Indiana
College faculty overwhelmingly opposed to bill seeking to end “viewpoint discrimination” – Indiana Capital Chronicle
Faculty from higher education institutions across Indiana descended on the Statehouse Wednesday to speak out against a contentious bill that would increase lawmaker oversight of state colleges and universities and push speech in the classroom toward “intellectual diversity.”
Sen. Spencer Deery, R-West Lafayette, has called his Senate Bill 202 a “reform” effort intended to reverse “declining views” of higher education.
But dozens of opponents argued the proposed changes could harm students and professors, or would overly burden public institutions.
Testimony was heard on the bill in the House Education Committee on Wednesday. Committee chairman Rep. Bob Behning, R-Indianapolis, said a vote on the measure is expected next week.
“At the end of the day, there is an elephant in the room that we need to address, and that’s the increasing number of students who just don’t feel like higher ed is a place for them,” Deery said, He pointed to a 2023 Gallup survey which found the percent of Republicans “with confidence in higher education” declined from 56% in 2015 to 19% in 2023.
“Addressing this issue will both improve the quantity of Hoosiers that we can get enrolled in higher education,” Deery continued. “I also believe it will improve the quality of education they receive, because we all benefit — no matter your political beliefs — from being challenged and exposed to new scholarly ideas.”
Faculty, students and other campus representatives from Ball State University, Indiana University, Indiana State University, Ivy Tech Community College, Purdue University, University of Southern Indiana and Vincennes University disagreed, however. They argued the bill “would severely constrain academic freedom” and threaten schools’ ability to recruit and retain top faculty.
“SB 202 will put the state at odds with specialty accreditors and risk programs’ specialized accreditation, resulting in even greater shortages fundamental to the needs of Indiana citizens,” said Lindsey Everman, a professor at Indiana State University. “I encourage and welcome intellectual and ideological diversity in my classroom and throughout my scholarship. I work to educate students to also welcome diversity in the way they think.”
“Effective practitioners have to embrace diversity of thought, and it is a misconception that one cannot both believe in diversity, equity and inclusion, and also offer an opportunity for free expression of faith and political ideology,” she continued. “A college classroom is meant for this kind of dialogue. And everyone — faculty and students together — grow in their critical thinking from this kind of exchange. Instead of encouraging free expression, as the bill hopes to do, the ambiguity of SB 202 will only stifle those activities that encourage critical thinking.”
Preventing faculty from imposing their views
Deery and other Republican lawmakers contend that conservative students and faculty members are increasingly ostracized at progressively liberal college and university settings — or at least perceive such shunning.
As an attempted remedy, Deery’s bill would change up institution boards of trustees by removing appointment power from alumni councils and pass it off to House and Senate Republican majority leaders — “with advice” from Democrat minority leaders. It would require boards’ existing diversity committees to consider “intellectual diversity” alongside cultural diversity in employment policies and faculty complaints.
The legislation would additionally require the committees to make recommendations promoting recruitment and retention of “underrepresented” students rather than the “minority students” specified in current law.
Conservative-friendly higher education legislation clears Senate
The measure re-shapes tenure and promotion policies, too.
Boards of trustees would be required to prevent a faculty member from getting tenure or a promotion if the board thinks the member is “unlikely to foster a culture of free inquiry, free expression and intellectual diversity” and unlikely to offer students scholarly works from a range of “political or ideological frameworks.” Boards would also dock members considered likely to bring up personal political views unrelated to their specific field or class.
Boards would get wide latitude in making those policies. The bill says decisions would be based on past performance “or other determination by the board.”
The bill also mandates that boards conduct reviews of tenured professors every five years based on the above, as well as if faculty members “adequately” carry out academic duties and more. A fiscal analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency notes IU’s flagship campus at Bloomington alone has over 1,000 tenured faculty, meaning its board would have to conduct 200-plus reviews annually.
“One of the fundamental things that ought to happen to you as a young person in college is to be challenged by thoughts you’re not familiar with — thought you’re not comfortable with, thought you don’t agree with,” Democrat Rep. Ed DeLaney told Deery during committee discussion, adding that his bill “will cut that down.”
“You’re requiring the professors — for example, in sociology or political science — to give a range of opinions and to be neutral,” DeLaney continued. “In effect, you are neutering your faculty. That’s what you’re trying to do.”
Deery opposed that description of his proposal and maintained that he wants to protect tenured faculty by codifying things the board can’t consider in reviews, like expressing dissent or engaging in research and public commentary, as well as criticizing institutional leadership and engaging in political activity outside teaching or mentoring duties.
In effect, you are neutering your faculty. That’s what you’re trying to do.
– Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis
Still, institutions would be required to adopt policies establishing disciplinary actions — termination, demotion, salary cuts and more — for tenured faculty members who fail those reviews.
Deery said the bill does not “mandate that any particular content be taught,” nor does it require students be exposed to “every scholarly idea” or “pseudoscience.”
“If you believe that it’s unreasonable for faculty to answer, occasionally, how they expose students to competing scholarly views, or if you believe that doing so will somehow ‘threaten’ the stature of your university, or the economic and cultural vitality of our state, or weaken the intellectual rigor of your students … then you and I have a very different definition of what it actually means to be higher in higher education,” Deery said.
“If you believe that we should not include in our definition of diversity the importance of competing ideas, along with the traditional goals of creating equal opportunity for all, then you and I also have a very different view on what diversity is, and I stand by that policy difference.”
University faculty speak out
A joint statement released Monday by the Purdue-West Lafayette and Indiana University-Bloomington chapters of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) said adoption of the Senate bill “would severely damage the ability” of the two public research universities “to recruit and retain outstanding faculty, erasing the State of Indiana’s uniquely prominent national profile in higher education.”
“In its attempt to ensure that all students and faculty at state universities feel confident they can express their political and intellectual views freely — an aspiration the AAUP shares — SB 202 mandates a system of surveillance and political scrutiny that will instead stifle the free flow of ideas,” the statement said. “It requires that hiring, tenure, and promotion become subject to reviews that judge faculty based on political criteria, and that post-tenure employment be contingent on further periodic reviews. These measures would severely constrain academic freedom at our university.”
Story continues below.
240212 IU-Purdue SB 202 joint statement
That sentiment was echoed by multiple other faculty members from public universities across Indiana who testified against the bill on Wednesday.
Mary Dankoski, who has served as faculty at IU’s medical school for 24 years, said Senate Bill 202 “is unprecedented” and will have “an enormous impact.”
“It is a deterrent to prospective faculty from considering making Indiana their home and the place to grow their careers,” Dankoski said.
Dan Smith, a professor and dean emeritus at IU’s Kelley School of Business, noted that students in all classes already complete faculty evaluation surveys and appear content with their teachers.
“One of those questions has to do with whether the faculty member for that course creates an environment in that classroom that is conducive to engagement from all students,” Smith said. “When you look at the battery of responses, and you add them all up — the Kelley School has 10,000 students, 400 faculty — last year, the average on this composite index was a six-point-three out of seven on a seven-point scale. That’s comparable to how happy and satisfied you are with your Apple iPhone.”
College faculty emphasized, too, that within campus environments now, students have the ability to think critically and for themselves — and they actively do so.
“I think that the misconception that higher education may be indoctrinating students would be better evidenced if we had a room full of liberals as legislators,” said Everman, from ISU. “We’re not as effective as you think we are at changing the minds of our students. And that is because we are able to have a dialogue in a classroom and that the system evaluates our ability to do that.”
Capital Chronicle reporter Leslie Bonilla Muñiz contributed reporting.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
LEXINGTON, Ky. — Indiana basketball coach Darian DeVries and senior forward Tucker DeVries met with reporters after the Hoosiers’ 72-60 loss to Kentucky on Saturday night at Rupp Arena in Lexington.
Here’s what the DeVries duo said during their near-seven-minute press conference.
Q: I guess, Darian, it’s sort of another night where it feels like it just kind of gets difficult to really break down an opponent off the dribble, kind of get that inside-out sort of paint touch to three looks you want, just like what, I guess, are you guys, what’s not happening there, what’s just kind of sort of failing at the source offensively when that’s not working?
DD: Yeah, I thought the first half, you know, we got some pretty good action, pretty good movement, I thought the second half, Kentucky certainly turned up the pressure and was able to get into us and we didn’t respond well enough and we turned the ball over too much and live ball turnovers against them are really hard because now they’re out in transition playing in space, so the turnovers and the offensive rebounding, I mean, that flipped the game around that second half.
Q: On Kentucky’s long run, what was the problem there?
Yeah, I thought the turnovers, it was a combination of things, I thought, you know, we left our feet a few times, I thought we just, you know, got on our heels a little bit and didn’t play as disciplined as we needed to, you know, as that, you know, the crowd got cranked up and things, that’s the time where you got to really dig in a little bit more, your screen’s got to be better, you got to play off of two feet more, and then the offensive rebounds, you know, they just went and got them and, you know, we didn’t do a good enough job of creating space and getting bodies and going and securing the ball.
Q: What do you think you need to improve on, the team needs to improve on against ball pressure at the point of attack?
