1. WP3 : Academic freedom and the changing conditions of academic work: legal and conceptual aspects

2. (1) Main concepts and issues that the texts define or contest Hunt (2010) Definitions academic freedom related to the ”freedom from retaliation for their statements that goes beyond the freedom accorded to other members of society” – ”By tradition and often by legally binding contractual arrangements ” – = Bargain with society Double standard which is used by society Observations Articles (both Hunt and Karran) are not written with the idea of defining the concepts Hunt does not discuss or question the conceptualization/concept of academic freedom but takes it for granted Hunt does not give evidence for some of its claims (versus: to be responsible you have to give evidence)

3. (1) Main concepts and issues that the texts define or contest Karran (2007) Parameters for measuring academic freedom constitutional protections for freedom of speech, academic freedom, freedom of training and research, institutional autonomy specific national legislation relating to academic freedom, freedom of training and research, institutional autonomy institutional autonomy and internal governance of the university (self- governance) Method of appointment of the university rector Existence of academic tenure  levels of protection: low, medium, high

4. (1) Main concepts and issues that the texts define or contest Karran (2007) Definitions Autonomy: UNESCO defintion : ”Autonomy is that degree of self- governance necessary for effective decision making by institutions of higher education regarding their academic work, standards, management and related activities... and respect for academic freedom and human rights.” + “institutional form of academic freedom” Procedural + substantive autonomy (Berdahl (1990))

5. (1) Main concepts and issues that the texts define or contest Karran (2007) Observations The concept of academic freedom is not defined in itself  concepts of autonomy, institutional autonomy, freedom of teaching and research, freedom of speech are all used This is a discussion of the existing legislation (legal perspective), not of the existing practice(s) Analysis is very quickly outdated (rapidly changing legal context)

6. (2) Theoretical and political position? Why? Hunt (2010)  2 aspects to evaluating a speech: – Worrying about the truth of what is said (scientists) – Worrying about the implications of saying it (other parts) Karran (2007) from the legal perspective Epistemologically: – He is aware of the limitations of his research – Does not make claims on the presence or practices of these laws in everyday life – This research = opening for further studies

7. (3) in your own research? in your theoretical or empirical work? Not directly, but indirectly