Since Senate Bill 83, or the Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act, was passed by the Ohio Senate May 17, several Kent State faculty members are expressing their thoughts on the bill and what it could mean for higher education.

With a vote of 21-10, the controversial bill that would ban required diversity training in public universities, prohibit university employees from striking and restrict universities and faculty from taking stances on “controversial issues” now moves to the Ohio House and is being considered by committees.

This piece of Ohio legislation comes in the midst of numerous bills introduced across the country that target diversity, equity and inclusion programs as well as laws that limit discussions of race and sexuality in schools.

Deb Smith, a philosophy professor and president of the Kent State Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP-KSU), has expressed many concerns about Senate Bill 83, as she testified twice at the Ohio Statehouse in opposition to the bill’s original and revised versions.

“One of the parts of the bill that I’m most concerned about is the requirement that all of the faculty post their syllabi for all classes with their contact information, a detailed description of the content that will be covered in the class and the readings and nature of the assignments, and make this available on the web in a way that is accessible without any login or sign-in page,” Smith said.

She said this is problematic because it would allow anyone, including those not affiliated with the university, to search this website, identify and contact professors who are teaching content they disagree with and potentially file lawsuits against the university or professors for violation of the law.

“They would probably lose those lawsuits in most cases, but the mere fact that the university and faculty would have to defend themselves against such lawsuits would have a chilling impact on academic freedom,” Smith said. 

On May 17, she testified before the House Higher Education Committee opposing the substitute bill, and her testimony focused on the ways that the substitute bill would limit the right for faculty unions to collectively bargain policies on workload, performance review, post-tenure review and retrenchment.

“This law would remove our right to collectively bargain and explicitly says that any language we currently have in our contract that would conflict with the policies developed, that we don’t have any right to bargain, the new policy prevails over any existing contract language,” Smith said. “That is a fairly radical restriction on our collective bargaining rights.”

From discussions Smith has had with Ohio Sen. Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland), who introduced Senate Bill 83, she has gathered that he believes higher education institutions are indoctrinating students to adopt more liberal values and censoring conservative students.

David Silva, an assistant professor in the School of Communication Studies at Kent State, believes there are two main issues with the bill.

First, he said he believes that state legislators behind the bill are trying to hide a major portion that would not only impact higher education employees, but that would also impact some primary and secondary education employees, firefighters and police officers. 

Silva said the section of the bill, which would bar public employees from striking and weaken unions, is buried in Senate Bill 83.

“Making this change under the guise of a higher education reform looks to me like they are trying to hide the most far-reaching portion of the bill,” he said. “I don’t think a clean bill banning police from striking would pass this legislature or be accepted by Ohio voters, but it is included in a bill focused on higher education.”

Silva also believes that the bill is unclear in some of its most-discussed portions, and that there is a “lack of clear definitions,” which would make it more difficult for it to be enforced.

“In this bill, a wide variety of experts can take away very different interpretations,” he said. “That means universities will operate while worried about potentially being sued and having to spend the time and resources to sort out issues in the courts.”

Silva noted that Kent State President Todd Diacon and other university presidents brought these concerns to the bill’s sponsors before it was revised, but he said that these sections did not improve.

“This bill is not a solution,” Silva said. “It is a statement which I think is harmful.”

Kent State’s Department of Africana Studies released a statement opposing Senate Bill 83 and submitted it to the state Senate, saying the bill would “undermine pivotal gains made as it relates to access and equity in higher education.”

Department chair and professor of Africana Studies Mwatabu Okantah stated his personal opinion on Senate Bill 83 and the state of American democracy.

“The weaponization of ignorance and arrogance are the real dangers in these treacherous yet exciting times,” Okantah said. “The misguided battle over Critical Race Theory being taught in schools, the attack on African American Studies in Florida, the SB83 assault on Black Studies, on notions of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, and on the fundamentals of academic freedom here in Ohio are being waged to conserve an archaic status quo that was never intended to embrace 21st century American realities.”

Okantah believes that the lawmakers who are introducing and supporting legislation such as Senate Bill 83 are making their intentions clear, and he said that education remains to be at the center of the conflict in the U.S.

As Senate Bill 83 moves to the House and as similar bills continue to be introduced and passed in other states, Kent State faculty members offer advice to those who may be worried about these efforts.

Deb Smith encourages students, faculty and Ohio citizens concerned about the bill to follow it through the process, stay updated as it moves forward and write to members of the House committee, their state representatives and the governor about their concerns.

“The other important thing I think for everybody is the importance of registering to vote and voting in every election,” Smith said. “Not just for the president, but every election.”

David Silva said if he were in charge of a campaign to combat efforts of the bill, he would encourage those who are concerned to tell others about how it goes too far.

“Ohio college students are smart enough to figure out for themselves what arguments they agree or disagree with,” Silva said. “They know how to use evidence and logic to separate poor ideas from good ideas, and they often come to different and new conclusions. That is the value of a higher education and this bill risks disrupting that process.”

Aden Graves is a reporter. Contact him at [email protected].