DD: Yeah, the number one thing when you get at ball pressure is everything from an execution standpoint and a movement standpoint, it’s just got to be done with more force, you can’t continue just to get pushed out and everybody stands, so you have to find ways to give yourself up with a back hook, give yourself up with a screen, set up those screens with more force, you know, and get some movement to, you know, even as, you know, they had gotten ahead and we started to break it off a little bit, once we got movement again, we were able to get those clean looks or better looks, so it’s something we got to get better at, there’s no question.
Q: Tucker, your individual line tonight was really great, I mean, your effort was fantastic, 15 points, 7 rebounds, a lot of the three point shots tonight didn’t go down like they normally do for the Hoosiers, what do you think that is, was it just not seeing the basket as well, was it the defense, was it not in the offense where you were getting clean looks?
TUCKER DEVRIES: To be honest, making and missing shots, I thought tonight, honestly, wasn’t a problem, I know, certainly, I did not shoot it great, as a team we didn’t shoot that great either from three, but, you know, even with that being said, I think there were certainly areas that we needed to be a lot better at, as a group, and if we were able to, you know, especially in the second half, execute in those areas, I think that would have made up for some of those, you know, shooting habits and miscues, but, you know, making them missing shots sometimes is basketball, but I thought in the other areas, if we could just, you know, execute there a little bit.
Q: On that, if shots maybe weren’t the problem, what kind of was, do you think?
TUCKER: I mean, he hit on it pretty good, the turnovers and obviously the offensive rebounds they had, especially in the second half. I mean, I take full responsibility for both of those areas. Obviously, four turnovers is far too many. As a group, I think when they pick up the pressure, I think we just need to really focus on our execution a little bit more on every possession. But good thing is we get a good week here before we play again to really dial in on some of those areas that we’ve maybe lacked in the beginning.
Q: When Lamar picked up his fourth foul and missed nearly nine minutes, what went wrong offensively?
DD: Yeah, I don’t remember the exact sequences there, but, you know, not having Lamar out there is certainly a big part of our offense, and, you know, his foul trouble tonight certainly limited him with only the 21 minutes because he was, again, he’s, you know, a big focal piece of what we try to run our offense through, so, you know, I believe during that little stretch that he wasn’t out there, that’s when the turnovers started to happen and
we weren’t able to get into, you know, maybe some of our actions the way we needed to.
Q: Darian, you mentioned Kentucky’s offensive rebound and kind of flipping that game. Was that just their physicality, their effort out beating you guys or something else that you saw going on?
DD: Yeah, I thought their effort, their physicality in the second half was, you know, really good. I mean, they certainly cranked it up a notch in that second half and we needed to respond to it, but, you know, I thought their aggressiveness defensively, their aggressiveness in the offensive glass, you know, was ultimately the factor.
Q: Darian, you mentioned Lamar, but how much did the foul trouble for not just him, but other guys, affect you tonight?
DD: I mean, foul trouble is foul trouble. You have it every night, so you’ve got to figure out a way to deal with it and, you know, we just didn’t do a good enough job with that.
Q: Just to follow up on that, with this team, and you’ve talked about sort of where you are with the two bigs and things like that, like does foul trouble become sort of a compounding problem when it disrupts rotations? It felt tonight like maybe guys were just not either on the floor long enough to find the rhythm or maybe had to be on the floor too long because other guys were in foul trouble.
DD: Again, our guys, you know, their numbers are called, they’re ready to go. You know, certainly, you know, a guy like Lamar, you want him out there, but when he’s not out there, I feel very confident that the guys that are coming in are going to do their part and do their job and, you know, we certainly have a lot of faith in them, so, you know, unfortunately it just didn’t work out the way we wanted it to tonight.
Kentucky basketball’s Mark Pope sees pride-worthy potential in squad
Kentucky basketball coach Mark Pope says he’s done a poor job of getting the competitive spirit out of his team despite a 103-67 win over NC Central.
Basketball icons Dick Vitale and Charles Barkley headline the broadcasting crew for Indiana vs. Kentucky on Saturday, Dec. 13.
Vitale, a longtime ESPN analyst, and Barkley, a Basketball Hall of Famer-turned analyst, are teaming up to call two games this season, with the first coming between a pair of blue bloods in a nonconference matchup. Dave O’Brien will handle play-by-play duties.
Vitale and Barkley will broadcast together for the second time this season during TNT and CBS Sports’ First Four coverage of the men’s NCAA Tournament in March.
Watch Dick Vitale, Charles Barkley call Indiana vs. Kentucky live with Fubo (free trial)
The humorous duo will be appointment viewing for many college basketball fans, as both are known for their larger-their-life personalities. The team-up became possible after TNT lost its broadcasting rights for NBA games, moving TNT’s “Inside the NBA” to ESPN.
