College of Education alters 78 courses to comply with Senate Bill 17 and protect faculty from public backlash following Lieutenant Governor’s memo

 Friends,

Higher Education in Texas is in trouble. 

Read this piece, along with the earlier North Texas Daily publication titled, "Guidance on research and teaching aimed at SB 17 compliance announced, North Texas Daily.17 isn't supposed to be impacting research of teaching, yet this is what is happening right now right before our very eyes!

I'm glad that the faculty at UNT Denton are standing up, but this could easily become a slippery slope with faculty losing ground at other universities. We must organize, my friends, to push back against an agenda that will incur irreparable damage to Texas' crowned jewel of higher education which boasts some of the best institutions in the country!

-Angela Valenzuela

College of Education alters 78 courses to comply with Senate Bill 17 and protect faculty from public backlash following Lieutenant Governor’s memo

• John Forbes
 Nov. 12, 2024|

The College of Education is making 78 alterations to course titles and descriptions. Photo by Aiden Gonzalez

The College of Education is making 78 changes to course titles and descriptions to comply with Senate Bill 17 and to protect faculty from public backlash.

The altered courses are within the College of Education’s Department of Teacher Education and Administration. Course names and descriptions are reviewed, selected for adjustments and then rewritten by Brian McFarlin, an associate dean for undergraduate studies and research in the College of Education.

Faculty were initially informed of the changes through their colleague Bill Camp, a professor in the College of Education. Camp emailed ten other faculty within the College of Education, informing them that “if a change is being made to your course, there were problems related to SB 17 and the new charge in the new legislative session.”


SB 17, passed June 17, 2023, is a state law that prohibits public colleges and universities that receive state funding from participating in diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. The bill explicitly states the DEI prohibition does not apply to “academic course instruction.”

The course changes also follow the release of a Sept. 10 memo by Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick entitled, “Stopping DEI to Strengthen the Texas Workforce.”

In the memo, Patrick directs the Subcommittee on Higher Education to “examine programs and certificates at higher education institutions that maintain discriminatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies.”

The memo then directs the committee to “expose how these programs and their curriculum are damaging and not aligned with state workforce demands,” and to “make recommendations for any needed reforms to ensure universities are appropriately educating students to meet workforce needs.”

According to an email sent by Assistant Professor Lok-Sze Wong to fellow faculty and obtained by the North Texas Daily from an anonymous source, Patrick’s directive was in mind when McFarlin, Interim Dean of the College of Education Rudi Thompson and the Integrity and Compliance office decided to make the changes.

McFarlin was tasked with the College of Education’s course review and adjustment process.

After course titles and descriptions are altered by McFarlin, he has to “send the changes through another process or two,” according to Wong’s email. Some of the tentative course adjustments are as listed:

Altered College of Education course descriptions

Wong’s email said McFarlin was made aware of Patrick’s charge in early October. Afterward, McFarlin and Thompson spoke with the university’s Integrity and Compliance Office about “how to best protect our faculty and courses from being further targeted.”

Their discussion also included how to protect faculty from student complaints, according to the email.

The Integrity and Compliance Office, Thompson and McFarlin decided to address course names and descriptions because they are “public facing,” the email said. Wong’s email referenced a grassroots organization named Parents Defending Education who use syllabi available to the public to target and expose schools and higher education institutions all over the United States for “imposing harmful agendas,” according to Parents Defending Education’s website.

Parents Defending Education has listed three of the university’s courses as “incidents” and posted the courses’ syllabi online. According to the website, the courses’ infractions involve critical race theory, decolonization, oppression, white privilege and tenets of queer theory.

One of the classes listed on the website is “EDLE 5600: Race, Class, and Gender Issues in Education.” This is also one of the courses altered by McFarlin.


The changes to EDLE 5600 include a new title and course description. The tentative new course title, “Critical Inquiry into Education,” and description makes no mention of race, gender or class.

The old course description, which operates on the basis that inequities exist between people of different races, gender and social class, was replaced with language saying students in the course would “critically examine current topics related to providing leadership for various student groups.”

The new description also includes new language emphasizing that “all learners” are “capable, motivated, and resilient.”

Katherine Mansfield, a tenured professor in the College of Education who teaches the current Race, Class, and Gender Issues course at the university, said she did not yet know whether the same course could be taught with the listed changes because of the lack of information about the changes.

“All we know is that the title has been changed and the written focus of the class has been changed,” Mansfield said in an interview with the Daily.

According to the email from Wong, faculty whose courses have been adjusted have until the 2025-2026 academic year to revise their curricula to match the new course descriptions.

Wong also emphasized in the email that McFarlin feels empathetic to the faculty and said “he would feel similarly [upset] if he were in [the faculty’s] shoes.”

