Students and Faculty at Ohio State Respond to a Bill that Would Restrict College Discussions of Climate Policies

June 05, 2023

Print This Article Share it With Friends

by Dan Gearino (Inside Climate News) “You can say gravity isn't true, but if you step off the cliff, you’re going down,” says climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe about restrictions on teaching. ... The wide-ranging bill includes a provision that designates climate policy as a “controversial belief or policy” and says faculty must “encourage students to reach their own conclusions about all controversial beliefs or policies and shall not seek to inculcate any social, political, or religious point of view.”

...

The bill is an example of a national trend of Republican-led states seeking to rein in what they see as runaway liberal politics in higher education—a sentiment that threatens to undermine the rigor and accuracy of teaching about arguably the greatest threat to the environment and economy.

“You can say gravity isn’t true, but if you step off the cliff, you’re going down,” said Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist who teaches at Texas Tech University and a well-known writer and commentator about climate change and responding to climate denial. “And if you teach other people that gravity is not true, you are morally responsible for anything that happens to them if they make decisions based on the information you provided.”

...

The Ohio bill bans state colleges and universities from requiring diversity, equity and inclusion training for students and staff; bans unions at at colleges and universities from going on strike; requires the use of student surveys in evaluating faculty; requires all students to take an American government or history course; and has a variety of provisions aimed at protecting students and faculty whose views may be out of line with those of the administration or a majority of people on campus.

The measure has passed the Ohio Senate and is now being considered by the Ohio House, both of which have large Republican majorities. Gov. Mike DeWine is also a Republican.

...

The “controversial concepts” specified in the law include “climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion.”

Colleges would be required to declare that they will not endorse any controversial belief or policy.

The bill has inspired intense pushback from people tied to Ohio colleges and the general public. Opponents have filled the seats and hallways of the statehouse during marathon hearings on the measure, with some in the audience wearing black tape over their mouths to symbolize what they view as a state overreach into what is said in classrooms.

Ohio State’s Board of Trustees has said it opposes the bill.

...

Cirino and the bill’s supporters have made changes in response to critics. For example, they changed “climate change” to “climate policies” in the list of controversial concepts to indicate that they are taking aim at colleges and faculty endorsing policy responses to climate change, as opposed to regulating discussion of climate change as a concept.

At a committee hearing last week, one of the bill’s opponents asked Cirino if college faculty would be required to teach both sides of the question of whether the Holocaust happened.

...

She (Robyn Wilson, a professor at Ohio State’s School of Environment and Natural Resources) also has practical questions about how faculty members are supposed to teach about the science, politics and social ramifications of climate change if the bill passes.

“When you attempt to share both sides of the story, you give them equal weight,” Wilson said. “And the problem is that for some of these issues, there’s not equal weight.”

...

Hayhoe said the idea behind proposals like the one in Ohio is often that faculty members are chilling discussion about climate change by insisting that one view is correct and others are wrong. But the reality, in her classes at least, is more nuanced. She’s trying to teach students how to review evidence and recognize disinformation.

Students can interject if they have a different view, but she responds by guiding them to accurate information. Her goal is for them to learn for themselves if their view is correct or not. For a small number of students, this is an affront.

“They feel silenced when all you’re doing is correcting,” she said. READ MORE

Related articles

Senate Bill 83: Enact Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act (Ohio Legislature)
Update on Ohio Senate Bill 83 (University of Cincinnati)
SENATE BILL 83’S FOUR BIGGEST PROBLEMS, AN ACLU OF OHIO PERSPECTIVE (ACLU Ohio)
Ohio Fails to Pass Restrictions on College Teaching About Climate Policies -- The legislation, written to fight the “woke fiefdom” of higher education, doesn’t have the votes to pass the Ohio House. (Inside Climate News)

Excerpt from University of Cincinnati: This review identified impact to academic freedom, our academic mission, research enterprise and operations, all of which support our institution’s role in promoting critical thinking and supporting student success.

Because of these concerns, our university leadership, led by President Pinto, and members of our university community advocated at length for our mission and our values with the bill’s sponsor, our local delegation and other elected officials. Importantly, the state’s public university presidents joined together to consistently speak with a united voice regarding this bill.

On May 9, the Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee voted to accept a substitute version of the bill. The House Higher Education Committee also adopted the language of this substitute bill into its companion bill, House Bill 151.

