Amid the tidal wave of proposals across the country that would eliminate diversity efforts at public colleges, Ohio’s Senate Bill 83 stands out.
The 39-page bill could reshape higher education in the state, with provisions that would ban many diversity initiatives, require annual faculty performance reviews, create new graduation requirements, potentially bar Chinese students from enrolling, and mandate the language colleges must include in their mission statements.
State Sen. Jerry C. Cirino, a Republican, who introduced the legislation, did not respond to a request for comment. An Ohio Department of Higher Education spokesman declined to comment on the bill and said the department “does not establish positions on new legislation until the governor begins the process of involvement in the bill.”
Here’s The Chronicle’s analysis of how the bill could affect the state’s colleges.
Banning DEI
The bill says the state would withhold money from public colleges unless they declare that they will not require students, faculty, or staff to take part in diversity training or programs. Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are described as a “controversial belief or policy” in the bill.
Public colleges would also be prevented from using diversity statements, or other so-called “political and ideological litmus tests,” in hiring or promotion.
Additionally, before a new course is approved, the college must submit “intellectual diversity rubrics,” which the bill does not define.
It’s unclear if Senate Bill 83 would prevent colleges from funding diversity, equity, and inclusion offices and staff. The bill states that no state institutions can fund or support “any position, material benefit, policy, program, and activity that advantages or disadvantages faculty, staff, or students by any group identity.” An exception states that institutions may offer advantages to U.S. citizens and Ohio residents.
Diversity scholarships may also be in jeopardy: The bill would prevent state institutions from having any policies or programs “designed explicitly to segregate faculty, staff, or students by group identities such as race, sex, gender identity, or gender expression.”
This restriction would apply to academic majors, financial awards, on-campus housing, employment, and extracurriculars, as well as events like orientation programs, student training, and graduations.
More State Oversight
The new bill would require colleges to post all of their course syllabi online. It would also require state institutions of higher education to include specific, state-mandated language in their mission statements.
“The institution affirms that its duty is to ensure that no aspect of life at the institution, within or outside the classroom, requires, favors, disfavors, or prohibits speech or action to support any political, social, or religious belief,” reads one of five points that colleges would need to include.
The bill would also add a new graduation requirement for some degree-seeking students: Students in associate and bachelor’s degree programs would have to pass an American history or American government class to graduate.
The bill also stipulates material that must be taught in the course. Students must read the entirety of the U.S. Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, five essays from the Federalist Papers, the Emancipation proclamation, the Gettysburg Address, and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail.”
In a departure from most other diversity-related proposals circulating in state legislatures, private colleges would also be subject to some provisions in Senate Bill 83. The legislation stipulates that private institutions will receive state funds only if they do not require diversity training, post all of their course syllabi online, and eliminate “political and ideological litmus tests.” Private institutions must also submit an affirmation document saying they adhere to these rules with requests for state funding.
Impact on Faculty
Colleges and universities would be required to create a disciplinary process for professors who interfere with anyone’s “intellectual diversity rights.” Intellectual diversity is defined as “multiple, divergent, and opposing perspectives on an extensive range of public policy issues … but which are poorly represented on campus.”
Each year, faculty members would receive a numerical score based on their student evaluations, which institutions would be required to post publicly online. Student evaluations would also affect the annual performance evaluations the bill calls for.
Performance evaluations would take into account a range of factors, including research, services, and administration. Student evaluations would make up at least half of the teaching category of an evaluation.
The bill would institute new post-tenure-review policies tied to those faculty-performance evaluations. Faculty members who do not meet performance expectations for two out of three years would be placed under post-tenure review. Department chairs, deans of faculty, and provosts would have the authority to request post-tenure reviews at any time if faculty members have a “documented and sustained record of significant underperformance.”
The bill would also prevent all members of a state institution of higher education from striking, allowing public employers to seek injunctions against any strikes that may occur.
The purview of the state’s chancellor of higher education would expand as more state oversight goes into effect.
The chancellor would be responsible for creating “educational” programs to train members of the boards of trustees at public colleges. The chancellor would also have to create new questions for student course evaluations aimed at ensuring no violations of the bill are happening in the classroom.
“Does the faculty member create a classroom atmosphere free of political, racial, gender, and religious bias?” reads one question suggested in the bill language.
China
Students from China might be unable to attend state universities in Ohio. If the bill passes, state institutions would not be allowed to accept any funds from China or organizations or individuals who may be acting on the country’s behalf, specifically students and their family members. The legislation doesn’t say explicitly whether this ban on funds would apply to students’ tuition payments.
Thousands of Chinese students attend college in Ohio, though their numbers have been declining at some institutions in recent years. Across the U.S., about 63,000 student visas were issued to Chinese nationals in the government’s 2022 fiscal year.
Institutions would also be required to report any contributions they receive from organizations affiliated with China, including Confucius Institutes, government-affiliated programs that teach Chinese culture and language across the world.
Colleges would not be allowed to have academic relationships with universities in China, or with institutions located elsewhere but affiliated with the country.
