Statement on Extramural Speech
September 19, 2025
At its September 17 meeting the Iowa Board of Regents discussed comments made by Iowa State University faculty on their private social media accounts. This involves substantial issues of academic freedom, faculty status, due process, and extramural speech. We asked that the Board not make any final decisions about faculty status without a fair and complete investigation, and that it keep in mind the principles of academic freedom with respect to extramural utterances.
The Board directed regents’ universities to complete investigations into employees whose social media posts have been flagged within two weeks. This investigation departs from the procedures that exist in the faculty handbook, which are based on AAUP principles and guidelines. This is unfortunate. However, at least there will be an investigation, and we can work to make sure that it is a fair one.
The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) 1940 Statement of Principles asserts the right of faculty members to speak and write as citizens, free from institutional censorship or discipline. At the same time, it calls for faculty members to indicate they are not speaking for the institution. They also should be mindful of their responsibility as faculty and how their actions affect how the institution may be judged, a principle endorsed in ISU’s Faculty Handbook (7.1.1 and 7.1.2) and the Board Policy Manual (3.10.E).
The AAUP recognizes that “social media can be used to make extramural utterances and thus their use is subject to Association-supported principles of academic freedom, which encompass extramural utterances.” (“Academic Freedom and Electronic Communication,” Policy Documents and Reports, p.57) The AAUP further states that “Professors … should have freedom to address the larger community with regard to any matter of social, political, economic, or other interest, without institutional discipline or restraint, save in response to fundamental violations of professional ethics or statements that suggest disciplinary incompetence.” (“Protecting an Independent Faculty Voice: Academic Freedom after Garcetti v. Ceballos,” Policy Documents and Reports, 38–40.)
When a charge is filed against a faculty member for extramural speech, it is essential that a hearing be conducted by an appropriate faculty committee. A final decision should take into account the faculty member’s entire record as a teacher and a scholar. “In the absence of weighty evidence of unfitness, the administration should not prefer charges; and if it is not clearly proved in the hearing that the faculty member is unfit to continue, the faculty committee should make a finding in favor of the faculty member.” (“Committee A Statement on Extramural Utterances,” Policy Documents and Reports, p. 34). Moreover, “Extramural utterances rarely bear upon the faculty member’s fitness for continuing service.” (ibid)
Our chapter will continue to support the faculty member’s due process rights and their right of academic freedom with respect to extramural speech, as we will for all faculty at ISU.
Thank you,
Cullen Padgett Walsh, President ISU-AAUP