Academic Freedom Doesn't Mean Tech Chaos

The principle of academic freedom is a vital one that allows college and university professors to teach controversial subjects and voice unpopular opinions without risk of institutional sanction. It is also a cherished principle that empowers faculty members to pursue knowledge, research, and teaching without undue interference or censorship. However, the concept is often misinterpreted by faculty to extend far beyond its intended scope into the realm of technology choices. Some professors assert that academic freedom gives them the right to reject their college's officially supported learning management system (LMS) and other educational technology tools in favor of using entirely disconnected, unsupported and redundant third-party applications and services.

This pseudo-libertarian stance on institutional technologies often creates chaos and inefficiencies for students, faculty, IT support staff, and administrators alike, often unnoticed by the instructor causing the issues. When professors stray from the college's unified digital ecosystem, students get a fragmented experience bouncing between different tools for each class. Providing IT support across these dispersed technologies is a nightmare, and leaves students seeking help with a rogue software tool out in the cold. I have known of students dropping classes, and experiencing anxiety over losing financial aid because their instructor has implemented an unsupported technology, and can't or won't offer support for it! Also, colleges lose out on economies of scale by being unable to standardize on a core set of integrated platforms.

Academic freedom absolutely allows professors freedom in how they construct curriculum, manage classroom discussions, and express ideas - even controversial ones. But it doesn't give faculty carte blanche to arbitrarily ignore established institutional technologies and processes. After all, professors don't have the "academic freedom" to stop submitting grades or stop holding class sessions on the authorized schedule and location.  

So what can college leaders do to realign faculty behaviors with the true definition of academic freedom? A few key action points:

• Have a clear, unambiguous acceptable use policy that circumscribes academic freedom to matters of curriculum and classroom instruction - not institutional needs and requirements such as adhering to the authorized and supported Learning Management System.
• Ensure the LMS and approved ed tech tools have rich functional versatility so faculty don't feel constrained. The technology itself should support diverse pedagogical approaches and student learning needs.
• Provide initial and ongoing training and support by offering comprehensive training sessions, workshops, and resources to familiarize faculty with supported technologies and demonstrate their potential benefits for teaching and learning. Additionally, establish channels for ongoing technical support and troubleshooting to address faculty concerns and promote confidence in utilizing institutional platforms. College employees who are required to use a given technology to earn their paychecks should also be paid to attend training on those tools. Training doesn't cost, it pays.
• Involve faculty governance bodies in the process of evaluating and selecting core technologies. This will build more buy-in.  
• Highlight costs and risks of ad hoc technology adoptions - security vulnerabilities, missed ops/procurement discounts, support staffing sprawl, etc.
• Engage faculty and student support personnel in the conversations and decisions. They make their living working hands-on with a variety of educational technology tools, and quite often have experiences and insights nobody else on campus has. Also, they are the ones faculty and students will be turning to for troubleshooting and ideas on how to use the technologies effectively and efficiently. This will build even more buy-in.
• Facilitate cross-departmental collaboration. Foster interdisciplinary collaboration and knowledge-sharing among faculty members, support staff, coaches, advisors, student help desk personnel, etc. to explore innovative uses of technology across academic disciplines. Encourage the formation of communities of practice focused on leveraging technology to address shared challenges and enhance the overall quality of teaching and learning experiences.
• Survey students regularly on their technology experience and usage to identify rogue tools. Share this data with IT leadership and faculty as a prompt for change.
• Celebrate and provide high visibility to "model" faculty who are creatively using institutional technologies in innovative ways while respecting policy.

Ultimately, college and university faculty need to understand that a cohesive, standardized technology architecture benefits everyone - including themselves through easier training, support and collaboration. Ad hoc tech fragmentation becomes its own pernicious form of chaos, inhibiting the very academic freedom it purports to protect.

With pragmatic policies, economically smart tech selection processes, faculty and support personnel input mechanisms and consistent leadership communication, colleges can realign the academic freedom principle with its original intent. The credibility, effectiveness, reputation, and sustainability of the institution depends on it.

On LinkedIn