Sign up for The Brief, a daily newsletter designed to keep readers informed about the most vital news in Texas.
Texas Tech University System Chancellor Brandon Creighton announced on Monday new restrictions regarding faculty discussions on race, sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation in the classroom. He also introduced a revised course content approval process, emphasizing that instructors could face disciplinary actions for noncompliance.
In a memo directed to university presidents, Creighton stated that faculty members are prohibited from endorsing the belief that “one race or sex is inherently superior to another,” or that any individual is inherently oppressive or biased based on their race or sex, either consciously or unconsciously. The memo further asserts that no person should be discriminated against or treated adversely due to their race or sex and that moral character should not be determined by these factors. Additionally, it clarifies that individuals cannot be held responsible for the actions of others who share their race or sex, and that concepts such as meritocracy or a strong work ethic should not be labeled as racist, sexist, or oppressive constructs.
Creighton elaborated that promoting these beliefs involves presenting them as factual or mandatory and pressuring students to accept them, rather than critically analyzing them as one perspective among many.
The memo includes a flowchart that outlines a new approval process for any course content that addresses the restricted subjects. Faculty will need to submit their materials for review to department chairs, university administrators, and ultimately the Board of Regents.
Instructors are first tasked with assessing whether the material is relevant and necessary. If deemed necessary, they must then consider if the content is essential for professional licensure or certification, or for patient or client care. If it meets these criteria, the material may remain in the course, but the Board of Regents will be informed. If it does not meet those criteria, instructors must obtain approval to retain the material by submitting it to their department chair, dean, and provost, who will forward their recommendation and justification to the Board of Regents.
In a news release, Creighton stated that the aim of these new policies is to provide “clarity, consistency, and guardrails that protect academic excellence.” A representative from the system indicated that the memo serves as guidance for faculty preparing for the upcoming spring semester, which begins in six weeks. They expressed hope for a swift approval process, though details are still being finalized.
Creighton’s memo emphasizes that “the integrity of this process depends on the earnest participation of every faculty member” and cautions that failure to comply may lead to disciplinary action in accordance with university policies and state laws.
The immediate response from faculty across the Texas Tech University System regarding these new changes remains unclear. However, Kelli Cargile Cook, a professor emeritus who established Texas Tech’s Department of Professional Communication, indicated that the memo prompted her to cancel a class she intended to teach this spring and to consider resigning instead.
“I’ve been teaching since 1981, and this was meant to be my final class. I was eagerly anticipating working with the seniors in our major, but I cannot condone what is happening at Texas Tech,” she expressed. “The memo cleverly frames the beliefs it mentions as agreeable at face value. However, when considering its practical implications—where a Board of Regents, composed of politically appointed individuals rather than educated researchers, approves a curriculum—this trajectory is concerning.”
Cargile Cook expressed her dismay at the memo’s portrayal of specific race and sex concepts as merely “one viewpoint among many,” arguing that it trivializes established facts, such as labeling George Wallace, known for his defense of segregation, as a viewpoint.
Creighton’s memo frames the new requirements as the “first step” toward implementing Senate Bill 37, a state law he authored prior to his transition from the Texas Senate to the Texas Tech System. This recently passed law mandates that regents conduct a thorough review of undergraduate courses to ensure they adequately prepare students for civic and professional life while reflecting the workforce demands of Texas. The initial review is expected by 2027.
In September, system leaders initiated limitations on faculty discussions surrounding gender identity in classrooms following a controversial video featuring a Texas A&M professor, which incited conservative backlash, led to the professor’s dismissal, and prompted the resignation of the university president. This incident has caused universities statewide to reassess their course offerings.
Angelo State University, part of the Texas Tech University System, was the first to act, quietly instructing faculty in September to refrain from discussing transgender identities in class.
Subsequently, Texas Tech’s then-Chancellor Tedd L. Mitchell issued a system-wide directive mandating faculty compliance with a Trump executive order, a letter from Governor Greg Abbott, and House Bill 229, which recognize only two sexes. Faculty members reported that Mitchell’s guidance led them to postpone lessons, remove terms like “transgender” from curricula, and engage in self-censorship. When they posed questions to administrators, the written responses were briefly posted online before being taken down, further contributing to the confusion.
Neither the executive order, the governor’s letter, nor the new state law specifically addresses college instruction, and no federal or state laws—including SB 37—restrict how professors should approach these topics. Early drafts of SB 37 contained language that would have limited how universities could teach matters related to race and sex, but those provisions were ultimately removed before the legislation was passed.
Creighton assumed the role of chancellor last month following Mitchell’s retirement.
The new policies within the Texas Tech University System align with those of the Texas A&M University System, which recently adopted a policy requiring campus presidents to approve any course perceived as advocating for “race and gender ideology or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity.” Texas Tech’s new regulations seem to extend further than A&M’s, incorporating a formal approval process culminating with the Board of Regents.
Other universities that have initiated course reviews in response to the A&M controversy or SB 37 have also circulated new guidelines for faculty. At Texas State University, the student newspaper, The University Star, reported that faculty received instructions to revise course descriptions in “ideologically neutral” language and eliminate terms associated with advocacy.
At the University of Houston, Chancellor and President Renu Khator directed faculty to review their course titles, syllabi, and content to ensure compliance with the university’s stated academic commitments. In a letter to the campus community on November 21, Khator emphasized, “Our responsibility is to provide students with the ability to form their own opinions rather than imposing a specific viewpoint on them. Our guiding principle is to educate, not indoctrinate.”
She outlined a four-phase review process for all core curriculum under SB 37, which will begin with a preliminary assessment by the provost’s office and the university’s legal team by the end of December, culminating in a report to the Board of Regents by February.
The University of Houston chapter of the American Association of University Professors responded by warning that the review process described by Khator poses a threat to academic freedom by allowing administrators to override faculty judgment and fostering a “false balance” in classroom discussions.
Andrew Martin, president of the Texas Tech chapter of the AAUP, expressed his disappointment regarding Monday’s memo.
“We had hoped that our new chancellor’s visits to the campuses to engage with students, faculty, and staff would foster a spirit of collaboration and an acknowledgment that academic freedom is a foundational aspect of a free society,” Martin remarked.
He asserted that the new rules and processes infringe upon the First Amendment and adversely affect transgender and gender nonconforming students and colleagues while misrepresenting the law.
The Texas Tribune collaborates with Open Campus for coverage of higher education.
Disclosure: The Texas A&M University System, Texas Tech University, Texas Tech University System, and the University of Houston have financially supported The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization funded in part by donations from members, foundations, and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters do not influence the Tribune’s journalism. A complete list of supporters is available.
Learn more about The Texas Tribune’s policies, including our partnership with The Trust Project to enhance transparency in news.
Independent reporting in Texas is vital. Support us in delivering factual journalism for Texans, by Texans. Our community of members makes this work possible. Will you consider making a donation to support our nonprofit newsroom?
