Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Academic Freedom
Academic Freedom
Education
ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Academic Freedom:
(1)
(2)
[3. Student .
ACADEMIC FREEDOM OF
It includes:
The right to decideINSITUTION
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hence, you cannot complain to court when you the school expelled a
person or suspend in accordance with its rules LAYING DOWN
GRADING SYSTEM ADMISION..
Cases:
UP v. CSC: Commission ordered that a teacher be dropped?
FACTS: A TEACHER TOOK A LEAVE MORE THAN ONE YEAR.. UNDER THE CSC RULES, YOU CAN BE THROWN
OUT IF LEAVE TAKEN IS MORE THAN 1 YEAR.. CSC ORDERED HIM TO BE DROPPED HELD: CSC CANNOT
COMPELL UP TO DROP HIM AS THE LATTER HAS ACADEMIC FREEDOM AS TO WHO SHOULD TEACH.. RIGHT
OF CHOICE WHO SHOULD TEACH CHOICE OF FACULTY
FACTS: A
TEACHER DID NOT REQUIRE STUDENTS TO ATTEND CLASSESS BUT HE GAVE THEM GOOD AND PASSING
GRADES IT WAS IMPUGNED: HELD: IT INVOLVES ACADEMIC FREEDOM ON THE MANNER OR METHOD OF
TEACHING
TO TEACHERS ( WHICH WAS
DISALLOWED BY COA- HELD: ACADEMIC FREEDOM HAS NO RELATION RICE ALLOWANCES) NOT COVERED
NO! THE
SCHOOL HAS THE RIGHT OF CHOICE OF STUDENTS- RIGHT AS TO WHOM TO TEACH- AS LONG THE
STANDARDS ARE REASONABLE
GRADUATE PROVIDED THAT THE STUDENT COMPLIES ITS STANDARDS. UNLESS YOU FAIL..
RIGHT TO Decide the aims and objectives of the institution and how best to attain them without interference
and coercion, except when there is an overriding public concern: THESE ARE THE FOLLOWING:
1.
Due process(EX. IF YOU ARE DISMISSED FROM THE SCHOOL FOR BREACH OF SCHOOL RULES WITHOUT
APPROPRIATE INVESTIGATION OR NO NOTICE AND HEARING) REFER TO ANG TIBAY DOCTRINE
2.
Equal protection
(2)
For the Professor (FACULTY) The right of a faculty member to pursue his studies and publish the results without fear of
retribution or penalties (IN PURSUIT OF TRUTH OR IDEA.. NO NEED TO FEAR)For the Institution The right to Decide the aims and objectives of the institution and how best to attain them without
interference and coercion, except when theRe is an overriding public concern (NOT ABSOLUTE.: ALSO HIGH SCHOOL AND
ELEMENTARY ARE NOT INCLUDED: HOW, WHO. WHAT, WHOM TO TEACH
Religious Instructions-
2009, No. 15. The principal of Jaena High School, a public school
wrote a letter to the parents and guardians of all the school's
pupils, informing them that the school was willing to provide
religious instruction to its Catholic students during class
hours, through a Catholic priest. However, students who
wished to avail of such religious instruction needed to secure
the consent of their parents and guardians in writing.
1. Does the offer violate the constitutional prohibition against the
establishment of religion? (3%) NO! FOR AS LONG AS
ADDITIONAL COST IS PAID BY THE GOVERNMENT.. EXPRESSED
IN WRITING BY PARENTS BACK PAGE ANSWER
2. The parents of evangelical Christian students, upon learning of
the offer, demanded that they too be entitled to have their
children instructed in their own religious faith during class
hours. The principal, a devout Catholic, rejected the request.
As counsel for the parents of the evangelical students, how
would you argue in support of their position? (3%) IT MUST BE
ARGUED ON EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE.. IT MUST BE OPEN
TO ALL RELIGION
2010, XIX
To instill religious awareness in the students of Doa Trinidad
High School, a public school in Bulacan, the Parent- Teachers
Association of the school contributed funds for the
construction of a grotto and a chapel where ecumenical
religious services and seminars are being held after school
hours. The use of the school grounds for these purposes was
questioned by a parent who does not belong to any religious
group. As his complaint was not addressed by the school
officials, he filed an administrative complaint against the
principal before the DECS. Is the principal liable? Explain
briefly. (5%) THIS IS NO LONGER ALLOWABLE: WHAT IS
GUARANTEED IN THE CONSTITUTION IS RELIGIOUS
INSTRUCTION DURING SCHOOL HOURS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
COST.. IT DOES NOT GUARANTEE CONSTRUCTION
Held: There is nothing in the Show Cause Resolution that dictates upon
respondents the subject matter they can teach and the manner of their
instruction. Moreover, lawyers who are also law professors
cannot invoke academic freedom as a defense in an
administrative proceeding for intemperate statements tending
to pressure the Court or influence the outcome of a case or
degrade the courts. Implied in the jurisprudence is that the
constitutional right to freedom of expression of members of the Bar may
be circumscribed by their ethical duties as lawyers to give due respect to
the courts and to uphold the publics faith in the legal profession and the
justice system. To our mind, the reason that freedom of expression may
be so delimited in the case of lawyers applies with greater force to the
academic freedom of law professors. Thus, their actions as law
professors must be measured against the same canons of professional
responsibility applicable to acts of members of the Bar as the fact of
their being law professors is inextricably entwined with the fact that they
are lawyers.