UCL academics have become involved in a controversial movement for freedom of speech in the classroom.

The Academics for Academic Freedom (AFAF) movement is calling for a change in UK law to allow freedom of speech both inside and out of the ‘classroom’ without risk of discipline.

Such debate is not unfamiliar, with the classic case of whether ‘Intelligent Design’ should be taught as an alternative to the theory of evolution in the US schooling system, a debate that has been mirrored in some London schools.

Yet UK university lecturers fear action against those who discuss subjects which may “upset tax payers”.

Now a group of lecturers and fellow academics alike have joined forces to campaign for freedom of speech. In a statement, the group AFAF said: “The responsibility to speak your mind and challenge conventional wisdom defines the university and stands as a model for open debate in wider society.”

Many argue that despite a vision for open debate, university lecturers are still victims of suppression, such as in the case of the resignation of academic Frank Ellis early last year. A 500-strong student petition called for him to relieve his position after claiming there is “evidence” that ethnicity can affect intelligence levels.

AFAF have opposed such action with an online petition signed by over 250 academics since October 2006, five of which are from UCL staff.

Simon Renton, of UCL’s Department of History, told Pi Squared: “The freedom of university staff to work in unpopular areas is in clear need of defence. If academics’ work is mistaken, wrong headed or is motivated by malice, this should be corrected by debate within the university community and elsewhere not by prohibitions enforced by university managements, pressure groups or self appointed guardians of ‘right thinking’.  This is the way that our understanding of the world is developed and improved.”

“We must enter into debate with those with whom we disagree and attempt to refute the bases of their positions or the nature of their reasoning. We must not retreat into a theological certainty that would allow us to define anyone who disagrees with us as heretics who should be punished and excluded from academic debates,” he added.

Asked if UCL should adopt a policy of freedom of speech for academics, Dr Ian Brown, Department of Computer Science, said: “I think it should, as should any university that deserves the name.” Dr Brown joins Professor David Colquhoun, Department of Pharmacology; Gill Doran, The Bartlett School of Architecture; Dr Kalvis Jansons, Department of Mathematics in their support for a change in policy.

Professor Colquhoun told this newspaper: “I signed it as a matter of principle, not because of anything to do with UCL. On the contrary; UCL allows me to run blogs on UCL web servers, despite the fact that the views are my own and occasionally controversial. On the one occasion when someone I’d written about complained to UCL, the college supported me magnificently.”

“The same can’t be said of many universities in the UK though, and of course such activity would be quite impossible in US universities,” he added.

For a university which rests much of its historical success upon equal opportunity, some will be surprised that so few UCL academics have signed the petition. But not everyone widely accepts the premise of AFAF’s argument. Professor Lewis Elton, Honorary Professor at UCL, said: “While I support the ‘Statement of Academic Freedom’, I find it both curious and inadequate. In particular, I find the formulation ‘both inside and outside the classroom’ curiously old-fashioned - why is the classroom singled out when in modern teaching, with its stress on learning, the activity can occur in so many places - and also inadequate, as it makes no reference to research and scholarship.”

Elton added that he wanted a more comprehensive description of academic activities to be covered rather than simply an emphasis on the classroom.