The UNC System Board of Governors wasted little time on Thursday in approving a definition for academic freedom that has been a year in the making. The policy protects the rights of all faculty to engage in teaching, research and scholarly inquiry without undue influence. But it also spells out that academic freedom is not absolute.

The extensive definition states that faculty must ensure their activities support the university’s mission and meet accreditation standards. While researching controversial concepts may be protected, the new policy states that academic freedom does not extend to teaching content that “lacks pedagogical connection to the course.”

The North Carolina State Conference of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) argues that the parameters included in the definition weaken the historical scope of academic freedom. Others worry that the language is too vague and could be “weaponized” to retaliate against instructors.

Despite concerns voiced by many faculty members, Wade Maki, who leads the system’s faculty assembly and represents them before the Board of Governors, supported the proposal, a decision that’s drawn criticism.

On Thursday, Maki addressed his critics at the UNC Board of Governors’ meeting by invoking Machiavelli, saying it’s more effective to work for change from inside the system than to stand in its way or insist on an ideal that won’t work in reality.

Maki, a UNC-Greensboro philosophy professor who’s led the Faculty Assembly for four years, said faculty members are often tempted to come in and tell the system staff, UNC’s Board of Governors, and its chancellors how things ought to be done, but said that would have been a strategic mistake.

“While some faculty might prefer to have a fight than win one, I believe we have shown how to get a win without a fight,” said Maki.

Maki acknowledged while there was faculty consensus last October on a definition for academic freedom, that consensus fell by the wayside with non-faculty additions made at the end of last year describing what academic freedom is not. Still, Maki said, it’s better to be on board as the system moves ahead with the definition.

“As a practical matter, I’ve found it best to get on the train, as it is easier to jump off later than to try to catch up or stop it after it leaves,” said Maki.

UNC System President Peter Hans said that defining academic freedom rather than referring to a vague concept will help guide North Carolina’s universities moving forward.

“This expanded definition grew out of a conversation more than a year ago between this office and the elected faculty assembly, reflecting on the fact that academic freedom is frequently invoked in abstract ways during moments of controversy, but rarely understood as the day-to-day bedrock,” said Hans.

Hans told the Board of Governors that by strengthening the UNC system code to include more details about the purpose and the parameters of academic freedom, the UNC system hopes to make it easier for everyone to appreciate “the privileges and the obligations that come with serving our public universities.”

Leading up to the passage, some faculty worried adding the new parameters to the UNC System Code could chill speech on campus. AAUP members said it was “part of a broader effort to limit open inquiry and debate in higher education.”

But Hans emphasized that the definition expressly protects the exploration of controversial or unpopular ideas.

For his part, Maki believes the new definition will be a model for other states to follow.

“As is often the case, a lot will depend upon the implementation,” said Maki.

This story was originally produced by NC Newsline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Nebraska Examiner, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Read the original article: https://ncnewsline.com/2026/02/26/faculty-leader-addresses-critics-as-unc-system-defines-academic-freedom/