The Texas Tech University System has introduced significant new restrictions on how faculty can discuss topics related to race, sex, and gender identity in the classroom. A memo from Chancellor Brandon Creighton outlines a multi-layered approval process for any course material touching on these subjects, with final oversight resting with the Board of Regents.
The new directive, which faculty must adhere to or face potential disciplinary action, has sparked immediate concern among some educators about academic freedom and the integrity of university curriculum just weeks before the start of the spring semester.
Key Takeaways
- Texas Tech University System has restricted certain classroom discussions on race, sex, and gender identity.
- A new approval process requires course content on these topics to be vetted by chairs, deans, provosts, and ultimately the Board of Regents.
- Faculty members who do not comply with the new policies could face disciplinary measures.
- The move has been met with criticism from some faculty, who cite concerns over academic freedom and censorship.
A New Mandate for University Classrooms
Chancellor Brandon Creighton distributed a memo to university presidents on Monday detailing the new academic guidelines. The policy explicitly prohibits instructors from promoting a list of specific concepts. These include the idea that “one race or sex is inherently superior to another” or that an individual “is inherently racist, sexist or oppressive, consciously or unconsciously” due to their race or sex.
The memo also restricts teaching that individuals should face discrimination based on race or sex, that moral character is determined by these traits, or that people bear guilt for the past actions of others from the same group. The policy further targets discussions suggesting that concepts like meritocracy or a strong work ethic are racist or sexist constructs.
According to the document, "promotion" is defined as presenting these beliefs as correct or required and pressuring students to affirm them. The guidelines permit analyzing or critiquing these ideas as one viewpoint among many.
The Multi-Step Approval Process
Accompanying the new rules is a detailed flowchart that establishes a formal review process for course materials. This system requires faculty to seek approval for any content that addresses the restricted topics, adding several layers of administrative oversight to curriculum development.
The process is as follows:
- Faculty must first determine if the material is relevant and necessary for the course.
- If it is, they must then assess if it is required for professional licensure, certification, or patient care.
- If the material meets these professional requirements, it can remain in the course, but the Board of Regents must be notified.
- If the material is not required for such purposes, the instructor must submit it for approval to their department chair, dean, and provost. These administrators will then forward a recommendation to the Board of Regents for a final decision.
Statewide Trend in Higher Education
These changes at Texas Tech are part of a broader pattern across Texas public universities. The Texas A&M University System recently approved a policy requiring campus presidents to sign off on courses that could be perceived as advocating for specific ideologies on race, gender, or sexual orientation. Similarly, Texas State University and the University of Houston have initiated reviews of course content and descriptions to ensure they are "ideologically neutral."
Faculty Reactions and Concerns
The directive has been met with immediate criticism from some faculty members who see it as an infringement on academic freedom. Kelli Cargile Cook, a professor emeritus who was planning to teach a final course this spring, said the memo prompted her to cancel the class and begin drafting a resignation letter.
"I’ve been teaching since 1981 and this was going to be my last class... but I can’t stomach what’s going on at Texas Tech," Cargile Cook stated. "When you think about how this would be put into practice, where a Board of Regents approves a curriculum — people who are politically appointed, not educated, not researchers — that move is a slippery slope."
Cargile Cook expressed alarm that the policy frames established facts and historical analysis as mere "viewpoints," which she believes could distort academic inquiry. This sentiment was echoed by Andrew Martin, president of the Texas Tech chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).
Martin described the memo as a "profound disappointment" and argued that it violates the First Amendment. He added that the policy harms transgender and gender-nonconforming students and colleagues while misrepresenting existing laws.
Legal and Legislative Context
Chancellor Creighton's memo positions the new rules as the "first step" in implementing Senate Bill 37. Creighton himself authored this state law during his time in the Texas Senate. The law mandates a comprehensive review of undergraduate core curricula. While early drafts of SB 37 included restrictions on teaching about race and sex, those provisions were removed before the bill was passed.
Implementation and Broader Implications
In a news release, Chancellor Creighton said the objective of the new policies is to offer “clarity, consistency and guardrails that protect academic excellence.” A system representative noted that the memo was intended to provide guidance as faculty prepare for the spring semester, which begins in six weeks. While the system hopes the new approval process will be swift, the specific details are still being finalized.
This move follows a systemwide directive issued in September by then-Chancellor Tedd L. Mitchell, which instructed faculty to comply with various state and federal orders recognizing only two sexes. At that time, some professors reported self-censoring and removing terms like "transgender" from their lesson plans due to confusion and fear of reprisal.
The new, more formalized process at Texas Tech appears to go further than recent policies at other state universities by creating a direct line of curriculum approval that ends with the politically appointed Board of Regents. As universities across Texas navigate new state laws and political pressures, the balance between institutional oversight and academic freedom remains a central point of contention.