This follows the latest university Faculty Senate meeting, during which Chief Integrity Officer Clay Simmons presented new guidance on research and academic course instruction aimed at complying with SB 17.

In Simmons’ presentation, he said the new guidance, which was recommended by the university’s Office of General Counsel, requires course instruction on DEI topics to be “limited to the elements of the course.”

For example, Simmons said a mathematics class could not include an activity on DEI topics, whether graded or not.

Devynn Case, university director of media relations, said in a statement to the Daily that the university “[continues] to support all our students as we comply with Senate Bill 17.”

Case also said the law forbids the university from engaging in DEI efforts and “does not apply to student organizations or academic course instruction/research.”

This is a developing story that will be updated as new information becomes available.

Editor's note: this story has been updated to add context.

Guidance on research and teaching aimed at SB 17 compliance announced, North Texas Daily

 Friends,

UNT Denton is now extending SB 17 law compliance into curriculum and research. Yes, this unnecessary and ridiculous DEI phobia is impacting what gets taught in some Texas' university classrooms, as well as what gets researched by university professors who are under scrutiny at UNT Denton. So far, so good at UT Austin, but this could be a portent of things to come at your local university if officials continue contributing to a climate of fear and misinterpreting and misrepresenting the law.

What's crazy is that UNT Denton is asserting itself into what have been decades-long, thorny debates on what constitutes "research," by offering something as truly ambiguous as "generalizable research." Moreover, to cite my colleague, Dr. Lilia Garces, this is "repressive legalism" playing out. 

Please, we don't need or want every university in Texas to be run by lawyers, councils, or chief integrity officers!!! This should not even exist or get normalized. These kinds of decisions about what constitutes research need to be made by the research community itself. Anything short of this undermines faculty governance, contributes to low morale among the faculty and administrators who know better (and most do), and turns higher ed in Texas into glorified high schools.

Faculty, please consider joining AAUP as this will provide you with job protection and a community that is responding to this nonsense and hurtful agenda that by their own admission, exceeds the bounds of SB17 that's not supposed to impact either teaching or research.

Angela Valenzuela



Guidance on research and teaching aimed at SB 17 compliance announced, North Texas Daily

by McKinnon Rice, John Forbes
Oct 31, 2024 | North Texas Daily




Chief Compliance Officer Clay Simmons introduced new guidance on research and academic course instruction at the most recent Faculty Senate meeting that included restrictions on faculty research and academic course instruction to comply with Senate Bill 17.

SB 17, passed in 2022, prohibits Texas public institutions of higher education from undertaking diversity, equity and inclusion efforts and from requiring employees to participate in DEI training or make DEI statements. It also does not allow the university to “give preference on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin to an applicant for employment, an employee, or a participant in any function of the institution.”

The law also says the DEI prohibition does not apply to “academic course instruction,” and “scholarly research or a creative work by an institution of higher education's students, faculty, or other research personnel or the dissemination of that research or work.”


The new guidance introduced at the meeting, provided to Clay Simmons by the university’s Office of General Counsel, has caused confusion and concern among faculty.

Simmons said at the Oct. 9 meeting that the university is using the definition of research used in the university’s research misconduct policy, which defines research as “a systematic investigation, including development, testing, evaluation, or publication to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge,” under the advice of the General Counsel’s Office.

Simmons’ presentation at the meeting acknowledged the bill mentions areas where the DEI restrictions do not apply, and outlined the university’s limitations on those exceptions.

The new guidance in the presentation said that “classroom lessons on DEI topics must be limited to elements of the course,” and that “course activities must relate to the course goal or objective.”

Regarding research, limitations to the exception are that “research must meet the definition of true research and be essential to the research,” and that the “scope of work is very important,” according to the new guidance.

“The identity-based aspects must be essential to the research,” Simmons said at the Oct. 9 meeting. “So if you're doing research on homelessness, you have to be very careful if you're going to focus on a certain identity within homelessness. So if you're looking at LGBTQ homeless individuals, then you'll have to make sure that that is narrowly-tailored within the scope of work.”

Adam Briggle, professor and director of graduate studies in the philosophy department, expressed concern about the new guidance at the meeting.

Briggle said he is often told his scholarly work is not research as defined by the Institutional Review Board, a body at the university that reviews faculty’s research proposals to ensure they are complying with regulations pertaining to the use of living subjects, because his work does not fit the part of the definition that says research must “contribute to generalizable knowledge.”

The IRB defines research as “a systematic investigation, including research development, testing and evaluation, designed to develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge,” almost identical to the Office of General Counsel’s chosen definition.

At the meeting, Briggle asked if a peer-reviewed article about the rights of transgender people that appeared in a journal or periodical would be permitted.

Simmons said such work would not be protected by the exemption.

“So if you’re not conducting research to the definition that’s included in the policy there, then you’re not covered by the exception,” Simmons said.

