Openness to Change and Academic Freedom in Jordanian Universities

1 Introduction

Openness is the fundamental value that instigates significant changes in society and serves as a prerequisite for the development of higher education institutions. A considerable effort is required to establish a system that is receptive to change and interconnected with the surrounding framework. Universities can adopt various strategies to enhance their openness, including implementing programs for the exchange of educational materials. Consequently, every university should incorporate openness as an administrative concept, as it not only fosters positive progress but also plays a crucial role in fostering an atmosphere of cooperation and communication among university employees.

A university faculty member embracing openness exhibits several characteristics. Firstly, they should adhere to an open and modern curriculum, eliminating unnecessary obstacles to education using social networks. Secondly, fostering communication with fellow teachers enhances productivity. Lastly, effective collaboration and a sense of responsibility towards others contribute to successful task execution. Additional traits encompass creating websites to facilitate communication among faculty members, exchanging ideas, and sharing educational activities with experts and students to impact the educational development process transparently (Al-Hakami, 2018). Furthermore, faculty members should utilize existing educational models by compiling resources produced by teachers to facilitate knowledge exchange (Al-Shabrawy, 2017). Lastly, faculty members should employ open and advanced educational methods to encourage student participation in knowledge creation through the Internet and allow learners to contribute to public knowledge sources such as Wikipedia (Mahmoud, 2018). Providing opportunities for student and stakeholder assessment is also essential (Nascimbeni & Burgos, 2016).

According to Yilmaz (2010), there are three factors that affect openness to change. The first factor is individual differences, such as self-esteem, optimism, and the ability to self-control. If an individual possesses high levels of these qualities, the faculty member will be more open to change in the workplace. The second factor is the content; openness to change depends on the content and degree of the change itself. Third, another factor is called operations, such as employees’ participation in change processes, communication with each other, and the exchange of information about openness to change.

There are some factors that increase openness to change within organizations. The first factor is the specific context, which is the variable that consists of trust in executive management. Leadership’s confidence is based on the leader’s trust in their followers, and it is represented in how the leader builds trust in each member of the organization. Leaders enhance the confidence of employees to be influential and encourage change (Abu-Shaqra & Smadi, 2018).

Academic freedom for faculty members plays a crucial role in achieving the university’s goals and functions. It serves as the foundation for faculty members and the university to fulfill their roles in serving the community and contributing to solving its problems. Academic freedom encompasses a broad spectrum of creativity, evident in its outputs and the research production of its members, making it more relevant to the needs and issues of society (Badran, 2015). Furthermore, academic freedom is a necessary and indispensable requirement in university life. It is important to note that academic freedom motivates the development of thought, the flourishing of culture, and the emergence of talents. Without it, the university may find it challenging to fulfill its mission (Al-Amar, 2013).

According to Akroush (2009), academic freedom has multiple meanings, encompassing three dimensions. The first dimension includes all types of freedom related to research and academic work (freedom of thought, freedom of opinion, freedom of movement, freedom to participate in public seminars and projects, freedom to obtain and use information, freedom to publish and distribute intellectual and scientific works). The second dimension involves the freedom of the university to manage its financial and administrative affairs independently, determine the appropriate educational curriculum and its contents, and appoint individuals with the efficiency and skills necessary to achieve the university’s goals. The third dimension involves observing the standards of academic integrity and academic honesty, protecting students from any operations that may target doctrinal, sectarian, or partisan indoctrination.

2 Previous Studies

There are many studies that have examined openness to change (Aslan, Beycioglu, & Konan, 2008), indicating that the degree of openness to change was generally high and that there were no statistically significant differences between openness to change and participation in choosing the type of school.

It was also found that there is a positive correlation between the degree of organizational agility and the level of openness to change among faculty members. Academic freedom has also been examined in several studies, including Al-Seouf’s study (2007), which reported a decline in the practice of academic freedom by faculty members according to their point of view. There is a positive and strong relationship between academic freedom and the level of job satisfaction. Al-Balasi (2008) concluded that the degree of practicing academic freedom by academics at the faculties of education in the official universities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was moderate. The degree of practicing freedom was high in the field of academic content, and the field of community service was in the last rank. Also, there were statistically significant differences in the degree of academic freedom due to the variable of the region in which the university is located.

