Author ORCID Identifier
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9229-8569
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4247-6045
Abstract
Abstract Academic freedom, a cornerstone of higher education, is formally codified within the enforceable language of collective agreements (CAs) between universities and faculty unions in Canada. While the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) provides an exemplar framework for academic freedom clauses, institutional interpretations and implementations vary significantly. This study comprehensively analyzed CAs from 44 Canadian universities using computational text analysis methods, specifically Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) and Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF). The analysis revealed that approximately 27% of institutions closely align with the CAUT exemplar, while 57% incorporate additional limiting factors that qualify the exercise of academic freedom. Local institutional contexts and governance structures emerged as primary drivers of these variations, demonstrating the dynamic tension between standardized frameworks and distinctive institutional priorities. This research advances our understanding of how academic freedom is operationalized within binding agreements and illuminates the implications of textual variations for institutional policy, faculty rights, and administrative practice. The findings contribute to broader discussions about the evolution of academic freedom in contemporary higher education and the role of collective bargaining in its preservation.
Recommended Citation
Ribaric, Tim and Kumar, Rahul
(2025)
"How Do Collective Agreements Stack Up? Implications For Academic Freedom,"
Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy: Vol. 16, Article 5.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.58188/1941-8043.1920
Available at:
https://thekeep.eiu.edu/jcba/vol16/iss1/5
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
10.58188/1941-8043.1920
