"Education is for all" is an aphorism that is ubiquitously heard from the most recognized intellectuals to even primary-school students.
Why do we need education? There are too many answers for this tricky question. Philosopher would answer: to attain the truth, university student would says: to have a decent job, company employee would respond: for promotional purpose and a high school student would claim: to escape from the protracted complaint of parents. Drawing from the above points of view, we can steer education to one single-mined purpose: development.
Education is for development; materialistically or ideally, individually or collectively, but this purpose (development), in the context of any country in the world, will not be fully attained if one attitude is not stereotyped into the educational system. This attitude is the academic freedom.
To be simplistic, "academic freedom" is the freedom applied within the academic establishment. For university professor, "academic freedom" is the freedom to teach by using his or her own methodology, conducting research, dismissing the students, above all; how his or her lecture should be operated. For student, "academic freedom" is the freedom or the right to challenge the lecturer or professor without sanction, freedom to choose his or her learning path. For (academic) institution, "academic freedom" is the freedom of the institution to set the curriculum for the teaching and learning staff and what should be researched on without or out of the campus. Academic freedom was born in Europe, during 1100's and 1200's: the period of rising of universities.
There are too many benefits brought by "academic freedom," but the drawback is that this humanitarian philosophy is not ubiquitously applied in many parts of the world, mostly in the less developed countries. This is one of the most dominant reasons that make university education not a true education for one purpose:...