Texas Colleges and Universities Face Increased Oversight
Texas colleges and universities could face more oversight — including over who is hired, what is taught and how they are following the law — under a wide-ranging priority bill filed Thursday.
The Senate proposal would give governor-appointed boards of regents more power to overturn decisions made by campus leaders and review curriculum. The bill also would reduce the role of faculty senates and create a new office to investigate concerns at state schools.
Background and Purpose of the Bill
Introduced by Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, Senate Bill 37 is one of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s top 40 priorities. Patrick has long said he wants to roll back the “woke left” that is rampant on college campuses.
“By reaffirming the authority of the Board of Regents, SB 37 clearly defines university governance roles while increasing transparency in policies, hiring, curriculum, and financial decisions,” Creighton said in a statement.
“With taxpayer dollars and students’ futures at stake, universities must operate with accountability,” he added.
Reactions to the Bill
Others saw the bill as “an attack on faculty’s role in governance in colleges and universities,” the University of Texas at Austin chapter of the American Association of University Professors said in a statement.
“Shared governance is one of AAUP’s top priorities and central to the protection of academic freedom and faculty’s status as professionals,” the statement read.
In a statement, the Texas Conference of AAUP said the legislature is “attempting to micromanage and overregulate universities that are already thriving.”
The group noted that Gov. Greg Abbott bragged about Texas leading the nation in top research universities on social media Thursday. The state recently significantly expanded the number of schools reaching tier 1 status.
“This happens because we have top-notch faculty,” AAUP’s statement read.
Key Provisions of the Bill
Under the bill, governing boards would have expanded authority that includes the ability to overrule decisions made by school administrators. The boards would have to send annual reports to the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House and each state lawmaker on their hiring, curriculum and other issues.
The state’s university systems — such as the University of Texas and Texas A&M — have regents who are appointed by the governor. Community college boards, such as Dallas College, tend to have trustees elected by voters.
Regents and college boards would have final say over what’s included in “core curriculum,” after a committee review of material to ensure the curriculum does not “endorse specific public policies, ideologies or legislation.” A general education review committee — appointed by the board — would make recommendations on maintaining or eliminating courses.
Meanwhile, the governing boards would be responsible for hiring the positions of vice president, provost, associate or assistant provost and dean, according to the bill. Historically, faculty members and other administrators are involved in interviewing and hiring processes for these positions.
Impact on Faculty Senates
Faculty senates or councils would be overhauled to limit their power and could be established only by governing boards under the proposal. For example, faculty members wouldn’t be allowed in decision-making during a grievance review or faculty discipline.
Typically, faculty senates develop curricula and approve academic policies. They reflect and express the views of faculty members to university leadership and are a way for faculty to participate in academic governance.
Emarely Rosa-Dávila, an associate professor of social work and speaker of the faculty senate at Texas Woman’s University, said faculty senates help school leaders address concerns and policies on a campus.
“Faculty senates add value to the governance of any institution,” she said. That requires open communication and a transparent process, she added. For example, faculty senates typically provide feedback on policy changes under consideration.
Office of Excellence in Higher Education
The proposal includes a new “office of excellence in higher education” — with a director appointed by the governor — to investigate concerns that schools aren’t complying with state law. Findings could be turned over to the state’s attorney general, according to the bill.
In the months after Texas banned DEI in state colleges and universities, hidden cameras recorded various staff across the schools discussing ways they continued serving students despite the law.
That prompted a letter from Creighton, who authored the DEI-ban legislation, to higher education leaders stressing that they risked losing millions in state funding if they continued diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.
Conclusion
The proposed bill has sparked controversy and debate among educators, lawmakers, and the public. While some see it as a necessary measure to ensure accountability and transparency, others view it as an attack on academic freedom and faculty governance.
As the bill moves forward, it is essential to consider the potential implications for Texas colleges and universities, as well as the broader impact on higher education in the state.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the purpose of Senate Bill 37?
A: The bill aims to increase oversight of Texas colleges and universities, giving governor-appointed boards of regents more power to overturn decisions made by campus leaders and review curriculum.
Q: How would the bill affect faculty senates?
A: The bill would limit the power of faculty senates, allowing them to be established only by governing boards and restricting their role in decision-making processes.
Q: What is the Office of Excellence in Higher Education?
A: The office would be a new entity responsible for investigating concerns that schools aren’t complying with state law, with a director appointed by the governor.
Q: How would the bill impact diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts on campus?
A: The bill would block schools from spending state funds until they submit a report to the Legislature showing compliance with state laws, including the ban on DEI programs and offices.
