[ad_1]
Florida’s Legislature on Wednesday passed a comprehensive bill that would ban diversity statements, overhaul general-education course requirements, and prohibit colleges from spending state and federal dollars on diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
The bill, SB 266, now heads to the desk of Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, who will have seven days to veto or sign it. It is not known if the governor intends to sign the legislation, but it would achieve many of his policy priorities. The governor’s office did not respond to an inquiry on whether he would sign the bill.
Since it was first proposed, in March, the measure has drawn protests from students, intense lobbying from colleges, and condemnation from faculty unions and national advocacy groups for free speech. In the last three weeks, it’s undergone three rounds of revisions.
Critics say the bill is unconstitutional and would limit academic freedom. But supporters of the legislation argue it would ensure a wide range of viewpoints could be heard in the classroom.
The bill’s sponsors did not respond to requests for comment on the legislation..
The bill is part of a tidal wave of legislation targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts that is sweeping state houses across the country. Florida was one of the first 20 states to introduce such legislation, according to The Chronicle’s DEI legislation tracker.
Last week North Dakota’s Gov. Doug Burgum, a Republican, signed into law a bill that prohibits colleges from requiring diversity training.
Florida’s legislation was viewed by some as an unprecedented attempt to write DeSantis’s agenda — to dismantle DEI efforts on campuses — into law, a drive fueled by the end of the legislative session, on Friday. At New College of Florida, a public institution, DeSantis appointed several new trustees and gave them the explicit mission of creating the “Hillsdale of the South,” a reference to a Christian college in Michigan.
Students and faculty members across Florida have protested the anti-DEI legislation, saying it would limit academic freedom and over-legislate the college classroom.
“While the bill’s supporters have claimed that it will provide ‘accountability’ to Florida’s colleges and universities, SB 266 is in fact another unconstitutional attack upon the freedoms of Florida’s students to learn and faculty’s rights to teach — freedoms that are undermined by state-sponsored indoctrination and control,” the United Faculty of Florida, a union representing more than 25,000 faculty members, said in a statement on Wednesday. (A bill-analysis and fiscal-impact statement found that the bill would not violate the state’s constitution.)
I believe that this is true academic freedom in this bill.
Conservatives in Florida, and across the country, have said anti-DEI legislation would limit discrimination against white employees and students, and would prevent colleges from teaching only one viewpoint.
“I believe that this is true academic freedom in this bill,” said its author, Sen Erin Grall, before the Senate voted on it. “This encourages all voices to be heard, robust debate to happen, and merit and academic rigor to be the utmost importance at all of our colleges and universities.”
A Watered-Down Bill
The Senate bill has undergone numerous changes since it was introduced.
It originally called for eliminating majors and minors in critical race theory (or structural racism), gender studies, and intersectionality, or the concept that people experience discrimination based on multiple identities. That provision was later taken out.
The original bill would have given the 12 universities in the State University System of Florida the power to conduct post-tenure reviews of faculty members at any time, as long as there was cause to do so. The final version of the bill would require post-tenure reviews to occur every five years.
The bill also initially would have given those public universities’ boards the power to hire faculty members, taking that authority away from campus officials. In the bill’s final version, that power would be given to each university’s president.
Some language in the original bill was made more allusive. Specific references to “critical race theory” and “diversity, equity, and inclusion” were replaced with phrases such as “theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States.”
Under the final version, the state universities would be barred from asking student and job applicants for statements on how they would contribute to diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
If the measure is enacted into law, such institutions could lose millions of dollars in federal research grants, many of which require applicants to describe existing or future diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts.
The bill would also prohibit public colleges and nonprofit organizations affiliated with them from spending state or federal funds on programs and activities that “advocate for diversity, equity, and inclusion, or promote or engage in political or social activism.”
Exemptions would be made for programs that are required to comply with federal law, necessary to obtain accreditation, approved by the State Board of Education or the Board of Governors, or supported by student fees to benefit student groups. College-access programs for specific groups of students would also be exempt.
The bill also includes a provision attempting to circumvent any accreditation problems it may cause. Many accreditors require colleges to show that they are encouraging diversity, equity, and inclusion on campus. The bill says that accreditors cannot “compel any public postsecondary institution to violate state law.”
Under the bill, the State University System’s Board of Governors would be able to review and revise the mission statements of the 12 universities.
The Board of Governors and the State Board of Education would also be responsible for approving the list of general-education courses to be taught at public colleges and universities. Colleges’ individual faculty committees, jointly appointed by both boards, are currently responsible for identifying those courses.
Both boards would also be charged with recommending courses for the state’s general-education core curriculum. The bill stipulates that starting on July 1, 2024, faculty committees must submit recommendations for changes in such classes to the Articulation Coordinating Committee every four years.
The bill states that core general-education classes “may not distort significant historical events or include a curriculum that teaches identity politics … or is based on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political, and economic inequalities.”
Among a list of standards for such core classes, the bill states that humanities courses would be required to “include selections from the Western canon.” General-education courses would also be required to, “whenever applicable, provide instruction on the historical background and philosophical foundation of Western civilization and this nation’s historical documents.”
[ad_2]
Source link