Hamdan’s (2008) study showed that the degree of academic freedom among faculty members in Palestinian universities was medium, while organizational loyalty was high. One of the most important results of Al-Sarhani’s study (2008) is that the degree of providing academic freedom by the academic leaders at the faculties of education was great according to their point of view, and the degree of providing academic freedom by the academic leaders at the faculties of education was large according to the faculty members’ point of view.

Ali (2009) stated that academic freedom is not only a package of rights granted to faculty members but also includes duties and responsibilities. The most important responsibilities of faculty members include performing their duties and adhering to their academic, educational, and national responsibilities with the highest degree of efficiency, following scientific standards, and upholding ethical values. Other responsibilities involve creative interaction with the community and its aspirations, as well as active participation in solving community problems. These responsibilities also encompass rejecting violence in all its forms, encouraging and strengthening values of tolerance, accepting others, engaging in dialogues, and promoting good human values. Such responsibilities also involve refusing the exploitation of academic freedom and the results of academic research for purposes that contradict the interests of society or offend social and human values. Institutional and fair judgment for a member of the academic community comprises a major component of the responsibilities if the academic member breaches his/her duties or concrete responsibilities. It also gives students the right to higher education according to scientific standards set by the academic society and defends the right of students to form all their institutions and set their own rules and regulations governing their activities if they follow the controls of freedoms inside the university campus.

The results of Yilmaz’s (2010) study showed a specific result: there is a low relationship between the degree of teachers’ sense of effectiveness and openness to change in Turkish schools, and a low relationship between the openness of schools and acceptance of the pressures of society.

Bousamaha and Rahima (2011) found that the social, cultural, and intellectual reality experienced by students generates a contradiction between the desire for openness and adherence to the customs and traditions of their society. Finally, Al-Rezki’s (2012) study also showed that the degree of practicing academic freedom and decision-making skills by postgraduate students was moderate and that they practice communication skills to a high degree. It was also found that there is a positive relationship between postgraduate students’ practice of academic freedom and the degree of their exercise of decision-making skills.

According to Cagle (2012), there is a positive and statistically significant relationship between a school principal’s support for openness to change and the teaching staff’s acceptance of teaching, awareness of changes, and acceptance of community pressure for change. Additionally, there is a positive relationship between the principal’s openness to change and its impact on the teaching staff’s openness to change.

Lin (2013) found a positive relationship between cognitive flexibility and openness to change in academic performance. The study by Al-Osaili (2013) found that academic freedom by the academic supervisors on the Al-Gyam (values) website in open university education, considering cultural openness, was high. Al-Amar (2013) showed that academic freedom was high in all areas, except for the freedom to participate in decision-making, which was moderate. The level of job performance, in their view, was generally high in all areas, and the results indicated a positive correlation with statistical significance between academic freedom and job performance among faculty members at Jerash University. According to Al-Madi (2013), the academic freedom of the faculty members at Al al-Bayt University was moderate.

According to Al-Ghuwaireen’s (2014) study, the degree of practicing academic freedom by faculty members was moderate, and organizational health according to their point of view was also moderate. Additionally, there is a positive correlation between the degree of academic freedom and the level of organizational health according to faculty members’ points of view. Annab’s study (2014) showed that the members of the study sample understood the concept of academic freedom to a moderate degree.

Academic freedom is necessary for students and faculty members (Karki, 2015). However, the rights of faculty members and students to carry out academic activities and participate in university administration are somewhat limited by the university’s rules, and the Faculty of Education did not pay much attention to protecting academic freedom for faculty members. Moreover, Al-Harthy (2015) also found that the academic freedom of female faculty members was moderate, and there was a correlation between academic freedom in all its fields and the level of scientific production in the field of writing books only.

