Six weeks after the spring semester began, the Texas Tech University System Board of Regents met Thursday but did not publicly answer a central question facing professors: What, exactly, are they allowed to teach about race, gender and sexuality?
The new chancellor, Brandon Creighton, upended longstanding academic norms late last year when he directed faculty to recognize there are only two sexes, male and female; barred them from promoting the idea that individuals are inherently racist or sexist; and required regents’ approval of flagged course content. Since then, courses were canceled, readings removed or shortened and instructors required to sign statements agreeing not to teach certain material unless regents approve it.
Texas Tech University officials, who have declined to say how many courses were affected by Creighton’s directive, previously said regents would consider curriculum recommendations at the Feb. 26 meeting and make final decisions on what could be taught.
For weeks, a black-and-white protest flyer circulated on campus promoting a Feb. 26 rally from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. on Texas Tech’s campus in Lubbock. It altered the university’s slogan, “From here, it’s possible,” to read: “From here, it’s [REDACTED].” Beneath the altered motto, the flyer accused the university of advancing a “political agenda” and urged students not to “let Texas Tech betray you.”
Meeting in Dallas, roughly 350 miles away at a Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center campus, regents spent much of the morning hearing campus updates and recognitions.
Creighton, attending his first regents meeting as chancellor, began by reflecting on his first 99 days before turning the meeting over to campus presidents.
“I’ve seen first hand the reach of the system, not just in geography, but in impact,” he said. “The Texas Tech system is changing lives every single day, and it’s our people who make that possible. That’s what makes the system so special, and frankly, once again, why I’m so grateful to be here.”
Midwestern State University officials boasted that its men’s soccer team won the NCAA Division II national championship.
Texas Tech President Lawrence Schovanec highlighted a recent choir performance at a statewide music convention in San Antonio.
“Last week, I was on the phone with a reporter from the New York Times who asked me, ‘What positive stories about higher education should we be telling?’ And I said, ‘Well, this is going to surprise you, but I want to talk about the Texas Tech choir,’” Shovanec said.
Several thousand people attended the performance, he said.
“It was so moving, almost as moving as athletic events,” Schovanec said, jokingly.
Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center President Lori Rice-Spearman discussed a rural breast cancer screening effort that provided more than 2,700 exams across West Texas. She said one patient, a 50-year-old woman from Roscoe, 230 miles west of Dallas, had never received a mammogram.
“She got an exam that revealed abnormalities in both of her breasts, leading to a diagnosis and life-saving treatment,” Rice-Spearman said.
The board also advanced major construction projects, including a roughly $168 million academic complex and a $128 million agricultural building at Texas Tech University, along with health facilities in El Paso.
The Academic, Clinical and Student Affairs Committee lasted only a few minutes and included no public discussion about the course content review.
Regent Shelley Sweatt briefly addressed the items approved on the consent agenda, noting they were promotions, tenure decisions and several new degree programs that had been “carefully discussed and considered” by regents and campus leaders to meet workforce and student needs.
Among them was a new master’s degree in renewable energy at Texas Tech University, which drew scrutiny earlier in the week from conservative website Texas Scorecard. The publication questioned the need for the program.
Regents then spent nearly five hours meeting privately in executive session. Just before 4 p.m., they returned and approved three items: changes to board employment rules tied to Senate Bill 37, a contract for an electronic medical records project in El Paso, and a real estate purchase.
They did not address the curriculum review and did not say whether it came up behind closed doors. The board’s next regularly scheduled meeting is May 7.
Back in Lubbock, between 50 and 80 students and professors rallied in opposition to the curriculum review.
Tara Findley, vice president of Democrats for Texas at Texas Tech, said organizers held the protest during the regents meeting to pressure them and raise awareness among a student body she described as not very politically active. Records show that administrators have told professors not to bring up the course content review in class.
“They’re not being transparent at all about this,” Findley said of administrators.
Findley, a junior studying public relations and political science, said she initially planned to invite a representative from a transgender rights organization to speak to her class, but her professor worried it might violate the new rules. Findley instead invited a representative from the American Association of University Professors, a group that has opposed curriculum reviews as a violation of academic freedom.
Wearing his academic regalia, Andrew Martin, an art professor and president of the Texas Tech chapter of the AAUP, used a megaphone to say the review undermines the university’s educational mission.
“We all need to learn more about the world as it is, and no one group can determine reality for us,” Martin said. “The concerns our students are raising are real, and the hour for all of us to be alarmed is now.”
According to Creighton’s Dec. 1 memorandum and an accompanying flow chart, faculty who believe their course materials implicate the race and gender directives must first determine if the content is “relevant and necessary” for classroom instruction. If it is not required for professional licensure, certification or patient and client care, instructors must disclose the content to a department chair, dean and provost. The provost then decides whether to recommend the material to regents for approval. Faculty who do not seek review are expected to remove the content and could face discipline if they do not.
Other public university systems have adopted similar restrictions in recent months.
The Texas A&M University System Board of Regents adopted a policy that states “no system academic course will advocate for race or gender ideology, or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity” unless they are upper-level or graduate courses and receive written approval from a university president.
Last week, the University of Texas Board of Regents approved a rule requiring its institutions to ensure students can graduate without studying what it calls “unnecessary controversial subjects,” and faculty take a “broad and balanced approach” when discussing them.
Many university leaders have justified restrictions by citing SB 37, a new state law expanding regents’ authority over hiring, discipline and curriculum. The law requires regents to periodically review general education curricula to ensure courses are foundational and prepare students for civic and professional life. It does not explicitly ban or require pre-approval of specific lessons on race, gender and sexuality.
Creighton authored the law during his final legislative session as a Republican state senator before becoming chancellor.
The Texas Tribune partners with Open Campus on higher education coverage.
Disclosure: Texas A&M University System, Texas Tech University and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
