An Update from the Provost's Advisory Committee on Academic Freedom
Dear Colleagues,
As part of ongoing efforts in the Office of the Provost to strengthen academic freedom, open inquiry, and confidence in our institutional processes, last fall I convened the Provost’s Advisory Committee on Academic Freedom (PACAF) to listen to faculty across the University and to develop practical recommendations in support of these fundamental values.
Over the past few months, the committee has engaged faculty from across schools and disciplines to gather input and ideas. This has included conversations with the University Senate’s Faculty Affairs, Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee, the Columbia chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and the Columbia Academic Freedom Council, as well as leadership from the Center for Teaching and Learning, the Office of Institutional Equity, and University Life. Committee members have also brought questions and suggestions from their colleagues, and members of the community have shared input directly through the PACAF email account. We are tremendously grateful to the committee for their time and care in this work, and to everyone who has shared their perspectives.
Across these conversations, the most frequent comment was a need to restore a culture of trust not only within classrooms and labs but throughout the campus. To that end, the committee has submitted an initial set of unanimous recommendations to the Office of the Provost. The recommendations identify areas where near-term actions may be possible, while recognizing that many issues require further review, consultation, and careful implementation.
Below, I outline the three broad areas addressed in the committee’s preliminary recommendations and describe what to expect next.
1. Fostering a Culture of Open Inquiry
The committee heard consistent concern that students and instructors may hesitate to engage fully with challenging or controversial material. In response, PACAF has recommended measures that could help foster norms of open inquiry in instructional settings, including emphasizing our foundational commitment to intellectual debate in pre-matriculation communications, during and around orientations, and through the Community Citizenship Initiative for new students. These educational opportunities can also highlight the University’s recently adopted policy on institutional voice and, where feasible, be paired with faculty-led conversations on controversial topics to model rigorous, respectful discourse.
As you prepare for the semester, you may wish to consider including illustrative syllabus language, adapted by the committee from widely recognized AAUP principles, to help frame expectations around academic freedom and potentially challenging conversations in your classroom or lab. An example the committee has shared appears below.
“Knowledge flourishes when inquiry is free and respectful. Consistent with University and department policies, the instructor has the authority to set the class syllabus, which may include controversial material relevant to topics being studied. While all participants and their views will be treated respectfully, no one should expect to be shielded from challenging or even upsetting ideas, as thoughtfully engaging such ideas is crucial to free inquiry and intellectual growth.”
The committee has also expressed support for the development of Chatham House Rule–style classroom norms regarding attribution. In the meantime, you may wish to explore introducing this approach on an optional basis this semester, and I would welcome any feedback on your experience at the end of the term.
2. Office of Institutional Equity (OIE) Procedures
PACAF heard repeated concerns about the number of reports submitted to OIE and the processes and consequences for faculty respondents. Their discussions also revealed widespread misconceptions about the University’s anti-discrimination and discriminatory harassment policies and procedures. As the most recent OIE Annual Report shows, 81 percent of Faculty and Staff Anti-Discrimination and Discriminatory Harassment reports in the 2024–2025 academic year were administratively closed, without a formal investigation or findings. The committee has been looking closely at how to help ensure that OIE can perform its vital work in ways that support open and confident engagement in teaching and scholarship.
Against that backdrop, the committee has recommended that the University review and refine certain existing OIE procedures to improve clarity, transparency, and consistency, particularly where academic activity is concerned. Areas identified for review include who should be mandatory reporters, good-faith reporting expectations, timelines and notification processes, improved communication to help steer those who wish to report a concern to the most appropriate resources and channels, and enhanced FAQs and examples. The Provost’s Office, through OIE and in consultation with the Office of the General Counsel, is already working to review these recommendations and will consider and implement changes as appropriate throughout the spring semester. At the same time, if OIE matters arise where additional academic context would be helpful in reviewing an issue, the Provost may always consult with individual faculty members or convene a faculty advisory group with the appropriate expertise to help inform that work.
3. Protections for Officers of Instruction, Research, and the Libraries
Finally, PACAF heard from many faculty a desire for greater assurance that the University will support them in the event that they face outside legal or other adverse actions arising from activities undertaken within the scope of their academic roles. While the University has long indemnified faculty in these situations, the committee has recommended reforms to strengthen and clarify the University’s indemnification policy for officers of instruction, research, and the libraries. To that end, the University has updated and posted its indemnification policy, to make clear the scope of these protections and how they apply to duties conducted in the course of University employment.
PACAF will continue its work this spring, helping to surface additional questions and concerns, make additional recommendations to the Provost, and engage with faculty to support constructive dialogue across the University. Further updates will follow as this work progresses.
Through centuries of lively debate, disagreement, and productive discourse, our commitment to free inquiry has remained the cornerstone of our community and an indispensable precondition for our academic mission. PACAF has exemplified these values in its own work already. The caliber and colleagueship of Columbia’s extraordinary faculty give me tremendous optimism about our future as we begin the new semester together. I wish you all a semester filled with meaningful learning, teaching, and scholarly achievements.
Sincerely,
Angela V. Olinto
Provost
Rutherfurd Professor of Astronomy and Professor of Physics