REGULATIONS
ACADEMIC FREEDOM

With the major changes that are currently in process in academic health centers—in the teaching of students, in the status of health science school faculty, and in the conditions under which these faculty members work—it is urgent that clear-cut policies on academic freedom is formulated, made known, and addressed.

The modern health care industry is now more complex and market- driven, with instructors and professors often acting as entrepreneurs in research and in-patient care. It is marked by conflicting roles and responsibilities, both academic and nonacademic, for faculty members and administrators alike. The intense competition for private or governmental funding can affect the choice of research subjects, and in some instances, scientists in academic medicine are finding it difficult to secure funding for unorthodox research or research on matters that are politically sensitive. The growing reliance on the clinical enterprise at many medical schools, and the resulting expansion of the number of professors who are engaged mainly in clinical work, may serve to divert the schools from their teaching mission, and may implicitly or explicitly dissuade professors from devoting their attention to such activities as graduate teaching or academic service that are not income producing in nature.

Academic freedom should be especially nurtured and supported because of the constraints surrounding medical and clinical research. Rules governing genetic research and engineering, debates about the beginning and end of human life, and disputes about the use of animals for research and experimentation are examples of matters that can profoundly affect the work of medical school professors. While society may require restraints on the pursuit of knowledge in these and other similarly sensitive areas, basic principles of academic freedom, in the field as well as elsewhere in an institution of higher learning, must be observed.

The American University of Health Science upholds the following cornerstones of academics:

FREEDOM TO INQUIRE AND TO PUBLISH

The freedom to pursue research and the correlative right to transmit the fruits of inquiry to the wider community––without limitations from corporate or political interests and without prior restraint or fear of subsequent punishment—are essential to the advancement of knowledge. The pursuit of medical or clinical research, however, should proceed with due regard for the rights of individuals as provided by standard protocols on the use of human and animal subjects. Any research plan involving such matters must be reviewed by a body of faculty peers and/or the University Institutional Review Board (IRB) before the research is initiated and while it is being conducted. AUHS is a Christian University and within these perimeters, faculty is afforded academic freedom. All research protocols going to any external agencies must be reviewed and approved by the Provost at AUHS and a signature of approval must be affixed before the grant is sent to the agency.

PATENTS AND ROYALTIES FROM PATENTS

If a patent is expected to be produced from any and all research endeavors and other ongoing work produced at AUHS as a faculty member, the assignment of the patent must be made exclusively to AUHS. Similarly, royalties from all patents are also to be assigned to AUHS accordingly.

FREEDOM TO TEACH

The freedom to teach includes the right of the faculty to select the materials, determine the approach to the subject, make the assignments, and assess student academic performance in teaching activities for which they are individually responsible of which are in alignment with the Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs), Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs), and Course Learning

Outcomes (CLOs), without having their decisions subject to the veto of the Chief Academic Officer, Program Dean / Director / Chair, or other administrative officer as long as they follow University protocol related to respecting times for changing of texts, etc. (changing course ‘required’ textbooks requires ample notice to the librarian and program administrator). Teaching duties in health science schools that are commonly shared among a number of faculty members require a significant amount of coordination and the imposition of a certain degree of structure, and often involve a need for agreement on such matters as general course content, syllabi, and examinations https://www.aaup.org/. Often, under these circumstances, the decisions of the group may prevail over the dissenting position of a particular individual. When faculty members are engaged in patient care, they have a special obligation to respect the rights of their patients and to exercise appropriate discretion while on rounds or in other non-classroom settings.

FREEDOM TO QUESTION AND TO CRITICIZE

Faculty members should be free to speak out on matters having to do with their institution and its policies to administration, and they should be able to express their professional opinions to administration without fear of reprisal. In speaking critically to administration, faculty members should strive for accuracy and should exercise appropriate restraint. Tolerance of criticism to administration, however, is a crucial component of the academic environment and of an institution’s ultimate vitality.

Despite the serious challenges currently facing them, our institutions of academic health science should respect and foster conditions that are essential to freedom of learning, freedom of teaching, and freedom of expression.