In its current, updated form, Senate Bill 83 – as well as the companion House Bill 151 – continue to impact a number of areas, including:

University mission statements

DEI policies and programs

Policies related to intellectual diversity and controversial beliefs

Syllabus requirements

Faculty workload, evaluation and post-tenure review processes

Partnerships with the People's Republic of China

Board of Trustees training and term lengths

A requirement of an American history/government course for all undergraduates

Endowment-related policies and practices

Collective bargaining agreements

Senate Bill 83 will receive another hearing in the Senate Workforce and Higher Education Committee on May 16. The university and our counterparts around the state as well as the Inter-University Council, a consortium of Ohio’s 14 public universities, will continue our advocacy, both formal and informal, regarding the bill’s impact on higher education and the State of Ohio overall. As the process advances, it’s our goal to represent the integrity of our institution as fundamental to our state and our society in terms of problem solving, creating opportunity and developing educated and engaged citizens. READ MORE

Excerpt from ACLU Ohio: The ACLU of Ohio opposes this legislation and urges the Ohio General Assembly to cease consideration given its numerous problems.

...

1. Elimination of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Training

The bill explicitly states, “No DEI or related training of any kind.”

While there are perhaps countless reasons why such a ban is unwise policy, the ACLU of Ohio notes that this prohibition prevents not only proactive training, but also training that is reactive to demonstrated, systemic and/or widespread problems in a university or college.

...

2. Contrived Definitions of “Segregation” and “Non-Discrimination”

SB 83 contains broad language in several places prohibiting universities and colleges from all types of segregation. On its surface, much or some of this language can be seen as a positive thing. Who could support segregation of any type? Or treating students differently?

...

Practical examples of what this may impact: 

Dormitory living (students of same sex required to live together)

Certain extracurricular groups, organizations, or activities
- Using Ohio State University as an example, these would no longer be recognized or funded by OSU – using those that just start with the letter “A”
  - African American Voices Gospel Choir
  - American Muslim Student Association
  - Armenian Students Association
  - Asian American InterVarsity Christian Fellowship
  - Association of Latino Professionals for America
  - Association of Native American Medical Students
  - Association for Women in Mathematics Student Chapter
  - Association of Women Dentists

No formal recognition of sororities and fraternities split by sex;

No single-sex sports teams;

No literature, presentations, trainings, etc., aimed at distinct student demographics on such topics as preventing and/or coping with sexual assault, human trafficking, birth control, LGBTQ issues and concerns;

No majors or courses of study on such topics as women’s studies, Pan-African studies, queer studies, etc.

All of the above, and surely much more, would be illegal as these examples can be interpreted as providing “advantage” (funding or official recognition, in this case), or endorsing or facilitating “segregation” by “membership in groups defined by characteristics such as race, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.”

3. Banning “Controversial Beliefs or Policies”

Aimed squarely at the idea that colleges and universities are centers of ‘indoctrination,’ SB 83 contains various language provisions meant to prevent that assumption. To get everyone on the same page, this section of SB 83 offers definitions: “Controversial belief or policy’ means any belief or policy that is the subject of political controversy, including issues such as climate change, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion.”

Essentially all topics in today’s society are capable of being the subject of some “political controversy.” What if a university wants to generally encourage students to vote? Some people think 18 is too young, or that women should not be allowed. What if a university wants to acknowledge or celebrate Gay Pride Month? Not under SB 83.

4. Application to Private Schools

Finally, SB 83 applies part of its provisions and ideas to private colleges and universities. As a condition of ongoing and future state funding for “institutional purposes” (not including needs-based financial grants), the private schools must submit standardized documentation affirming:

The institution is committed to intellectual diversity;

The institution is committed to free speech protection for students, staff, and faculty; and

The institution does not require diversity, equity, and inclusion courses or training for students, staff, or faculty.

All that is needed for all state funding to be revoked is for the chancellor of higher education to receive “credible information” of a violation, after which the chancellor will notify the college or university in writing. The college or university must then return state funding. SB 83 does not contain any appeals process or formal investigation requirements, only the receipt of “credibly information” before funding is seized back. READ MORE

Excerpt from Inside Climate News: Ohio lawmakers have failed, at least for now, to pass a bill that would exert control over discussion of “controversial beliefs” about climate policies in college classrooms.

Ohio House Speaker Jason Stephens, a Republican, said this week that the bill doesn’t have enough support to pass the House, where it has sat for months following passage in the Senate.

Senate Bill 83 contains a wide-ranging set of rules for public colleges and universities, including bans on most diversity training and new requirements that alternative viewpoints on such topics as climate policies, immigration and abortion are discussed. Its main sponsor, Sen. Jerry Cirino, a Republican, said he was taking on the “woke fiefdom” of higher education.

The bill faced intense opposition from faculty, students, environmental groups and unions, leading to hours-long hearings over several months. Supporters of the bill made many changes to attempt to find a version that could pass, including the removal of language that banned strikes by higher education unions, but it wasn’t enough.

A provision dealing with “controversial beliefs or policies” remained in the bill, which helped to inspire resistance from people who teach and study science; they warned that Ohio’s public colleges and universities would be impaired in their ability to teach climate science. READ MORE