In recent years, Republican lawmakers in 35 states have introduced greater than 150 bills to limit academic freedom on campus, 21 of which have now been enacted.
This laws is described intimately in a brand new White Paper published by the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedoma project of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). Overall, this legislative assault has undermined academic freedom and institutional autonomy in five distinct and overlapping ways.
1. Academic Intelligence Orders
As detailed within the report, state legislators have passed 99 classroom gag orders through the 2021, 2022, and 2023 legislative sessions. All 10 of those gag orders were passed by Republican governors. These bills claim that teaching about structural racism, gender identity, or unvarnished portrayals of American history harms students.
These news blackouts are widely referred to as “divisive concepts” or “anti-CRT” laws. CRT is an acronym for Critical Race Theory, an instructional framework that sees racism as deeply rooted in America’s legal and political system. The partisan activists, like Christopher Rufushave used this term to explain a “moral panic“ as a part of a political response to the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests.
For example, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed House Bill 7 in April 2022, which “Stop the Woke Law.” The law defines a “divisive term” as one of eight vague claims. These include claims that “virtues similar to merit, excellence, exertions, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial blindness are racist or sexist.”
US District Judge Mark Walker described this law as “downright dystopian.” He noted that the federal government’s lawyers themselves have admitted that the law would likely make any classroom discussion of the merits of affirmative motion illegal. The vague wording of this news blackout has a deterrent effectThis leaves many teachers unclear about what they’re legally allowed to debate at school and what they are usually not.
2. Prohibitions on DEI programs
Expanding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) services on campus was a significant consequence of the 2020 protests for racial justice. But in 2023, the legislative backlash was in full swing. During the 2023 legislative session, 40 bills were introduced to limit DEI efforts, seven of which became law.
For example, Texas Senate Bill 17 was based directly on the tactic developed by Rufo and Manhattan Institutea right-leaning think tank. SB 17 banned diversity statements and considerations in hiring. It also restricted diversity training on campus and defunded DEI offices on Texas public university campuses.
As detailed within the AAUP white paper, only a handful of individuals testified in favor of SB 17, and just about all of them had declared or undeclared ties to right-wing think tanks. In contrast, greater than 100 Educators and residents testified or got here forward to testify against the law. Since its passage, Texas public universities have seen the closure of DEI programs and the reduction of campus services for minority students. For example, after lawmakers accused the University of Texas-Austin of violating SB 17, the university was forced to shut its DEI office. This affected Dismissal of 40 employees.
3. Weakening of the term of office
Tenure protections were put in place to guard faculty members from external political pressure. Tenure protections allow faculty members to show, conduct research, and speak publicly without fear of losing their jobs because their statements anger those in power. However, as detailed within the report, 20 bills were introduced through the 2021, 2022, and 2023 legislative sessions, with two bills weakening tenure protections becoming law. in Florida and one other in Texas.
In Florida, for instance, SB 7044 created a post-tenure system Review, which allows administrators to conduct a review of tenured faculty every five years. The law also empowers administrators to fireside those whose performance is deemed unsatisfactory. The law also requires faculty to post course content in a public and searchable database.
The AAUP criticizes the lawand noted that SB 7044 “significantly weakened tenure in the Florida State University System and, if fully implemented as written,” would “effectively eliminate employment protections.” Now even tenured faculty have reason to fear that what they teach may very well be construed as a “divisive concept,” CRT, or promoting DEI.
4. Required content
In addition, legislators in several states have passed laws mandating diversity of opinion, establishing recent academic programs and centers to show conservative content, and shifting curriculum decision-making away from teachers.
For example, Florida Senate Bill 266 expanded the Hamilton Center for Classical and Civic Education on the University of Florida, without faculty involvement or oversight. The original proposal for the Hamilton Center stated that the goal of the middle was to “a conservative agenda“ within the curriculum.
SB 266 also gave the boards that oversee the university and college systems the ability to make your mind up which courses count toward the core curriculum. That power was exercised in November 2023 after Manny Diaz, Florida's education commissioner, asked the boards to an introduction to the sociology courseHe explained on social media that the discipline “hijacked by left-wing activists and no longer serves its intended purpose as a general education course for students.”
5. Weakening of accreditation
The accreditation process is a narrowly defined area of academic administration by which colleges and universities usually undergo external peer review. These institutional performance reviews are conducted by nonprofit accreditation agencies.
As detailed within the report, six bills were introduced through the 2021-2023 legislative sessions – three of which were passed – that weaken the accreditation process and thus make it easier for political interests to influence higher education policy.
For example, the accrediting body of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, warned the university’s Board of Trustees that the establishment of the School for Civic Life and Leadership without oversight and consultation with the college raised serious concerns about institutional independence. The legislature responded with Senate Bill 680which might require public universities in North Carolina to decide on a special accrediting agency each accreditation cycle. This policy was eventually passed as a part of Omnibus House Bill 8 and allows schools to “Shopping” for an accreditation agency less more likely to object to such political interference within the curriculum.
These five overlapping and reinforcing attacks on academic freedom and institutional autonomy threaten to radically transform public higher education in ways in which serve the partisan interests of those in power.
image credit : theconversation.com