Vitale is returning to regular broadcasting in 2025 after battling multiple forms of cancer since 2021. He has called over 1,000 games for ESPN since joining the network in 1979.
Barkley, an 11-time NBA All-Star, averaged 22.1 points and 11.7 rebounds across his 16-year career. He was drafted No. 5 overall out of Auburn in the 1984 NBA Draft.
How to watch Indiana vs Kentucky today with Dick Vitale, Charles Barkley
Indiana-Kentucky will air live on ESPN, with streaming options available on the ESPN app or Fubo, which offers a free trial.
Indiana vs Kentucky time today
- Time: 7:30 p.m. ET
- Date: Saturday, Dec. 13
- Location: Rupp Arena (Lexington, Kentucky)
Indiana vs. Kentucky is set for a 7:30 p.m. ET tipoff on Saturday, Dec. 13, from Rupp Arena in Lexington, Kentucky.
For the second consecutive season, Indiana head coach Curt Cignetti has been named college football’s Coach of the Year following a magical 2025 campaign.
Cignetti, who joined Indiana last November, won the Home Depot Coach of the Year Award on Friday night, making him the first coach to win the award in back-to-back seasons. He is also just the second coach to win the honor twice, joining Brian Kelly, who won it in 2009, 2012 and 2018.
Cignetti’s Hoosiers delivered an encore worthy of recognition following his successful first year in Bloomington where they fell in the first round of the College Football Playoff after going 11-2 overall and 8-1 in the Big Ten. Unlike 2024, however, the 2025 season will go down as the best in program history with Cignetti and California transfer quarterback Fernando Mendoza leading the way.
Indiana went undefeated (13-0) for the first time since 1945 and won its first outright Big Ten championship since 1967 with a win over Ohio State en route to clinching the No. 1 seed in the CFP for the first time. The Hoosiers enter the CFP as the favorites to win their first-ever national title.
While Indiana was one of CFB’s most well-rounded teams, Mendoza proved to be a major catalyst behind the success. In his first season with Cignetti, the redshirt junior earned the right to call himself a Heisman Trophy favorite after leading the nation with 33 touchdown passes to just six interceptions, and completing 71.5% of his passes (226-of-316).
Mendoza has won multiple awards, including the Davey O’Brien (top QB) and Maxwell (Player of the Year) Awards, entering Saturday’s Heisman Trophy ceremony. Should he win the coveted honor, Mendoza would be the first Hoosier to ever win the Heisman, giving Cignetti another feather in his cap as top-seeded Indiana looks to make CFP history, starting with its first-round game on Jan. 1.
Want great stories delivered right to your inbox? Create or log in to your FOX Sports account, and follow leagues, teams and players to receive a personalized newsletter daily!
WI lawmakers should support data center accountability bill | Letters
West Virginia drops a double-overtime heartbreaker to Ohio State after leading by 16
Wyoming Ranchers Hoping Solar Can Lower Costs Say Utilities and the State Stand in Their Way – Inside Climate News
SEC Sets Bullish Tone on On-Chain Markets as Blockchain Settlement Becomes Strategic Priority
3 finance stocks to buy on rising 10-year Treasury rates
Florida High School Football Rankings: Top 25 teams – Oct. 21
Cleary's 21 help Le Moyne down Central Connecticut State 69-64 in OT
How old is Bo Nix? What to know about Oregon quarterback ahead of 2024 NFL Draft
99th annual Pony Swim held in Virginia
Video: ‘It Didn’t Have to Happen This Way:’ U.Va. Faculty Call for Review of Police Response to Protests
Trump’s election win filled Hamas with ‘fear,’ hostage held like ‘slave’ for 505 days recounts
In Khartoum, exhumation of makeshift graves reawakens families’ grief
Manhunt under way for attacker after two students killed at US university
Video: At Least Two Killed in Shooting at Brown University
FBI ousts reinstated whistleblower over unauthorized media talks, ‘poor judgment’
-
Alaska1 week agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Texas1 week agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
Ohio1 week agoWho do the Ohio State Buckeyes hire as the next offensive coordinator?
-
Washington5 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa7 days agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire
-
Miami, FL1 week agoUrban Meyer, Brady Quinn get in heated exchange during Alabama, Notre Dame, Miami CFP discussion
-
Cleveland, OH7 days agoMan shot, killed at downtown Cleveland nightclub: EMS
-
World7 days ago
Chiefs’ offensive line woes deepen as Wanya Morris exits with knee injury against Texans
