Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore

Arizona State Senator Anthony Kern (R-Glendale) last week proposed Senate Bill 1477, aiming to create a “Grade Challenge Department” under the Arizona Board of Regents, staffed with “volunteers selected by the Arizona Board of Regents,” overseeing the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, and Northern Arizona University.

The legislation harkens to the February 9, 2023 event on the campus of Arizona State University in Tempe, when more than 30 faculty as well as students objected to the appearance of conservatives Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager, and Robert Kiyosaki. Ann Atkinson, executive director of the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development at ASU’s Barrett Honors College, who organized the event, wrote in the Wall Street Journal on June 19, 2023, that she had been fired as a result (I Paid for Free Speech at Arizona State).

KJZZ, a National Public Radio member station in Phoenix, Arizona, reported in November 2023 that state Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Kern, formed a committee “on Freedom of Expression at Arizona’s Public Universities,” in response to Atkinson’s allegations. According to KJZZ, the state Republicans wanted to cut ASU’s funding for discouraging conservative speech on campus.

Kern’s bill states that “If the Grade Challenge Department determines that a student’s grade was awarded because of political bias, the department may require any faculty member of a public university to regrade the student’s assignment or reevaluate the student’s overall class grade consistent with the department’s guidance.

“If a student believes the Grade Challenge Department wrongly dismissed the student’s challenge or did not adequately consider the facts of the challenge, the student may appeal the decision of the department to the Arizona Board of Regents. The Board may order any faculty member of a public university to regrade a student’s assignment or reevaluate a student’s overall class grade consistent with the board’s guidance.”

Michael Nietzel, president emeritus of Missouri State University, warned in a Forbes report of “the mischief such a bill, were it to become law, could introduce into college courses.”

Nietzel wondered, could a student who is enrolled in a World History course contest her grade alleging that her essays were graded unfairly due to political differences with the instructor that were expressed during class? Would a student have grounds for an appeal if he contended that a Sociology term paper was marked down because of a prior political disagreement with the professor? Can the leader of the local College Republicans argue that her Social Work grade was unfairly lowered by a professor known for advocating liberal causes? Could a vocal communist student claim that a conservative professor unfairly decreased his Economics grade, thus necessitating intervention from the Grade Challenge Department for a reassessment?

The bill was approved by the Arizona Senate on February 22 in a vote of 16 to 12 along party lines, with two Democratic members abstaining. Recently, the Arizona House Education Committee passed it by a vote of 4 to 3, also along party lines, with a few Republicans and a Democrat abstaining.

Should the bill pass the full Arizona legislator, it will proceed for a signing to Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs. In the event of her veto, the state constitution requires at least two-thirds of lawmakers in each chamber to vote in favor of overriding the veto to enact the bill into law.

Mark Criley, a senior program officer for the American Association of University Professors’ Department of Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Governance, told Inside Higher Ed that the bill “seems to be deeply problematic; it assigns to the Board of Regents powers that it really should have delegated to faculty.”

ASU claimed Atkinson’s position was terminated because the funding for it was stopped by the donor, Tom Lewis, a Phoenix real estate mogul. Atkinson claimed that she had secured a new donor who wanted to promote teaching traditional American values such as hard work, personal responsibility, civic duty, faith, family, and community service, but ASU declined to accept the new funding.