A new study examines the barriers academics face and how their experiences and demographics influence their views.
Aidana Torebekova
Photo by Uladzislau Petrushkevich on Unsplash
Higher education makes significant contributions to the intellectual, social, and economic development of individuals and nations. Understanding the elements that influence faculty perceptions of academic freedom is critical, as their perspectives have a direct impact on the quality of higher education in Kazakhstan.
My study focuses on such important issues as how faculty at Kazakhstani institutions see academic freedom, the obstacles they encounter, and how their disciplinary backgrounds—as well as demographic factors such as age, gender, and experience—shape their perspectives.
Knowledge Present, Action Absent
A significant percentage of participants reported being familiar with the concept of academic freedom and their university’s guidelines on the topic. However, faculty members are generally hesitant to influence institutional procedures and guidelines.
The data reveal that faculty members have been rather inactive in initiating or advocating for changes to academic freedom-related regulations and procedures at their universities. Even with assistance from university administrations and deans, there is significant hesitation to force change, highlighting the delicate interplay between awareness and practical application of academic freedom.
Why are faculty members passive?
This passivity could be due to a variety of circumstances:
- fear of professional sanctions
- a lack of time or financial resources
- a belief that their efforts will not result in substantial change.
University instructors frequently feel hesitant while discussing contentious topics, a reality that poses a substantial threat to academic freedom.
Faculty play an important role in stimulating discussions about difficult topics such as politics, human sexuality, and religion. These are required for dynamic and meaningful discourse.
However, the fear of persecution frequently causes instructors to avoid these topics entirely. Furthermore, a lack of collective mechanisms—such as faculty unions or committees dedicated to academic freedom—may impede individual efforts to address these challenges.
This may also contribute to Kazakhstani faculty members’ dissatisfaction with the current academic freedom regulations.
Barriers in the Pursuit of Academic Freedom
There are several barriers to academic freedom. The research shows that these barriers can hinder knowledge acquisition, threaten academic freedom, and cause tensions between traditional beliefs and modern innovations.
My findings imply that a deeper comprehension of academic freedom’s actual implementation within institutional frameworks comes from a greater understanding of the concept. Faculty members’ sense of how the concept integrates with administrative rules and procedures generally improves as they become more familiar with it.
From this it can be inferred that improving faculty members’ knowledge may play a significant role in closing the gap between ideals of academic freedom and institutional regulations, creating a more encouraging environment for research and teaching.
- Notably, faculty members expressed greater satisfaction when their handbooks contained comprehensive explanations of regulations pertaining to academic freedom and their guiding concepts.
- Conversely, a lack of these rules resulted in greater dissatisfaction.
This underscores how crucial it is that academic freedom regulations be spelled out in detail in faculty handbooks and other documents at Kazakhstani universities. Institutions can create a more encouraging academic atmosphere that encourages open intellectual interaction and creativity by ensuring that faculty members are informed of their rights and protections.
Freedom through the Prism of Social Sciences and Engineering
The study reveals significant disparities in perceptions of academic freedom between departments, with Social Sciences faculty feeling more satisfied than those in Engineering.
This distinction most likely stems from the nature of their work. The social sciences tend to encourage questioning norms, exploring diverse ideas, and fostering open debates, making academic freedom key to their mission. By contrast, engineering focuses on addressing practical problems and collaborating closely with companies, with the result that academic freedom may be sacrificed on the altar of real-world needs. These findings suggest that disciplinary priorities not only shape faculty perspectives, but also influence how academic freedom is embedded within institutional practices. Closing this gap may pave the way for a better understanding of academic freedom in a variety of academic contexts.
Gender Dynamics in Academic Freedom
Unfortunately, the topic of gender differences in academic freedom within Kazakhstani universities remains underexplored, leaving gaps in understanding and contributing to the assumption of limited variation in perspectives.
The survey found hardly any differences along gender lines in terms of Kazakhstani university faculty members’ satisfaction with and awareness of academic freedom.
Interestingly, research conducted in other countries offers contrasting insights, suggesting that gender may play a more nuanced role in shaping views on academic freedom than initially observed in this context.
The lack of significant gender differences in perceptions of academic freedom among Kazakhstani teachers may be explained in part by the high proportion of women in the teaching profession, as well as male faculty’s considerably lower survey participation rates.
However, it is essential to keep in mind that women’s representation declines at higher academic levels, with few obtaining senior or leadership positions in higher education. This gap reflects the larger issue of gender inequality, which may indirectly impact how academic freedom is expressed and experienced.
Freedom and Professional Experience
The study finds intriguing variation in faculty perceptions of academic freedom depending on their professional experience.
Those with 6–10 years of experience exhibited lower awareness than their peers with 11–20 years of experience.
- This gap may reflect the challenges faced by early-to-mid-career faculty, who are still navigating their roles and establishing their professional identities.
- More seasoned faculty, having spent years engaging with institutional policies and the broader academic landscape, likely develop a deeper appreciation for the significance of academic freedom in fostering intellectual exploration and protecting their autonomy.
- Curiously, academics with more than 20 years of experience similarly express being undersupported by university policies and have a poorer understanding of academic freedom. The Soviet-era mindset, with its emphasis on conformity and centralized control, still influences the higher education system, creating barriers to open inquiry and institutional reform. For senior faculty who built their careers during this period, these cultural and structural constraints may shape their perceptions and limit their active participation in fostering academic freedom.
* * *
In conclusion, Kazakhstan’s academic freedom journey illustrates the mounting challenges facing a young country that has been navigating swift changes and constant reforms.
Like a plane being built mid-flight, to borrow one professor’s apt analogy, the country’s higher education system is striving to find balance in the face of competing priorities, historical legacies, and diverse perspectives.
For Kazakhstan to truly embrace academic freedom, it must address these multifaceted challenges head-on. Clear policies, greater faculty support, and a commitment to fostering an environment where all voices can be heard are essential steps forward.
0 Comments