Furthermore, Temel and Emre (2014) showed that the most common perceptions among teachers about openness to change include cooperation and the ability to deal with oneself, encouraging teachers to consult in decision-making, and making teachers professionals in their careers (teaching). These factors increase openness within the school. According to Çağlar (2014), the level of academic optimism and openness to change by schools differed according to gender, the subjects taught, the type of school, and the number of teachers and students in the school. There is a positive and moderate relationship between openness to change and academic optimism.

Jeong, Hsiao, Song, and Bae (2016) found a positive relationship between teachers’ connection to their work, career, and openness to change. A previous study found that educational values come first in terms of their relationship to openness to change, followed by religious and family values, political and social values, then modern values, and finally economic values. Zain-Al-Dien (2016) showed that the level of academic freedom for university students in Egypt is medium. There were also statistically significant differences attributed to the effect of the scientific rank, in favor of an assistant professor in the field of teaching, and in favor of a professor in the field of scientific research. Qaisar, Butt, Hussain, and Noreen (2016) showed that there is no significant difference between the points of view of faculty members on the variables of age, gender, and educational qualification.

While Saleh (2017) showed that more experienced faculty members and employees of public universities were more comfortable with academic freedom policies, he also found that the moral climate prevailing in private Jordanian universities from the point of view of faculty members was high and that academic freedom was also high from their point of view. The study by Najm, Al-Stouhi, and Abdul Latif (2017) showed a positive correlation and a significant effect between openness to change and breaking the psychological contract. Benno’s study (2017) demonstrated a direct relationship between the degree of openness to change and the level of service of faculty members to the community.

Al-Hakami (2018) indicated that there are several areas of academic freedom for faculty members. First, freedom of thought is represented in the faculty member’s ability to express ideas without restrictions and reach reliable results. Second, freedom of choice is represented through the faculty member’s ability and independence in choosing from a group of possibilities and alternatives that are commensurate with his/her inclinations. Third, there is also freedom of expression, represented in the faculty member’s ability to express a point of view on a particular topic and the right to engage in discussion, dialogue, and constructive criticism without bias. This freedom is controlled by limits and governed by restrictions. Fourth, freedom of research and publication is also referred to as the faculty member’s ability to choose research and the freedom of discussion, thinking, and presenting opinions and results without deletion or modification, considering objectivity and respect for others’ opinions. Fifth, freedom of teaching is the right of a faculty member to choose the subjects he/she wants to teach and to choose appropriate teaching methods. Sixth, freedom of participation in decision-making is participation not linked to specific variables, influences, or restrictions related to color, thought, and so on. Seventh, the freedom to participate in outreach services inside or outside the university. Finally, the freedom to join federations in his/her field of specialization and to attend discussions and seminars.

There is a positive impact on the level of open supervisors on the change in the percentage of added value and in developing motivation for teaching. Barbary (2018) concluded that adults’ inclination towards consumption rather than saving was one of the most visible and widespread features of change. In addition, Abu-Shaqra and Smadi (2018) found that the degree of academic freedom exercised by faculty members in Jordanian universities in the northern region was medium in all fields. Al-Hakami (2018) found that the reality of academic freedom and professional performance in Saudi universities came to a medium degree and that there was a correlation between the practice of academic freedom and the level of professional performance. Moreover, Mahmoud (2018) found that the degree of practicing the principles of educational governance by the heads of academic departments in private Jordanian universities in Amman was high, as well as the degree of practicing academic freedom by the faculty members was also high. It is important to notice that there was a positive correlation between the degree of practicing the principles of educational governance by the heads of academic departments and the degree of practicing academic freedom by the faculty members.

Crary (2019) found that teachers’ openness to change and their desire to cooperate with librarians to activate the use of technology. According to Sywelem and Al-Mahdy (2019), there is a high degree of openness among Saudi and Omani teachers. It was also found that the level of openness to change among faculty members was high, with differences due to the gender variable in favor of males, in favor of faculty members with more than ten years of experience, and in favor of those who obtained the ranks of professorship and assistant professor.

