On Thursday, state legislators in Texas put forth significant legislation aiming to enhance governance over institutions of higher education. This move follows complaints from conservative factions questioning compliance with a statewide prohibition on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

Overview of Senate Bill 37

Senate Bill 37 proposes the establishment of an Office of Excellence in Higher Education. This office will operate under the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and will be tasked with examining allegations that colleges and universities violate state laws or their internal policies. The bill is spearheaded by State Senator Brandon Creighton, who expressed concerns regarding institutional adherence to the DEI mandate.

Key Provisions of the Bill

• Office Responsibilities: The newly proposed office will have the authority to request information from educational institutions, expecting responses within a 30-day timeframe.
• Oversight and Public Transparency: Findings will be communicated to both the Attorney General’s Office and the respective university governance boards, ensuring state leaders are kept informed.
• Curricula and Hiring Authority: The bill grants university governing boards the power to oversee curricula and hire administrators beyond just chancellors and presidents, including vice presidents and deans.

Goals for Higher Education

The legislation aims to ensure that academic programs are aligned with workforce needs and do not promote specific political ideologies. As outlined in the bill, governing boards will form committees including industry representatives and tenured faculty to supervise course offerings.

Additionally, SB 37 establishes minimum enrollment thresholds for minor degrees and certificate programs to eliminate redundancies in academia, aiming for efficiency in educational offerings.

Background Context and Motivations

The push for increased oversight has its roots in prior actions by legislative leaders. For instance, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has previously advocated for measures that would limit the influence of faculty, addressing perceived indoctrination by educators.

“Achieving this requires accountability and efficiency — ensuring students receive a high-quality education while safeguarding taxpayer investments,” Creighton commented in support of the bill.

Implications for Faculty Governance

With the proposed changes in oversight, the traditional role of faculty councils in shaping academic policies may be limited. Under SB 37, governing boards would possess the ultimate authority over faculty councils and related decision-making processes.

Concerns arise regarding the potential weakening of academic integrity when faculty input is diminished. Observers note that a decrease in faculty participation could jeopardize accreditation with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, critical for maintaining federal funding eligibility for students.

Next Steps and Legislative Journey

In addition to the Senate version, a parallel bill in the House of Representatives has been introduced, although it remains uncertain whether it will receive the same level of support. The Chair of the House Higher Education Committee has yet to highlight faculty governance as a priority this session.