The is this the book-length work addressing the development of academic freedom and the procedures designed to protect it from the 1915 founding of the AAUP and the AAC to their endorsement of the key document in the history of professorial rights and responsibilities, the 1940 Statement of Principles of Academic Freedom and Tenure.

Beginning in the twentieth century, American faculty increasingly viewed themselves as professionals who were more than mere employees. This volume focuses on key developments in the long process by which the American professoriate achieved tenure, academic freedom, and a voice in university governance.Christian K. Anderson describes the formation of the original faculty senates. Zachary Haberler depicts the context of the founding and early activities of the American Association of University Professors. Richard F. Teichgraeber focuses on the ambiguity over promotion and tenure when James Conant became president of Harvard in 1933. In "Firing Larry Gara," Steve Taaffe relates how the chairman of the department of history and political science was abruptly fired at the behest of a powerful trustee. In the final chapter, Tom McCarthy provides an overview of the evolution of student affairs on campuses and indirectly illuminates an important negative feature of that evolution the withdrawal of faculty from students' social and moral development.This volume examines twentieth-century efforts by American academics to establish themselves as an independent constituency in America's colleges and universities.

This book analyses marginalisation and human rights in Southeast Asia and offers diverse approaches in understanding the nuances of marginalisation and human rights in the region. Throughout the region, a whole range of similarities and differences can be observed relating to the Southeast Asian experience of human rights violation, with each country maintaining particular aspects reflecting the variability of the use and abuse of political power. This book explores the distinct links between marginalisation and human rights for groups exposed to discrimination. It focuses on ethnic minorities, children, indigenous peoples, migrant workers, refugees, academics, and people with disabilities. This book highlights the disparities in attainment and opportunity of marginalised and minority groups in Southeast Asia to their rights. It examines how marginalisation is experienced, with case studies ranging from a regional approach to country context. Paying attention to how broader socio-economic and political structures affect different people’s access to, or denial of, their fundamental human rights and freedoms, the book argues that tackling human rights abuses remains a major hurdle for the countries in Southeast Asia. Providing a broader conceptual framework on marginalisation and human rights in Southeast Asia and a new assessment of these issues, this book will be of interest to readers in the fields of Asian Law, Human Rights in Asia, and Southeast Asian Studies, in particular Southeast Asian Politics.

"Academic freedom, the intellectual bedrock of American intellectual activities, was not always a shared value, but one that emerged from faculty collective action. This book provides a detailed history of the founding and early activities of the American Association of University Professors set into the broader societal and intellectual circumstances that affected its initial development. Key to the story, of course, is the influential work of Arthur O. Lovejoy at Johns Hopkins and John Dewey at Harvard in establishing this national association and very early professional trade union. The professionalization of the faculty, which accompanied the development of the American research university, identified academic freedom as a central element of professional autonomy. Public debates over academic freedom occurred within the broader debate of the balance of power in the American university. This debate was strongly influenced by the perspectives of the Progressive Era: the goal to democratize university governance was presented frequently in terms similar to the broader goal of democratizing American society. These developments were central to the establishment of the Association, and individual founders of the AAUP played an active part in many of them, inside and outside of academe"--

Van Alstyne presents an "unhurried" historical review of the extent to which academic freedom has been accepted into domestic constitutional law. Two essays deal with the issue of tenure and academic freedom. Ralph S. Brown and Jordan E. Kurland agree that tenure reinforces academic freedom but wonder if there is not a large price to be paid for such a system. In a highly instructive review Matthew Finkin looks at academic tenure and freedom in the light of labor law. Focusing on freedom of artistic expression, Robert O'Neil raises difficult questions about what kinds of art displays taxpayers can be expected to tolerate in the colleges and universities they support. Rodney A. Smolla looks at the ways in which "hate" speech and offensive expression on campuses engage wide First Amendment jurisprudence. Judith Jarvis Thomson examines the vexed issue of selecting - and valuing - individual faculty members or disciplines with regard to ideology. Michael W.

Political elites in liberal democracies are showing heightened concern about threats to national security from the overseas political activities of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and its supporters. This Whitehall Paper argues that an effective liberal democratic policy response requires careful disaggregation of distinct sets of risks: to national security; civil liberties; and academic freedom. Although widely cited as a model to follow, Australia’s response to these issues illustrates how aggregation of these diverse risks into a singular national security threat – commonly labelled ‘Chinese influence’ – can produce alarmist public policy discourse, legislative overreach and mismatched institutional responsibilities. The Paper suggests a set of measures for liberal democracies to manage their engagement with China’s powerful and increasingly authoritarian party-state.

Green sheds light onto the mercurial and ill-defined boundaries of institutional governance within China’s unique system of higher education, a national system that remains misunderstood by scholars who continue to position it as little more than a research arm of the party/state. Through a synthesis of systems theory, complexity theory, and institutional logics, Green provides a relational accounting of "Higher Education with Chinese Characteristics" – a complex, adaptive social system whose paradoxical modernization ideology of pragmatic instrumentalism, in conjunction with a centralized-decentralized governance model, foments rational chaos at the institutional level. Specifically, his book highlights the concept of rational chaos – an observable phenomenon of evolutionary emergence experienced by subaltern actors engaged with the confusing and often paradoxical institutional logics of meso/micro-level governance. Moreover, developed through in-depth narrative interviews, Green’s conceptualization of collective-individualism provides a glimpse into the diverse patterns of identity that have developed within a single institutional governance context. These discrete identity formations, patterned through varying understandings of individual self-determinism, collective role fulfillment, norms and structures of governance, and subsequent changemaking efforts, call into question culturally deterministic research surrounding self-mastery, institutional autonomy, and academic freedom within the Chinese higher education context. His book highlights a subaltern institutional lifeworld accounting of higher education governance that will speak to anyone grappling with neoliberal commodification, managerialism, academic nationalism and the increasing onset of transnational academic (im)mobility. It is ideal for students and scholars of international comparative education, higher education governance, and Chinese studies.

An illuminating history of the reform agenda in higher education. For well over one hundred years, people have been attempting to make American colleges and universities more efficient and more accountable. Indeed, Ethan Ris argues in Other People’s Colleges, the reform impulse is baked into American higher education, the result of generations of elite reformers who have called for sweeping changes in the sector and raised existential questions about its sustainability. When that reform is beneficial, offering major rewards for minor changes, colleges and universities know how to assimilate it. When it is hostile, attacking autonomy or values, they know how to resist it. The result is a sector that has learned to accept top-down reform as part of its existence. In the early twentieth century, the “academic engineers,” a cadre of elite, external reformers from foundations, businesses, and government, worked to reshape and reorganize the vast base of the higher education pyramid. Their reform efforts were largely directed at the lower tiers of higher education, but those efforts fell short, despite the wealth and power of their backers, leaving a legacy of successful resistance that affects every college and university in the United States. Today, another coalition of business leaders, philanthropists, and politicians is again demanding efficiency, accountability, and utility from American higher education. But, as Ris argues, top-down design is not destiny. Drawing on extensive and original archival research, Other People’s Colleges offers an account of higher education that sheds light on today’s reform agenda.