Al-Majali and Al-Khaaldi (2020) proved that it is crucial to appropriately mold students’ attitudes toward tolerance, respect, and openness during their university education because these principles are the cornerstone of effective personal development in twenty-first-century modern society. The purpose of this study is to determine university students’ tolerance values in the United Arab Emirates in connection to academic success and study characteristics. Since the methodologies are pertinent to the inquiry, the descriptive and correlative methods are employed. The study sample comprised 200 students from several universities in the United Arab Emirates, and the questionnaire was utilized as a means of gathering data. Positive competition, softness, self-peace, social responsibility, openness, cultural diversity, support, involvement, altruism, respect and appreciation, peace with others, equality, and justice rank highest among the respondents’ 83.5% tolerance, according to the results. The study’s findings also show that the tolerance values are positively correlated. Furthermore, as the findings show, there are statistical disparities in female tolerance, which is higher than the average tolerance of males. Additionally, the data show that the culture variable favoring UAE nationality causes statistically significant differences in tolerance among students. The findings also demonstrate that the variable of the study year has no statistically significant impact on the tolerance of the pupils.

The predominance of certain aspects of routine, bureaucracy, and stagnation in management has attracted researchers’ attention. These aspects have created problems such as delays in responding to modern technological changes and a tendency to adhere to traditional administrative practices. University educational systems are generally characterized by relative stability, as they are rarely updated or undergo fundamental changes in their structure, content, or architectural nature. There is administrative centralization and an inability to keep up with global changes, coupled with rigidity, stagnation, and weak flexibility in decision-making. This gives the impression that there might be a problem related to academic freedom and openness to change in Jordanian universities in general.

From the previous points, the idea of the study was produced, and the problem of the study was to answer the following main question: What is the relationship between the degree of openness to change at the faculties of educational sciences in Jordanian universities and the academic freedom of the faculty members in these universities? Additionally, this current study aims to achieve the following objectives:

Objective one: What is the degree of openness to change at the faculties of educational sciences in Jordanian universities according to faculty members’ points of view and does it differ according to gender, academic rank, university, and country of graduation?

Objective two: What is the level of academic freedom among faculty members at the educational faculties of educational sciences in Jordanian universities according to their point of view and does it differ according to faculty members’ point of view, gender, academic rank, type of university, and country of graduation?

Objective three: Is there a relationship between the degree of openness to change at faculties of educational sciences in Jordanian universities and the level of academic freedom among faculty members in these universities?

3 Methodology

The researchers employed a descriptive, associative approach, which aims to accurately depict a phenomenon, analyze it, and subsequently provide explanations along with pertinent recommendations. This method was deemed the most suitable for the present study.

4 Results and Discussion

To treat the findings with greater precision in accordance with proper scholarship, it is necessary to provide concise responses to the study questions that address the main problems outlined in the study.

5 Conclusion and Recommendations

The results confirm the level of openness to change and academic freedom among faculty members in Jordanian Universities was moderate. Also, the results confirm that a positive relationship between openness to change and academic freedom among faculty members in Jordanian Universities. It is necessary to involve faculty members in making decisions related to all university matters. It is essential to encourage faculty members to adhere to the principles of intellectual flexibility and to embrace diverse opinions in their interactions with students. Efforts should be made to activate the roles of unions, associations, and institutions to which faculty members are affiliated in Jordanian universities, enabling them to contribute to the improvement of scientific and social conditions. The university administration should focus on decentralizing the decision-making process. Lastly, the establishment of a crisis management committee within the university administration is necessary to enable proactive measures in addressing perceived threats.

According to the analysis, findings, and discussion presented in this article, the researchers find it necessary to identify additional areas for further investigation in the future. The study recommends the following. First, it is essential to promote increased awareness among all members of society, particularly within the educational and academic community, regarding the importance, concepts, elements, components, and types of freedom and academic freedom. Moreover, there is a need to foster a culture of freedom in society, as the reality of academic freedom reflects the overall state of public freedom.