THE ISSUE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM: AN INTERVIEW
WITH JIM GORDON

Recently, BYU has received some media attention around the issue of academic freedom and the university's decision not to grant continuing faculty status to Gail Turley Houston, a former assistant professor of English. To provide readers with a clearer understanding of these issues--some of which are alluded to and some of which are specifically addressed in President Merrill J. Bateman's article--Brigham Young Magazine editor Jim Bell recently visited with associate academic vice president Jim Gordon. A professor of law, Gordon has responsibility for faculty personnel issues. He also served as vice chair of the committee that drafted the university's Statement on Academic Freedom in 1992.

---

When and why did BYU adopt an official policy on academic freedom?

The academic freedom statement was drafted in 1992 by a faculty committee and was then circulated to the entire faculty and others for comment. We received many comments from faculty and students and incorporated a number of those comments into the statement. After the final version was prepared, it was approved by the university administration and the BYU Board of Trustees. The academic freedom statement protects the individual academic freedom of faculty to teach, research, and publish. The statement also protects the university's institutional academic freedom to pursue its religious mission. Normally, those two freedoms are in harmony, since most faculty come to BYU because they support the university's religious mission. In general, LDS faculty have more academic freedom at BYU than they would at any other university. They can include gospel perspectives in their classes and teach eternal truths. However, if conflicts arise, the academic freedom statement provides a set of principles to resolve those conflicts.

What are those principles?

The academic freedom statement formally sets forth principles that have always existed at BYU. The overall standard is that faculty expression should not seriously and adversely affect the university mission or the Church. The academic freedom statement gives three examples. They are expression with students or in public that, first, contradicts or opposes fundamental Church doctrine or policy; second, deliberately attacks or derides the Church or its general leaders; or, third, violates the Honor Code because it is dishonest, illegal, etc. The principles are clearly stated, and there are well-defined procedures to resolve disagreements.

What is the AAUP, and what gave rise to its evaluation of the university's academic freedom policy?

The American Association of University Professors is an association whose aim is to promote individual academic freedom. Less than 5 percent of faculty members in the United States belong to the AAUP, and it is not an accrediting body. The only action the AAUP can take, if in its view there is a violation of academic freedom, is to censure a university in its publication, Academe. The AAUP visited BYU at the request of Professor Gail Turley Houston and a small group of faculty to investigate claims that Professor Houston's academic freedom was violated when she was denied continuing faculty status in 1996.

What were the university's reasons for denying her continuing status?

The decision to grant continuing status, which is our equivalent of tenure, is essentially a decision to grant a lifetime appointment at the university. Before faculty members receive continuing status, they have annual contracts and are in a probationary period. This is consistent with what universities do across the country. BYU faculty are reviewed for continuing status in their sixth year. In that review, their teaching, scholarship, and citizenship are evaluated. Continuing status decisions require that we judge whether a person is likely to further the university's mission. The review is very thorough and careful, and it involves evaluations at the department, college, and university levels. The final decision is made by the president of the university.

In Professor Houston's case, the Faculty Council on Rank and Status, a committee of faculty from across the university, recommended against granting continuing status, and the president accepted that recommendation. The grounds included a pattern of publicly contradicting fundamental Church doctrine and deliberately attacking the Church. For example, among other things, Professor Houston publicly endorsed the practice of praying to Heavenly Mother. In addition, some of her students complained about her behavior in class. She continued in those patterns of behavior after receiving notice in her third-year review that the behavior was inappropriate.

Generally, the university does not deal with such issues publicly. Why, then, has it chosen to respond to media inquiries--and to the AAUP--concerning Professor Houston's case?

It's true that the university generally doesn't conduct its business in the press. We responded publicly in this case because Professor Houston went to such great lengths to make the case public. In addition, we responded to the AAUP because we welcome the opportunity to clarify our position regarding academic freedom and the mission of the university.

The AAUP has issued a lengthy report in Academe that is critical of BYU. Will that affect BYU's accreditation or possibly its relationship with its accrediting organization?

No. Last year the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges, which is BYU's major accrediting body, conducted its decennial review of the university and renewed our accreditation. The Northwest Association specifically approved our academic freedom statement. Its accreditation standards permit religious colleges and universities to place limitations on academic freedom so long as they publish those limitations candidly. In addition, the Northwest Association investigated almost all the allegations that the AAUP has asserted regarding other individuals. The Northwest Association concluded that BYU had not violated academic freedom.

Is BYU unique in placing religious limitations on academic freedom?

Other religious institutions also place limitations on academic freedom to preserve their religious mission and identity. The reality is that limitations on academic freedom exist at every institution, consistent with the mission of that institution. For example, state universities typically prohibit the advocacy of religious viewpoints in class to maintain a separation between church and state. Universities also place limitations on expression that is offensive because it is racist, sexist, etc. Many religious institutions also place limitations on academic freedom that are necessary to protect their religious identity.

It seems that the principles in the academic freedom statement have always been in place at BYU, whether formally or informally. Why was the decision made to put them in writing?

In the early 1990s, as the university considered changes in federal law that abolished mandatory retirement, BYU decided to review and formalize some of its policies related to faculty employment. In addition, the accreditation standards of the Northwest Association require religious institutions to publish their limitations on academic freedom candidly. Incidentally, the AAUP's own 1940 statement on academic freedom also permits religious institutions to place limits on academic freedom if those limitations are clearly stated. So we thought it was in everyone's best interest to be as clear and open about BYU's academic freedom principles as possible.

If the AAUP allows for limitations in its 1940 statement, why is it now, in essence, condemning the university for its practices?

Although the AAUP's documents expressly permit the adoption of religious limitations, the AAUP is strongly oriented toward promoting individual academic freedom above everything else. Scholars have written about the AAUP's antipathy toward religious colleges and universities, and BYU's experience with the AAUP is consistent with that of other religious institutions. The AAUP has censured numerous religious institutions, including the Catholic University of America. I should add that the AAUP has also censured secular institutions such as New York University, the State University of New York, and the University of Southern California. I think it's fair to say that AAUP censure has not injured those institutions.

How would you respond to those who may be concerned about academic freedom at BYU?

BYU's mission has always been to provide an excellent university education in an environment consistent with the ideals and principles of the Church. We take academic freedom very seriously, and BYU's academic freedom statement protects the individual academic freedom of faculty. The exceptions necessary to preserve our religious mission are carefully drawn. Also, the academic freedom statement has a notice clause that provides,"A faculty member shall not be found in violation of the academic freedom standards unless the faculty member can fairly be considered aware that the expression violates the standards." So the academic freedom statement ensures fair notice to faculty.

We hope and expect that faculty will teach students about the wide range of differing views in the academic disciplines. As President Bateman has said, "The board wants the curriculum to be as wide and deep as decency allows but hopes the teacher sees the world through the eyes of faith."

We are committed to protect both the individual academic freedom of faculty and the university's institutional academic freedom to pursue its religious mission. BYU will remain true to its intellectual and spiritual mission. If we abandoned that mission, there would be no reason for us to exist. The founding charge of BYU, which was given by Brigham Young himself to Karl G. Maeser, was "Brother Maeser, I want you to remember that you ought not to teach even the alphabet or the multiplication tables without the Spirit of God." Under the inspired direction of our board of trustees, we will continue to provide an education that is spiritually strengthening, intellectually enlarging, and character building, and that leads to lifelong learning and service.