Open
Inquiry
Open inquiry — the ability to ask questions, share ideas, and challenge popular views and assumptions — is essential to the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. It is one of our core values.
A powerful idea may begin as a notion that seems mistaken, strange, offensive, or even dangerous. Colleges and universities should be places where such ideas can be discussed, debated, and rigorously tested, not stigmatized and stifled. Yet open inquiry has increasingly come under threat.
For students, the challenge is often social: fear of ridicule or “cancellation” from peers leads to significant self-censorship on controversial topics, causing many to avoid difficult discussions and miss out on developing the skills of constructive disagreement.
For scholars, social pressures are compounded by the institutional pressures of journal publishing, citation counts, and academic prestige to skew the marketplace of ideas in favor of legacy and access.
This environment severely limits the potential of the academy, contributing to both intellectual stagnation and decreasing public trust in the university system. The scope of scholarly examination must be sufficiently broad to afford the progression of knowledge without interference.
Threats to open inquiry often look like scholars selecting a “safer” topic for their research out of fear. They look like students choosing not to ask challenging questions in the classroom. They look like students not getting what they are supposed to — and deserve to — get out of their education.
As part of our Open Inquiry U agenda to ensure open inquiry is protected, HxA and its members ask universities to:
- Enshrine knowledge seeking as the university’s non-negotiable purpose, establishing open inquiry as the foundation for all student planning and decision-making.
- Forster a culture of open inquiry across all campus domains, embedding the principles of open inquiry in teaching, research, admissions, campus life and governance.
- Measure their progress by regularly assessing and reporting on changes in the state of open inquiry on campus.
By committing to these goals, the academy can continue to discover new knowledge and cultivate critical thinking for new generations.
Is Censorship Ever Justified?
In this clip from Heterodox Out Loud, Ivan Oransky, a medical journalist and co-founder of Retraction Watch, explores the complexities of retracting scientific papers due to potential harm, even when the findings are robust. Oransky argues that if censorship is considered acceptable because “the ends justify the means,” then anyone could use that rationale to eliminate knowledge they find problematic.
Students are Reluctant to Discuss Controversial Topics
HxA’s recent Campus Expression Survey (CES) asked 4,730 undergraduate students at four-year colleges and universities in the US about different facets of their experience relevant to open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement. We found that just over 79% of respondents reported being at least somewhat reluctant to discuss, ask questions about, or share their ideas on at least one of the 10 controversial topics asked about on the CES.
Even in courses where such topics are relevant, 47% of CES respondents being reluctant to discuss Israeli-Palestinian conflict, 45% being reluctant to discuss politics, 42% being reluctant to discuss trans identity; 33% being reluctant to discuss abortion in classroom contexts, and 30% being reluctant to discuss religion.
For comparison, just over 15% of respondents reported reluctance to discuss a typical topic for college courses being taken; this means that the number of students who reported at least some reluctance to discuss a topic was up to 200% higher in the case of the most controversial topics, relative to a typical course topic.
Does how long respondents have been in school make them more comfortable discussing controversial topics, perhaps because college teaches them how to have difficult discussions? The 2023 CES data suggest this isn’t the case. We compared first-year students to students who’ve been in college longer and saw that the proportion of students reporting reluctance to engage in inquiry about complex and controversial issues remains more or less steady — there were no statistically significant differences relative to years a respondent has been in college.
Why are they reluctant? One big reason is because students are scared of negative social reactions from their peers in class. In our 2022 survey of students at four-year universities, we found that the primary reported reason for why students self-censor on controversial topics in the classroom was fear of negative reactions or retribution from fellow students. Students feared being attacked, made fun of, ridiculed, judged, or “canceled” by their peers.
Another 2021 survey of college students also showed more than a third of students were concerned with losing their peers' respect or being ridiculed if they shared their views in the classroom.
- Filter by Format
- All Formats
- Blog
- Event
- Podcast
- Announcement
- Report
- Video
- Resource
- Americans Praise Higher Ed Research, But Remain Concerned about Campus CultureOctober 25, 2025+Nicole Barbaro Simovski+Viewpoint Diversity+Open Inquiry
- How AI is Reshaping Inquiry and Disagreement in Higher Ed+Open Inquiry+Constructive Disagreement+Virtual only
- Under pressure, college administrators respond to federal policy and campus speech challenges.October 10, 2025+Shiri Spitz Siddiqi+Open Inquiry+Academic Freedom
- S2 Episode 39: Rebuilding Trust in Higher Ed with Chancellor Andrew MartinOctober 7, 2025+Andrew Martin+Viewpoint Diversity+Constructive Disagreement+Open Inquiry+Academic Freedom
- College Presidents Emphasize Open Inquiry Ahead of New YearOctober 1, 2025+Erin Shaw+Open Inquiry+Constructive Disagreement
- When University Classrooms Become Political BattlegroundsSeptember 24, 2025+Nicole Barbaro Simovski+Open Inquiry+Academic Freedom
- Authoritarian Influence in US Academia: A conversation with Sarah McLaughlin about her new book, Authoritarians in the Academy+Open Inquiry+Academic Freedom+Virtual only
Your generosity supports our non-partisan efforts to advance the principles of open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement to improve higher education and academic research.