The American Association of University Professors and The Oberlin Review are co-sponsoring a teach-in about academic freedom on Thursday, April 9, at 4:30 p.m. in Dye Lecture Hall. The event will bring together members of the Oberlin community to discuss growing concerns about threats to teaching, research, and free expression on college campuses. Speakers will include the Editors-in-Chief of the Review and College faculty. 

Academic freedom has historically been defined by the American Association of University Professors as the right of faculty to teach, research, and publish without fear of institutional punishment, as well as to speak as citizens on public issues. Academic freedom also extends to students, protecting their ability to engage with controversial or unpopular topics in their academic work. These boundaries are set by disciplinary standards and peer communities, rather than administrators or political actors.

Professor of Hispanic Studies  Sebastiaan Faber who helped organize the teach-in, said conversations about academic freedom at Oberlin began in the fall. The format of the event was inspired by previous teach-ins, such as those focused on Venezuela and the Day of Remembrance memorializing Japanese internment, which created space for collective discussion and learning.

“In response to events nationwide and in Ohio (SB1), we started having discussions about academic freedom on campus in the fall; working toward a better definition of academic freedom for faculty, staff, and students; and putting in place better protocols to adjudicate academic freedom disputes,” Faber wrote in an email to the Review.

Faber tied the urgency of the event to recent legislative and political developments across the country. According to a 2026 article by Inside Higher Ed, 32 states introduced a total of 93 bills in 2025 that censor higher education, including Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, Ohio, and Texas. State legislation such as Ohio’s Senate Bill 1 have been accused of threatening academic freedom by targeting DEI initiatives, curriculum, and tenure protections, based on a 2025 study published by Cambridge University Press.

“The current federal government and many current state governments don’t seem to understand or appreciate the importance of academic freedom,” Faber wrote. 

Despite these concerns, Faber suggested that the current moment could ultimately lead to greater clarity and stronger protections. He expressed hope that increased attention to these issues will reinforce the importance of academic freedom and related democratic principles.

Claire Solomon, professor of Hispanic Studies and Comparative Literature, OC ’98, who is also on the Executive Committee of Oberlin’s branch of the AAUP, pointed to the broader political climate as shaping how academic freedom is experienced on campus, particularly through what she described as a growing sense of fear.

“I think about fear of violence,” she said. “People are afraid of being kidnapped. … People are afraid of being detained. … People are afraid. And so I just feel like I need to say that first as the kind of container we’re all living in.”

She noted that this climate can make it more difficult for both faculty and students to feel comfortable expressing ideas, especially for those without job security. While tenured faculty may have some protections, others, particularly those on short-term or at-will contracts, may face greater risks when speaking or publishing work that could be seen as controversial. These pressures, she said, can also shape classroom dynamics, affecting how freely students participate and engage.

Solomon also pointed to structural and financial pressures shaping academic freedom beyond the classroom, describing what she sees as the growing “financialization” of higher education. As universities become more influenced by corporate and financial priorities, she noted that decisions about funding, partnerships, and programming can shape what kinds of research and teaching are supported. In the current political climate, these pressures may incentivize institutions to align with federal priorities or avoid controversy, further constraining academic work.

Solomon also emphasized that academic freedom is closely tied to broader questions of equity and justice, noting that its impact is not experienced equally by all students. Students may experience academic freedom differently depending on their level of security and privilege, she noted, with those facing greater risks often feeling less able to speak freely. 

“I would like students … to care about academic freedom if they care about equity, if they care about justice, … if they care about trying to repair our increasingly broken society,” she said.

Due to the current climate, both Solomon and Faber feel that it is important that students appreciate the topic. 

“Especially at this time, it is important that Oberlin students understand academic freedom, including their own rights within its framework, so they can defend their and their teachers’ rights collectively,” Faber wrote.