For several years, the concept of "academic freedom" has generated significant controversy by failing to delineate between the academic freedom of the individual educators and that of the institution. As such, when circumstances that result in the conflict between the individual and the institution arise, both parties can justify their rights in the name of "academic freedom." An example of such a conflict can involve a faculty member's disagreement with the institution regarding the implementation of controversial research projects such as stem cell research. While the faculty member can choose to pursue the implementation of the research based on academic freedom, the institution can also cite its academic freedom to revoke the tenure of a faculty member, which it considers the latter's actions to undermine its existence.
By recognizing the reality of the competing interests in the realm of academic freedom, it is evident, in my opinion, that academic freedom and the related concepts of freedom of expression and artistic freedom are limited by various boundaries. No academics or institutions can claim the license to engage in activities such as hate mongering and advance their own selfish agendas without taking in account the complex ramifications of their actions. As highlighted in the lecture, the courts will not protect a tenured faculty member who chooses to engage in disruptive activities; fail to take on additional work load; and address internal disputes in the public realm. Essentially, in pursuing their diverse academic pursuits, academics must always be aware of the various boundaries that need to be respected. They should be cognizant of their affiliation with the institution at all times in selecting their academic pursuits. Thus, based on this reality, there is no question that academic freedom is a relative concept.
Based on this relative conception of academic freedom, I believe that faculty
...