Senior Lecturer Lisa Welch, a senator from the College of Science, asked a similar question of Simmons later in the meeting about how faculty work like fiction and nonfiction writing and journal articles are handled by the new guidance.

“I think, as long as you're not doing one of those prohibited activities, then you're on safe ground,” Simmons said. “I don’t think there’s anything that prohibits anyone from writing a paper, especially if it's going to a research publication or a journal or something like that.”


In an interview with the North Texas Daily, Briggle said he believes the research restrictions discussed at the meeting are not the result of what the law said, but of the university’s interpretation of it.

“I actually don’t think this is a problem with SB 17, I think it’s a problem with our compliance office,” Briggle said. “I think they are hitting everything with a blowtorch here, because they're really afraid, understandably, of the legislature cutting their funding. So that's my concern, is even if the authors of SB 17 didn't intend this, it’s having a chilling effect campus wide that is creeping into the classrooms and research when it shouldn't be. I think we need to recalibrate where we're drawing the line as an institution.”

Mariela Nunez-Janes, a professor in the anthropology department, attended the Faculty Senate meeting and raised concerns about the teaching guidance issued. She asked Simmons how academic freedom was being considered by the university.

Simmons said he believes the new guidelines do not inhibit academic freedom because SB 17 is now state law, and is the “very top of the hierarchy” for the university when determining what is allowed in an institution.

Simmons also said there is “intense scrutiny” from the Texas Legislature and interest groups in regard to SB 17 compliance — the penalty for not abiding by the law is losing funding from the state.

On Oct. 25, Simmons sent an email to Faculty Senate members intended to clarify the guidance. The email reiterated the previously-used definition of research, including the section that says research must “develop or contribute to generalizable knowledge,” but also added that “this definition includes scholarly activities and creative works.”

Briggle said of the clarification that confusion remains because the phrase “generalizable knowledge” is still in the definition.

“I'm not sure it fixes it to just say this includes scholarly activities and creative works,” Briggle said. “Does that mean they still have to contribute to generalizable knowledge? And who's deciding what that means? Actually, I don't know, maybe this leaves more questions than answers.”

In an interview with the Daily, Simmons said, “I don’t see us really getting down into the very minute detail of what is generalizable knowledge […].”

According to the presentation, penalties for noncompliance with SB 17 include “disciplinary action by the university against individuals and loss of state funding for UNT.”

Briggle also said penalties could be a year without pay for a professor’s first offense, and immediate termination from employment for their second. In addition to being fired, Briggle said the professor would also be “blacklisted” from being hired at another higher education institution in Texas.

Simmons said anyone can request a review from the Integrity and Compliance Office to check if they or someone else are following SB 17.

At the Faculty Senate meeting, Simmons encouraged faculty members to consult their own chain of command before requesting a review from his office.

“The reason for that is that not only are we looking at legal risks that are presented with some of these activities, but we're also looking at the political risk that comes along with a lot of these,” Simmons said at the meeting. “And so sometimes things will be legal, but a dean just isn't comfortable going quite that far into that territory, and will be more prone to want to either change it or modify it, or rethink the whole idea.”

Simmons said in an interview with the Daily that the “political risk” is the possibility of it appearing to the state that the university is not taking SB 17 compliance seriously.

Simmons also said at the meeting that around university 90 activities had been cut and around 17 modified to comply with the law.

The next Faculty Senate meeting will take place on Nov. 20, and senators will be able to further discuss concerns about SB 17 guidelines.

"Last Night's DEI Dream: Art and a Change of Heart Will Save the World," by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Last Night's DEI Dream: Art and a Change of Heart Will Save the World

by

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

November 2, 2024

Perhaps inspired by the Day of the Dead and my deep thoughts and prayers these days on ancestors, especially my late mother, Helen Valenzuela, I had a dream last night that I was on a search committee at a major public university in Texas. Our committee of 5 members of the faculty were to replace a departing provost. The provost is the head of the academic mission of the university. They are also referred to as the Chief Academic Officers of the university. 

In my dream, she was an affable white woman with short red hair and freckles. Race and gender are important to this story on DEI, though I will not analyze it fully as I'm still processing the dream. I welcome your comments.

The space for the search committee meeting was a vast, open quadrangle that blended elements of ancient Greek design with modern, dilapidated structures that were chipped and crumbling. Ha! A "Hellenic" context. Love you, Mom! My dream felt at once current, futuristic, and dystopian.

The roads leading up to the quadrangle were dusty and riddled with potholes, a stark contrast to the imposing Greek-motif main building that loomed ahead. Its impressive facade evoked a bygone era, hinting at faded grandeur. The marble columns and platforms appeared worn and weathered, their once-smooth surfaces now etched with the marks—not of time, one sensed—but of underinvestment and neglect. Still, we as a faculty were pursuing our charge to select the next provost of the university with me as one of their representatives.

