UF Faculty Senate asks for outside group to investigate any undue influence at school
In an emergency meeting Tuesday, the University of Florida Faculty Senate voted to urge the university administration to bring in an independent group to investigate whether any undue influence from outside groups is affecting UF’s academic freedom.
“There’s a lot of confusion over the roles that different bodies play in what is happening at UF right now in terms of some of these academic freedom issues,” said Sarah Lynne, an associate professor at UF’s Institute for Food and Agricultural Sciences and the chair of the UF Faculty Senate Welfare Council, which drafted the passed resolution.
“So people are questioning what was the role of the administration, what was the role of the board of trustees, what was the role of the state executive branch,” she added. “And we think this is the best way to understand any potential influence that some of these groups may have had.”
The senators are asking to see a report by the end of the spring 2022 semester.
UF spokesman Steve Orlando declined to comment.
Backlash from barring professors to testify
The senate’s resolution comes after weeks of turmoil at the public university, since news broke in late October that UF had barred three political science professors from testifying as paid witnesses in a lawsuit against the state that challenged a new law restricting voting. UF initially argued their testimony posed a conflict of interest as it’s a state university and the suit was filed against the DeSantis administration, but then allowed them to testify as long as they didn’t use university resources and it was on their own time.
UF’s reversal came after a noted Princeton legal scholar warned of First Amendment issues, as did others in the academic and legal communities.
The UF Faculty Senate Welfare Council, which partly handles matters relating to faculty rights and academic freedom, crafted the resolution during its own emergency meeting Nov. 5.
The council determined an external, independent inspection was necessary because many professors are concerned UF’s reputation is on the line, Lynne said.
Investigation would ‘demonstrate transparency’
The council didn’t want to “diminish the importance or value of the internal reviews that are happening, because those are also very critical,” Lynne said, but the group believes an outside evaluation “would demonstrate transparency and potentially address any issues of the institution’s reputation on the national scale.”
Currently, a seven-member task force appointed by UF President Kent Fuchs comprised of UF employees is reviewing the university’s conflicts-of-interest policy. The task force is charged with recommending to Fuchs “how UF should respond when employees request approval to serve as expert witnesses in litigation in which their employer, the state of Florida, is a party.”
Simultaneously, a Faculty Senate ad hoc committee is gathering information on when an outside activity, such as writing an opinion piece or providing expert testimony, constitutes a conflict of interest for UF faculty.
Additionally, UF’s accreditation body, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools’ Commission on Colleges, announced Nov. 1 it would investigate UF over its decision to prohibit the three professors — Daniel Smith, Michael McDonald and Sharon Austin — from offering expert testimony in the voting rights case against the state. The group is trying to determine whether “academic freedom” and “undue political influence” standards were violated.
Lynne said senators are now asking for a broader investigation than SACSCOC’s, because it’s not only about the three professors.
“It’s a broader scope than just outside activities, because it encompasses also academic activities, like curriculum setting, syllabi, things like that.”
In the resolution, senators mentioned “a series of examples of restrictions on individual and institutional activities.”
They cited “proposed state legislation HB57 regarding curriculum and Critical Race Theory, HB 233 mandatory surveys of faculty on their political ideology as well as the recording of instructor classes without faculty consent, the denial of faculty requests to provide expert witness testimony against the state, the potential for undue political influence in the hiring process, and the development of COVID mitigation measures.”
This story was originally published November 17, 2021 at 7:29 PM.
