4 - A Review of Academic Freedom in Africa through the Prism of the UNESCO’s 1997 Recommendation
Corresponding Author(s) : Terence Karran
Revue de l’enseignement supérieur en Afrique,
Vol. 14 No 1 (2016): Revue de l’enseignement supérieur en Afrique
Résumé
Une évaluation du niveau de conformité avec la Recommandation de l’UNESCO en Europe, en Australie, aux Etats-Unis et d’autres juridictions indique que les dispositions dudit document ont été plus souvent violées que respectées. L’Afrique étant retournée à une culture démocratique et au raffinement du rôle de l’université à l’ère de la mondialisation, il est temps que ce continent évalue le niveau de conformité avec la Recommandation de l’UNESCO. Cette évaluation est réalisée sur la base de quatre indicateurs identifiés dans la Recommandation de l’UNESCO: l’autonomie institution- nelle, la gouvernance institutionnelle, les droits et libertés individuels, et les droits de propriété. La conclusion est que la liberté académique retrouve sa place dans les universités africaines après sa régression totale au cours de la période ayant suivi les indépendances. Cependant, les réformes univer- sitaires menées à l’ère de la mondialisation dans de nombreuses universités africaines ont entamé le respect de la liberté académique et sapé les acquis en matière de respect des libertés au cours de cette période.
Mots-clés
Télécharger la référence bibliographique
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)BibTeX
- UNESCO is the intergovernmental organization with responsibility for setting standards or norms within education.
- As the Recommendation concerned employment conditions, there was also consultation with the ILO.
- ILO, ‘UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, 1997.
- Text adopted by the 29th Session of the General Conference of UNESCO’ (GB.271/LILS/9, 271st Session, Geneva, March 1998).
- UNESCO,1997, ‘Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel’, in Records of the General Conference, Twenty-ninth Ses- sion, 21 October to 12 November 1997, Volume 1 Resolutions, Paris: UNESCO, Paragraph 74, p. 34.
- See for example: Karran, T.,2007, ‘Academic freedom in Europe: a preliminary comparative analysis’, Higher Education Policy 20 (3): 289–313.
- See for example Gerber, Larry G., 2001, ‘“Inextricably linked”: shared gov- ernance and academic freedom’, Academe 87 (3): 22–24. Also, Latif, M.A., 2014, ‘Academic freedom: problems in conceptualization and research’, Higher Education Research and Development 33 (2): 399–401.
- UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 27.
- UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 18.
- Adopted on 5 October 1966 at a conference held in Paris at the UNESCO head- quarters and organized in close cooperation with the ILO.
- Page, J., 2007, ‘Australian universities and international standards: Australian compliance with the 1997 UNESCO Recommendation Concerning the Status of Higher Education Teaching Personnel’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 29 (1): 95–101.
- UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 17.
- Democratic representation of academic unions in decision-making bodies of the institutions of higher education. UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraphs 31, 32.
- UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraphs 25–30.
- Paragraph 46 of the UNESCO Recommendation states this as ‘Security of
- employment in the profession, including tenure or its functional equivalent’. There are also
- special rights for disabled persons, women and part-time teaching personnel.
- Kenneth Good v. Republic of Botswana Communication 313/05 26 May 2010.
- Lebeau, Y., and Mills, D., 2008, ‘From “crisis” to “transformation”? Shifting orthodoxies of African higher education policy and research’, Learning and Teaching 1 (1): 58–88; Lulat, Y.G.-M., 2003, ‘The Development of Higher Educa- tion in Africa’, in Teferra, D. and Altbach, P.G., eds, African Higher Education: An International Reference Handbook, Bloomington: Indiana University
- Press; and, G. Mohamedbhai, 2008, The Effects of Massification on Higher Education in Africa, Accra: Association for the Development of Education in Africa and Association of African Universities.
- Adopted by delegates from six academic staff associations at the end of the Inaugural Workshop held in April 1990.
- Adopted in Kampala in 1990.
- The Bologna Process in Africa: a case of aspiration, inspiration, or both?’, 25 May 2008. Available athttp://globalhighered.wordpress.com/2008/05/25/the bologna-process-a-case-of-aspiration-and-inspiration-in-africa/
- Revitalising Higher Education in Africa. Report of First Experts’ Meeting, held 27–28 October 2005, Johannesburg. Available at http://www.aau.org/au_experts/ docs/midrand_rep.pdf
- Ghana, South Africa, Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tunisia, Libya, Sudan, South Sudan, Namibia, the Gambia and Zimbabwe.
- Explicit recognition means specific use of the term �academic freedom’ in ad- dition to other rights essential to the full exercise of academic freedom.
- Algeria, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, São Tomé and Príncipe, Gabon and Ethiopia.