I searched for an equivalent architectural structure online and this was the closest that I could find. This is a digital creation of what the Temple of Elysian Harmony looked like in ancient Greece. It is fitting, as for the ancient Greeks, the Elysium symbolized a realm of creativity, wisdom, and intellectual pursuits—the highest and noblest of qualities we envision for our universities today. This is why so many university campuses—and public buildings, too—are adorned with architectural artwork and aesthetically constructed according to Greek and Roman architecture in order to convey power, authority, and status.

However, in the context of my dream, I want you to imagine a large, u-shaped quadrangle structure that similarly consists of marble columns and platforms, with the entire structure opening up at its mouth to a large dirt parking lot and roads leading up to it. Cars are inchoately parked, revealing a lack of order that betrayed the decorum of "the Elysian" of my dream. I walked through the uncomfortable dust to get to my meeting with the search committee and provost. 

On a specially constructed platform astride the Elysian marble stairs, the outgoing provost was on a large, oblong table facing the audience and with the five search committee members facing her, myself included. What was interesting was that the entire university of students, staff, and faculty were invited such that the quadrangle area was fully packed. I sensed that many members of the public at large were present, as well, given the high-stakes nature of the meeting. I appreciated but was somewhat inhibited in knowing that members of the public were in attendance, including, possibly, members of the Texas legislature.

I don't remember any microphones. Rather, our voices were magically heard by all, presumably because of the Elysian's architectural design. What I liked was the "demos" vibe of the event, which is, of course, the root of the word "democracy," meaning "the people." What all appreciated and took for granted was that this was a transparent conversation surrounding this important hire where the expertise of the search committee was recognized as a matter of fact.

On the topic of the qualities of the provost, I remember saying that they should ideally be likable to the faculty, considering their relationship to the faculty. I by no means meant that the provost herself wasn't likable, but rather, the next provost should be similarly appealing. She took my suggestion well and agreed, nodding her head. Another on the search committee asked the provost what is the question she gets asked the most.

The provost said, "The question I get asked most is about diversity." My mind went immediately to the struggles we have been having in Texas with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). I thought to myself, "I'm not surprised considering all the chaos that the Texas legislature's ending of DEI programs and initiatives had wrought. In fact, it was the answer I was expecting.

What happened next, though, surprised me. The provost stopped speaking and stood up and walked over to her left side of the quadrangle, where large canvases dropped down from between its marble columns, four total. She painted with a large paintbrush, one canvas after another at breakneck speed, with beautiful, bright-colored imagery. The audience, myself included, was stunned and spellbound.

Then a white female professor, presumably a faculty member from the Fine Arts Department, similarly stood up and belted out a most beautiful rendition of the classic, Mexican song, "Los Laureles," sung by numerous artists, reminiscent of the memorable one by Linda Ronstadt in her best-selling, Grammy Award-winning album, Canciones de Mi Padre (My father's songs). You can listen to it in its entirety here and read the lyrics in Spanish here.

The provost never stopped painting, reminding me of the movie, "Fantasia," which is imaginatively vivid and expressive through animation, transporting the viewer to other worlds. Moreover, she inspired this professor to extemporaneously stand up to sing this well-known traditional Mexican song, which was clearly one of her well-rehearsed favorites, that extended the political statement the provost was making through art. What surprised us Mexicans and Mexican Americans in the audience was that both were white powerful women doing this and in the context of a search committee meeting! This was unheard of!

The person next to me said, "Can you believe this? There is such a deep hunger for diversity that even white people are craving it!" "And it's Mexican!" I said.

The final touch was a most piercing, loud Mexican grito, by a Latino male that punctuated a most extraordinary event, waking me up (see Learn How to Grito like a Mariachi on Youtube), literally thrust into consciousness.

There are many layers here that I am still figuring out. An immediate takeaway is that there truly exists such a deep hunger for diversity that we're seeing white people actively seeking out multicultural experiences, engaging with diverse communities, and advocating for inclusivity in various spaces. It really is hard to argue against the idea that our diversity is our strength, forming us into a richer, more vibrant society and nation that benefits everyone.

Conversely, without it, we are impoverished. Even our institutions lose their gleam, at best. At worst, they crumble and fall into disrepair.

 

A final thought is that we, as Mexicans or Mexican Americans—or members of any nationality, race, or ethnicity—also cannot and should not underestimate white people. Many of them are already Mexican (or other race, ethnicity, or nationality) in their hearts. And the number is growing. Or perhaps they have a Mexican mother, father, grandmother, or grandfather, including departed ones, who are not just telling them to love those parts of themselves that defy the myth of racial purity but also that art really can save the world. 

If it worked for Linda Ronstadt, it could work for them, too. 🩷