Disagreements between university staff on academic or political matters are “too often being improperly channelled” into employment and governance processes, according to researchers at The Open University (OU), who have called for a clearer understanding of the boundary between lawful disagreement and unprofessional conduct.
A paper by OU academics Sara Haslam and Dan Taylor sets out how university staff can better work “with disagreement”.
The document, which stemmed from a working group set up by the university in the wake of the controversial Jo Phoenix case but does not reflect an institutional position, draws on facilitated discussions with OU academics about disagreement over political and academic matters.
Despite free speech laws being in place, it identifies “persistent uncertainty about the professional boundaries around academic freedom and disagreement and their intersection with legislation or policy designed to protect individuals”.
Taylor, a senior lecturer in social and political thought, told Times Higher Education that “academic colleagues across the board, not just here but everywhere, are finding it increasingly difficult to work out and navigate what the bounds of disagreement are, particularly when it comes down to issues around politics and values”.
