Some professors concerned about academic freedom under Kansas Board of Regents social media policy

Education is increasingly online, but some professors may be taking a step back to avoid discipline under the Kansas Board of Regents social media policy.

The policy was created after David Guth, a University journalism professor, posted an anti-NRA tweet in 2013. The policy, however, has students, staff and faculty worriedabout a professor's ability to teach.

Professor Ron Barrett-Gonzalez, an aerospace engineering professor at the University, decided to observe students in Spahr Library last semester to study their methods of learning. Barrett-Gonzalez found that students increasingly rely on technology for their school work. Out of the 127 students he observed, he found all but two students using an electronic device to study.

“That is how this generation learns,” Barrett-Gonzalez said.

Because technology in education is increasingly prevalent, Barrett-Gonzalez said he was concerned that the implementation of the KBOR social media policy may hinder the way students learn.

The chief executive of a Regents university has the ability to discipline or fire a faculty member in violation of the policy at his or her discretion.

The policy stirred discussion and debate when it was approved in May 2014. Advocates for free speech have cited violations of first amendment rights, and the case made national news.

Barrett-Gonzalez said some faculty members had to curtail their teaching styles and have begun using printed paper in the classroom rather than electronic forms.

J.C.D. Clark, a professor in the history department, no longer uses any form of social media, including email, as a result of the policy.

“Although the policy printed by the Kansas Board of Regents seems to exempt emails, the rest of the policy reads as if that exemption has not been made,” Clark said.

Clark said he was afraid the policy could be detrimental to students’ learning.

“Social media, email and online communication are essential to scholarship and anything that makes that a matter of apprehensions can’t be in the best interest of students,” Clark said.

Barrett-Gonzalez said he thinks this policy may interfere with the way he teaches his students.

“If those mechanism are impeded, it’s a direct impediment of our first amendment freedom of speech,” he said. “If my ability to communicate with my students is being impeded, that’s not okay. How am I supposed to teach them?”

Professor Richard Levy, a professor in the School of Law, said he thinks that, although the policy was developed to protect academic freedom, there are larger issues at its core.

“If you take a step back and look at the big picture, the status of universities as centers where people are free to think and speak as they want may be seen as being eroded in multiple ways,” Levy said. “The principle of academic freedom is one that has to be better understood and protected.”

Levy said the wording of the policy presents the idea that faculty members have rights but also have responsibilities in the way they present them.

“We live in a different world of virtual reality and cyberspace communities in which instantly what you say becomes almost a matter of permanent record,” Levy said. “I think faculty members are called upon to be increasingly sensitive in the way they teach and the impact their way of teaching may have on particularly disaffected groups or individuals.”

Clark, an international professor from England who has taught at Oxford and Cambridge and visiting professor at Chicago University, said he’s never seen a policy like this at a university.

“It is a matter of some alarm because now Kansas is an outlier to the rest of universities in the country and internationally,” Clark said.

Levy said he believes the University still has the ability to attract new faculty and students, especially through programming and research dollars. He said he does not think this policy will push applicants away. Things like the provost's office allowing funding to be directed to support research and teaching activities are benefits he said makes the University attractive to potential new faculty members.

“There are a lot of things about KU that I think still remain very attractive and that people are still excited about, notwithstanding support for higher education and academic freedom within the state,” Levy said. “It’s not that we’re not able to attract anyone, but people who are hot commodities, who have other places they could go, would likely factor these policies into their decision.”

— Edited by Vicky Diaz-Camacho