Intellectual Diversity

 No. SB 1 does not in any way limit the subjects, topics, or materials that may be included in academic courses, nor does it limit academic freedom and responsibility as set forth in Faculty Rule 3335-5-01. Instructors (including faculty, staff, and graduate students serving in instructional roles) may still teach concepts and materials that may be considered controversial or divisive, so long as these matters are relevant to the course and its learning outcomes, consistent with the academic responsibilities outlined in the above rule. Further, while SB 1 prohibits orientation and training courses concerning diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), subject to certain exceptions, these limitations do not apply to courses offered by academic units toward the completion of a degree or for-credit certificate programs.

SB 1 requires instructors (including faculty as well as staff and graduate students serving in instructional roles) to support intellectual diversity in class and to allow students to reach their own conclusions on “controversial beliefs and policies” without “indoctrinat[ing] any social, political, or religious point of view.” SB 1 defines “intellectual diversity” as “multiple, divergent, and varied perspectives on an extensive range of public policy issues.” Likewise, SB 1 defines “controversial belief or policy” as “any belief or policy that is the subject of political controversy, including issues such as climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion.”

In short, while SB 1 does not limit the content that instructors may address in an academic course, instructors must ensure that students are permitted and encouraged to express a range of perspectives in discussions and to form their own conclusions about controversial issues as part of the course and its learning outcomes. This requirement aligns with the university’s motto of “education for citizenship”; preparing students for citizenship includes fostering critical thinking skills so that students can reach their own conclusions rather than teaching them to adopt any specific point of view. Syllabus language outlining these commitments is available here.

In addition to the classroom discussion and learning outcome requirements outlined above, SB 1 requires the university to demonstrate intellectual diversity in course approval (both generally and relative to general education requirements), common reading programs, departmental strategic goals, student evaluations and annual reviews. While the general guidance outlined above applies to these areas as well, the Office of Academic Affairs will engage directly with units regarding more specialized issues that may apply in these contexts as appropriate. SB 1 will further require changes to the faculty annual review and evaluation processes, and separate guidance will be provided on those issues.

No. While instructors (including faculty as well as staff and graduate students serving in instructional roles) must support intellectual diversity in their courses, they retain the right to assess student performance according to curricular goals and to address relevant learning objectives. Further, while instructors must not prohibit students from expressing their own perspectives in discussions or reaching their own conclusions on controversial beliefs and issues, students are ultimately responsible for mastering the material for courses in which they have enrolled.

Instructors have the right and responsibility to ensure that course time is used effectively to achieve the course goals, and as such can determine when and how to advance through the topics and materials detailed in the syllabus. SB 1 also provides that instructors have the right to exercise professional judgment about how best to accomplish intellectual diversity within their discipline as long as they do not exercise that judgment so as to “constrict intellectual diversity.” Further, SB 1 does not limit instructors’ abilities to address classroom conflict and disruptive incidents in their courses in accordance with existing university protocols.