���ϲ�����

���ϲ����� today announced that the working group charged with drafting and delivering the “���ϲ����� Statement” has completed its work. Following four months of engagement, which included nine forums and an all-campus survey, the working group has unanimously endorsed, signed and delivered the “”—an aspirational document that defines free expression and free inquiry at ���ϲ�����.

At the request of Chancellor Kent Syverud, the working group spent the better part of the Spring 2024 semester engaging the campus community on how they have experienced free expression and academic freedom, and how they would like ���ϲ����� to approach these important principles moving forward.

“I am grateful to the working group members and the many students, faculty, staff and alumni, whose input directly informed the creation of the ‘���ϲ����� Statement,’” says Chancellor Syverud. “���ϲ����� has a long history of engaging constructively on complex and provocative issues. The ‘���ϲ����� Statement’ reinforces our steadfast commitment to the principles of free expression and free inquiry to ensure free speech and academic freedom flourish.”

The working group, consisting of University leaders, faculty, staff, students and alumni, was co-chaired by Gretchen Ritter, vice chancellor, provost and chief academic officer, and Allen Groves, senior vice president and chief student experience officer. The other members of the working group included the following:

• Martín Abreu Zavaleta, assistant professor, philosophy, College of Arts and Sciences
• Mary Grace A. Almandrez, vice president for diversity and inclusion
• Steve Ballentine ’83, alumnus and University trustee
• Nina Brown, associate professor, public communications, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications
• Sean Drake, assistant professor, sociology, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs
• Lauryn Gouldin, Crandall Melvin Professor of Law, and director, ���ϲ����� Civics Initiative, College of Law
• Thomas Keck, professor and Michael O. Sawyer Chair of Constitutional Law and Politics, Maxwell School
• Daniel Kimmel, president and chief executive officer, Graduate Student Organization
• Nathanael Linton L’24, law student representative, Board of Trustees
• Gisele Marcus ’89, alumna and University trustee
• Behzad Mortazavi, dean and professor, College of Arts and Sciences
• William Treloar ’24, president, Student Association

“This has been an enormously beneficial experience—not just for the members of the working group, but for everyone who thoughtfully contributed to this process,” says Ritter. “The ‘���ϲ����� Statement’ emphasizes how central free expression and academic freedom are in the mission of our University, but also calls on every member of our community to contribute productively to the advancement of this mission. For free expression and academic freedom to truly be honored at ���ϲ�����, every single member of our community has a role to play.”

Groves adds, “The ‘���ϲ����� Statement’ is not a statement of policy, but rather an aspirational goal that summarizes what we believe our community values and what we hope to engender and achieve as a community when faced with difficult, complex and even divisive issues. I believe this aspiration is achievable based on the tremendous community participation, engagement and support our working group experienced over the last several months. This was a collaborative and Universitywide effort that resulted in a document created by our community for our community.”

As part of the engagement process, the working group sought the input of multiple constituencies, including undergraduate, graduate and law students; faculty; staff; and alumni.  This feedback was reviewed and carefully considered in creating the final draft. The “���ϲ����� Statement,” among other things, emphasizes the following ideals:

• a commitment to free expression and free inquiry;
• free expression and academic freedom as essential to the mission of the University in equal measure;
• open deliberation that allows individuals to test and assess often conflicting ideas every day, sorting good ideas from bad through research, expression and inquiry;
• expression intended to incite violence or harass an individual based upon a protected characteristic, or which otherwise violates the law, may be restricted;
• faculty have a responsibility to encourage their students to test ideas and express viewpoints relevant to course topics, even where they differ from those of the faculty;
• faculty members have a right to speak publicly on matters within their scholarly expertise and on questions of institutional governance; and
• a faculty member’s right to pursue scholarly work without intimidation should be defended.

In addition, except under the most extraordinary circumstances and with the sole purpose of protecting its mission of discovery, improvement and dissemination of knowledge, the University does not make institutional statements or pronouncements on current controversies. Instead, the University will employ a commitment to institutional neutrality to prevent the University from committing to positions that go beyond the stated academic mission or its protection.

To read the full “���ϲ����� Statement,” .