In September 2021, the University Senates Conference, the statutory body for the University, proposed a series of statute changes, titled ST-83, that raised concerns over academic freedom.
This August, a revised version of these changes was sent to University System President Timothy Killeen without approval from the three senates: Urbana-Champaign, Chicago and Springfield. The statutes governs all three schools.
ST-83 was sent to each campus for a vote on Aug. 2, 2021, but the senates rejected it. The senates were concerned that academic freedom would be taken away from graduate students.
The current statutes define academic staff as lecturers, instructors, teaching, research and clinical associates and teaching and graduate assistants, among others. This group is explicitly given academic freedom under Article X section 2a of the current statutes.
“It is the policy of the University of Illinois System to maintain and encourage full freedom within the law of inquiry, discourse, teaching, research, and publication and to protect all members of the academic staff against influences … which would restrict the member’s exercise of these freedoms in the member’s area of scholarly interest,” the current statutes read.
However, the term “academic staff” was removed in ST-83 and replaced only with “tenure system and non-tenure system faculty,” implying anyone else would lose academic freedom.
Following the rejections, the USC amended ST-83 over the summer and sent a revised version — revised ST-83 — to Killeen for transmission to the Board of Trustees in August.
Each of the three senates was given until Dec. 16 to send their feedback on these revisions to Killeen before he decides whether to transmit it to the Board for a final decision.
However, when the USC passed the revised ST-83 to Killen’s desk, they violated current statutes, which state a majority of the senates must pass a piece of legislation before it reaches the president’s desk.
According to the Statutes article XIII section 8a2, in the case of two senates passing an amendment, the USC sends the amendment, the recommendations of the opposing senate and its own recommendations to the president.
Although none of the senates approved the revised ST-83, the procedure followed by the USC was as though a majority agreement had been reached. It caused confusion and pushback during the Urbana-Champaign Senate meeting on Nov. 11.
Chair of the U-C Senate Committee on University Statutes and Senate Procedures David Dalpiaz said that he encourages any elected representatives in the Senate to tell the USC to bring the revised ST-83 back to the senates for a vote. He also said the current ruling goes against the norm.
“In departure from established practice, the USC did not return these changes to the Senate for approval,” Dalpiaz said.
Although the revised ST-83 gives back academic freedom to those who the original took it away from, it drew concerns in other ways. The original phrase of “scholarly interest” was modified to “scholarly expertise.”
David O’Brien, professor in FAA and past chair of the U-C Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure, said this change from academic interest to expertise does not align with academia today.
“By limiting academic freedom only to areas of scholarly expertise, they misrecognize the process through which much academic research takes place today,” O’Brien said. “Many scholars broaden their research by extending their interest to new areas where they do not have established expertise.”
O’Brien also pointed out that determining “academic expertise” is undefined, and limiting the scope of academic freedom is self-defeating.
“It is unclear in the proposed revisions how and by whom areas of scholarly expertise will be determined,” O’Brien said. “The concept of academic freedom is intended in part to protect professors’ right to teach and conduct research free of political and ideological attacks, so it is strange or odd to introduce the concept and immediately try to limit its scope.”
In the same U-C Senate meeting in November, Jeffrey Eric Jenkins, USC chair, said the deadline for sending comments to Killeen would be suspended indefinitely from the original Dec. 16 date.
“When the amended document went back to the individual Senates for comment, concerns were raised about changes made during the reconciliation process,” Jenkins said. “The concerns from the three universities differed from one another, and it became apparent that the December deadline, which was set by USC, was all too brief.”
Jenkins also spoke on Killeen’s behalf, explaining the sudden change.
“It became obvious that we needed to, as President Killeen put it, ‘Take a deep breath and understand that there is not a rush to complete this process … Academic freedom is supremely important, and we need to get this right’” Jenkins said.
At an U-C Senate meeting on Monday, USC Chair Jon Hale announced the deadline for comments on the revised ST-83 will no longer be given from each university to Killeen. Instead, comments will be given to the USC for further revision to the proposal. The comment date was also changed from Dec. 16 to March 15, 2025.
rp36@dailyillini.com
The post Potential changes to UI statutes spark academic freedom concerns appeared first on The Daily Illini.