- Direct recognition of academic freedom by including constituent elements ofacademic freedom, such as �scientific research’ or �artistic creativity’.
- Indirect recognition.
- The fifth indicator is the reference to academic freedom in the constitutions ofAfrican countries.
- Megan Lindow, 2011, Weaving Success: Voices of Change in African Higher Education, New York: Institute of International Education. Kudzai Mashininga, ‘Private universities set to overtake public institutions’, in University World News 4 March 2012, Issue No. 211. Available at http://www. universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20120302141207184
- N.V. Varghese, ed., 2006, Growth and Expansion of Private Higher Education in Africa, Paris: UNESCO 2006.
- UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 17.
Les références
UNESCO is the intergovernmental organization with responsibility for setting standards or norms within education.
As the Recommendation concerned employment conditions, there was also consultation with the ILO.
ILO, ‘UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, 1997.
Text adopted by the 29th Session of the General Conference of UNESCO’ (GB.271/LILS/9, 271st Session, Geneva, March 1998).
UNESCO,1997, ‘Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel’, in Records of the General Conference, Twenty-ninth Ses- sion, 21 October to 12 November 1997, Volume 1 Resolutions, Paris: UNESCO, Paragraph 74, p. 34.
See for example: Karran, T.,2007, ‘Academic freedom in Europe: a preliminary comparative analysis’, Higher Education Policy 20 (3): 289–313.
See for example Gerber, Larry G., 2001, ‘“Inextricably linked”: shared gov- ernance and academic freedom’, Academe 87 (3): 22–24. Also, Latif, M.A., 2014, ‘Academic freedom: problems in conceptualization and research’, Higher Education Research and Development 33 (2): 399–401.
UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 27.
UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 18.
Adopted on 5 October 1966 at a conference held in Paris at the UNESCO head- quarters and organized in close cooperation with the ILO.
Page, J., 2007, ‘Australian universities and international standards: Australian compliance with the 1997 UNESCO Recommendation Concerning the Status of Higher Education Teaching Personnel’, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 29 (1): 95–101.
UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 17.
Democratic representation of academic unions in decision-making bodies of the institutions of higher education. UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraphs 31, 32.
UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraphs 25–30.
Paragraph 46 of the UNESCO Recommendation states this as ‘Security of
employment in the profession, including tenure or its functional equivalent’. There are also
special rights for disabled persons, women and part-time teaching personnel.
Kenneth Good v. Republic of Botswana Communication 313/05 26 May 2010.
Lebeau, Y., and Mills, D., 2008, ‘From “crisis” to “transformation”? Shifting orthodoxies of African higher education policy and research’, Learning and Teaching 1 (1): 58–88; Lulat, Y.G.-M., 2003, ‘The Development of Higher Educa- tion in Africa’, in Teferra, D. and Altbach, P.G., eds, African Higher Education: An International Reference Handbook, Bloomington: Indiana University
Press; and, G. Mohamedbhai, 2008, The Effects of Massification on Higher Education in Africa, Accra: Association for the Development of Education in Africa and Association of African Universities.
Adopted by delegates from six academic staff associations at the end of the Inaugural Workshop held in April 1990.
Adopted in Kampala in 1990.
The Bologna Process in Africa: a case of aspiration, inspiration, or both?’, 25 May 2008. Available athttp://globalhighered.wordpress.com/2008/05/25/the bologna-process-a-case-of-aspiration-and-inspiration-in-africa/
Revitalising Higher Education in Africa. Report of First Experts’ Meeting, held 27–28 October 2005, Johannesburg. Available at http://www.aau.org/au_experts/ docs/midrand_rep.pdf
Ghana, South Africa, Uganda, Kenya, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tunisia, Libya, Sudan, South Sudan, Namibia, the Gambia and Zimbabwe.
Explicit recognition means specific use of the term �academic freedom’ in ad- dition to other rights essential to the full exercise of academic freedom.
Algeria, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Cape Verde, São Tomé and Príncipe, Gabon and Ethiopia.
Direct recognition of academic freedom by including constituent elements ofacademic freedom, such as �scientific research’ or �artistic creativity’.
Indirect recognition.
The fifth indicator is the reference to academic freedom in the constitutions ofAfrican countries.
Megan Lindow, 2011, Weaving Success: Voices of Change in African Higher Education, New York: Institute of International Education. Kudzai Mashininga, ‘Private universities set to overtake public institutions’, in University World News 4 March 2012, Issue No. 211. Available at http://www. universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20120302141207184
N.V. Varghese, ed., 2006, Growth and Expansion of Private Higher Education in Africa, Paris: UNESCO 2006.
UNESCO Recommendation, Paragraph 17.