February, 2006

Baptist University's Threat to Fire Academics Worrying Concern Group for Academic Freedom

Choi Po-king

(The author is an associate professor in the Dept. of Educational Administration and Policy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.)

In May 2005, the personnel department of Baptist University issued a letter to all academic staff inviting them to accept a new employment contract with a performance-based pay and reward structure. By December, six professors who had not agreed to accept the new contract were warned that their employment would be terminated if they did not do so before Jan. 7, 2006, thereafter being reemployed as new members of staff and on much less favourable terms. The six professors did not acquiesce, and a Committee for Termination of Employment was set up to decide their fate. The university subsequently yielded to pressure from students and alumni and announced on Jan. 23 that procedures to terminate employment would be deferred for the time being. However, the contract terms of the six professors have still not been decided. We are deeply concerned about this incident, not only because the threat of terminating their employment without any justification constitutes a serious breach of contract, but also because the university administration's actions thus far have greatly undermined academic freedom and, indeed, university education itself.

Academic Freedom Needs to Be Upheld

Ever since the mid-1990s, market ideologies and positivistic managerial cultures have pervaded academia in Hong Kong. In the area of staff employment, the traditional tenure system has gradually been replaced by contracts. While enhancing the flexibility of deploying human resources—the administration's main argument—the resulting system enables power to become much more centralised in the hands of a only few people. Universities, therefore, are becoming more like business enterprises running on a centralised command structure rather than academic communities working on the principle of collegial participation. The tenure system used to enable academics who have proven their capabilities via a rigorous probation procedure to concentrate on teaching and research in a stable and secure environment. This practice is backed by an important tenet, namely, that academics are to be allowed to teach, research and publish freely without fear of reprisal from a non-agreeable public or pressure from their employers. Ultimately, this benefits society because with an academic community that can work without fear or pressure self-reflection and striving for collective betterment become possible.

Low Trust in Academia Leads to Truncated Growth

The centralisation of power in academia drives a wedge between the administration and frontline knowledge workers. With an overconcentration of power in the former, important policies become ineffective, or even destructive, due to a lack of consultation. Meanwhile, professors who are not part of the administrative core are afflicted by a debilitating sense of alienation. The autocratic, centralised mode of control we now see emerging has generated a low-trust working environment, which, in the long run, will only be detrimental to quality research and teaching. The actions of the administration at Baptist University have, as is apparent, dealt a great blow to the trust that we think ought to prevail in academia and have led, unfortunately, to an even deeper sense of alienation.

The major worry in the prevailing climate of little trust in academia lies in its adverse impact on the cultivation of young scholars. While seasoned professors feel uncomfortable working in an environment lacking in trust and stability, younger scholars lose the opportunity for growth and nurture altogether. In the long term, we will suffer in academia from arrested development as we fail to nurture young scholars devoted to research and teaching. Failure to provide stable, fertile soil for the cultivation of a new generation of local scholars will result in a continued reliance on migrant scholars, sojourners with but a limited commitment to our society. Any academic research that is largely indifferent to its host society and culture is doomed to be superficial, a pale and colourless imitation of academic activities elsewhere. If we continue down this path, universities in Hong Kong will remain forever in an academic backwater, the academic Third World, so to speak.

We have deep concerns for academic development in Hong Kong, and we are adamant that social justice should prevail, not least in the universities. We therefore welcome Baptist University's decision to rescind the contract termination of the six professors. We trust that they will likewise reinstate the existing contracts and conditions of employment.

We would also like to take this opportunity to request that the administrative bodies of all local universities, as well as the University Grants Committee, address the undermining of academic freedom afflicting our universities today and explore ways to enhance the level of trust within Hong Kong's academic community. If not, in the end, society will be the loser.