting those folks, and making sure they are able to continue to speak their truth.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com