It is the policy of Texas State Technical College to (1) entitle each faculty member freedom in the classroom in discussing the subject which he or she teaches; (2) hold each faculty member responsible for judicious use of controversial material in the classroom and limit introduction of such material only as it has clear relationship to the approved curriculum and subject; (3) hold faculty responsible for maintenance of competencies, exercising professional integrity, being professional in conduct with students, and recognizing and exercising that the faculty member’s right to freedom of expression must be balanced with interest of the State as an employer, so as not to nullify constitutional protection.

Section 14 of the Higher Education Coordinating Act of 1965 states, in part: "To achieve excellence in the teaching of students at institutions and agencies of higher education, the (Coordinating) Board shall . . . develop and recommend minimum standards for academic freedom, academic responsibility and tenure." Accordingly, in 1967 the Coordinating Board issued Policy paper No. 1 on this topic which has been revised as of January 1979. The standards are not binding on Texas institutions, but rather serve as guidelines.

The founding legislation of TSTC (H.B. 137 of the 61st Session, Texas Legislature) characterizes TSTC as special purpose and designates the role and scope as training (technical-vocational) and technical-vocational research as it relates to careers. Excluded from the designation is research and publication related to technical or scientific content and broad scale public service as often referenced in universities’ role and scope. Thus the "academic freedom" associated with TSTC is related to and limited to its role and scope, and not like that of a university with different role and scope.

There are two basic concepts of academic freedom. One, the classical theory, is "professors should have the right to teach, conduct research, and publish their research without interference, and that students should have the corresponding right to study and learn." (Edmond L. Pincoffs, editor. The Concept of Academic Freedom, U. of Tx. Press LB 2332.C67 1975.) The authors continue to say that justification for these rights derive from a theory of what the university is and how it can best achieve its objectives. Thus, these are special rights that derive from a particular institutional structure. Furthermore, the extent of academic freedom is a function of institutional structure and role/scope. The second (general) theory of academic freedom is quite different and states, "that professors and students have the same rights of free expression, freedom of inquiry, freedom of association and freedom of publication in their roles as professionals and students that they have as citizens in a free society, except insofar as the mode of exercise of these freedoms needs to be restricted to preserve the academic and subsidiary functions of the university" (ibid). Only the first of these two concepts are pertinent to this guideline.

The Advisory Committees in cooperation with instructional program faculty, specify the terminal competencies via job skill specifications of each program and therefore indirectly specify what is to be taught. Technicians and vocational graduates live and work with technology which often times has significant sociological impact, be it the laboratory with genetic engineering or the commercial jet being certified as flight safe or participating in innovations of QWL (quality of work life). The role of the graduate and the technology in society are appropriate subjects as derived from institutional advisory committees and curriculum development from which related academic freedom may impact upon the faculty of TSTC.

Just as policies of academic freedom of an institution afford its faculty members protection to fulfill their assignment, the academic responsibility of faculty members is reciprocal and equally demanding if the institution is to fulfill its mission. The faculty member has a responsibility to the institution, his or her profession, his or her students and society at large. The Coordinating Board’s guideline (Policy Paper 1) states:

1. The fundamental responsibilities of a faculty member as a teacher and scholar include maintenance of competence in his or her field of specialization and the exhibition of such professional competence in the classroom, studio or laboratory and in the public area by such activities as discussions, lectures, consulting, publication or participation in professional organizations and meetings.
2. The exercise of professional integrity by a faculty member includes recognition that the public will judge his or her profession and institution by his or her statements. Therefore, the faculty member should strive to be accurate, to exercise appropriate restraint, to be willing to listen to and show respect to others expressing different opinions, and to avoid creating the impression that the faculty member speaks or acts for his or her college or university when speaking or acting as a private person.
3. The constitutionally protected right of the faculty member, as a citizen, to freedom of expression must be balanced with the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the educational services it performs through its employees. A faculty member’s comments are protected even though they may be highly critical in tone or content, or erroneous, but such statements are not protected free speech if they either substantially impede the faculty member’s performance of his or her daily duties or materially and substantially interfere with the regular operation of the institution, or if they are part of a continuing pattern of expression of such nature as to destroy the harmony and morale of a division, department or college. False statements made with knowledge of their falsity or in reckless disregard of the truth are not entitled to constitutional protection, and public statements may be so without foundation as to call into question the fitness of the faculty member to perform his or her professional duties.
4. A faculty member should be judicious in the use of controversial material in the classroom and should introduce such material only as it has clear relationship to his or her subject field.
5. A faculty member should be professional in his or her conduct in the classroom and in his or her relationships with students. The faculty member should maintain respect for the student and for the student’s posture as a learner. The faculty member should make himself or herself appropriately available to the student for consultation on course work.
6. A faculty member has the responsibility to provide timely and adequate notice of his or her intention to interrupt or terminate institutional services."

The nature of an institution and its policies not only directly influence the position of the institution on academic freedom but also on tenure. The faculty ranking system of TSTC emphasizes competencies and is the basis for the instructional delivery structure and organization of each program. Salary and promotion are based on certification of competencies, evaluation of performance, and availability of funds, all of which are detailed in other institute policies. The close dependency of instructional programs on the economic and technical dynamics of the industries served is a primary determinant in the future of the program. Therefore, recognizing the nature of TSTC, there is no practicality in the traditional tenure structure.