The cloudy future of higher education in Ohio

The past year has been a transformative time for higher education in Ohio. The onset and implementation of the Advance Ohio Higher Education Act, otherwise known as Senate Bill 1, has seemingly changed the state of higher education in Ohio almost overnight. 

The bill eliminated Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs at public universities, added a mandatory American civics course, regulated classroom discussions, prevented faculty from striking, allowed tenured professors to be fired over poor reviews and sunset degree programs with few enrollment numbers. 

SB1 was championed by State Senator Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland), who said the bill would ensure academic excellence in Ohio during shifts in workforce and student demands. He added the bill would also promote intellectual diversity, academic freedom and free speech and expression. 

“My bill will return our public universities and colleges to their rightful mission of education rather than indoctrination,” Cirino said in a press release. “We also must return to teaching students how to think rather than what to think, and how to listen to opposing views with a respectful but critical ear.” 

Faculty and students share a different perspective. Mwatabu Okantah, the department chair of Africana Studies at Kent State University, said Ohio legislators in support of SB1 wanted the bill in place to go back to a time when America was “a white man’s country.” 

Mwatabu added that SB1 has threatened the status of the Africana Studies program due to its low enrollment numbers, and that he’s in the process of retiring. He said SB1 wasn’t the sole reason behind the decision, but that he won’t have to deal with the bill and that it’s good timing due to how the Ohio legislature misunderstands the value of diversity.

“True diversity means we all have a story,” Okantah said. “I can learn from your story, and you can learn from my story. If we share our stories, that might allow us to see what we do have in common.” 

Nica Delgado, a digital organizer for the Ohio Student Association and Kent State graduate student in library and informational sciences, said the loss of identity centers affected her personally. She worked as a mentor and navigator at the Student Multicultural Center to help undergraduates students during their college journey. 

Due to its closure, along with the LGBTQ+ Center and Women’s Center, she was unable to return in that role. 

“There was so much love that came out of that center that I haven’t seen them get back or be able to build in a post-SB1 world,” Delgado said. “We see the lack of impact that it has brought to this campus.”

While all Ohio public universities had to implement Senate Bill 1, beginning on June 27, some Ohio schools have garnered a reputation for “over implementation” of the bill. One of those universities is Ohio State, which not only closed its identity centers,

but banned chalking and regulated dorm decor to be specific to the university. 

Sabrina Estevez is the President of the OSA Ohio State chapter, and she has witnessed the changes and over implementation first hand. She called it frustrating and shocking. 

“It just feels like a gross misuse of state power to co-opt these universities into something that is really at nobody’s benefit,” Estevez said. 

Okantah, Delgado and Estevez aren’t alone, as more than 1,700 college students, faculty, staff and alumni submitted opposing testimonies against SB1’s passing amongst three different hearings. Additionally, students and faculty alike said they would consider studying and teaching elsewhere had the bill been passed. 

Several Democratic state senators, including Casey Weinstein (D-Hudson), fueled those fears when they said it would cause Ohio to fall behind nationally in terms of attracting the best and brightest faculty and students.

“Senate Bill 1 is a direct attack on the academic independence that has long been essential to the success of our state’s public higher education system,” Weinstein said in a press release. “This bill, … sends a chilling message to students, faculty and businesses that Ohio is not committed to fostering academic and institutional freedom.”

This may become a reality, as nearby universities are attempting to poach Ohio college students to boost their enrollment numbers. Eastern Michigan University has marketed towards Ohio students affected by SB1. The university launched a campaign that promised “all are welcome,” there will be “freedom to grow,” that “all voices will be honored” and more. 

Additionally, Point Park University, a private college in Pittsburgh, PA, has created a scholarship specific to Ohio students. The Buckeye Fresh Start Scholarship offers a merit-based $16,000 to $22,000 per year, as well as a $5,000 award. 

“We have always been a campus that is open and accepting, and we have one of the most diverse student bodies of any school in Western Pennsylvania,” Marlin Collingwood, vice president of enrollment at Point Park University said. “This is an opportunity for students who are in Ohio, especially Pennsylvania students who decided they wanted to go to school in Ohio, to take a second look at what we think is a really great, unique university.” 

The scholarship targets Ohio college students affected by SB1 program cuts, but the scholarship is available to any Ohio student due to other SB1 concerns. 

“There was a bigger sense of angst happening,” Collingwood said. “Students whose program hadn’t been cut were still not happy about what was happening.” 

The idea of the scholarship stemmed from an email a freshman Kent State dance student sent to Point Park when she learned her program would be one of several getting sunset. She asked for help to transfer to Point Park, and this got the ball rolling for the scholarship.

The Thanksgiving season is a big period for college students who are considering transferring, so Collingwood believes the next couple weeks will be big for recruitment efforts. 

“This is really the height of transfer season, which I think is a real benefit for those of us who believe we have a place for those students,” he said. “It’s not a great time-wise situation for Ohio.” 

Delgado has already witnessed some students leave Ohio due to SB1. One of her close friends and colleagues at OSA was enrolled at Cleveland State and planned on staying there until graduation, but he left once SB1 passed. 

“He didn’t believe that he would be getting an education that meant anything in Ohio with SB1,” Delgado said.

Okantah shared a similar perspective. He said the sunsetting of programs vital to understanding differences like Africana Studies

hurts student’s opportunities to have those experiences. Okantah added that these programs help students become better members of society and prepare them for complex situations in the future.

“The value of these programs is to expand your vision so that you have empathy, and you can be sensitive to the differences in how people live,” he said. “What good is all this education if we can’t help people and make life better for people.”  

For students like Delgado, the removal of identity centers has the same effect. She said it’s “heart wrenching” to see freshmen not have the same opportunities as their predecessors. 

“Freshmen are coming in, and they’re not aware of Kent State’s history as a school of change,” Delgado said. “There’s so much stuff that students are missing out on because SB1 forced Kent State to put a gag in our mouth and bound our limbs.” 

SB1 was influenced by the National Association of Scholars, a nonprofit organization that works to reform higher education. Several parts of the bill, including the removal of DEI programs, establishment of an American Civics course and public syllabi all stemmed from model bills from the organization. 

NAS not only endorsed the bill, but “enthusiastically” supported it, and felt honored that the Ohio legislature considered its models. 

“SB1 will do an extraordinary amount to depoliticize Ohio’s public higher education system, strengthen intellectual diversity and restore its accountability to Ohio policymakers and citizens,” an NAS press release said. “This bill will invigorate higher education in Ohio and serve as a model of educational reform for the whole nation.”

NAS also said SB1 could be implemented pretty easily by public universities, and that its opposition would die down shortly after becoming law.  

“It is not only good reform, tailored reform and necessary reform but also practicable reform,” the statement continued. 

Estevez and Delgado disagree with this sentiment, as they both found the bill to be incredibly vague. Estevez attributes its wording and confusion to why universities like Ohio State have over implemented the bill. 

“It gives higher education institutions the ability, or possibly even forcing them into a position of over implementing in a space where student expression and learning should be whole and uninterrupted,” she said. 

This vagueness not only affects university staff, but faculty and students as well according to Delgado. She said people are scared of getting in trouble over saying or doing the wrong things, but they also don’t know what wrong means. 

“This is bullshit and doesn’t make sense,” Delgado said. 

The Ohio legislature quickly passed SB1 through the house and senate after it was introduced on Jan. 29. The Ohio Senate passed it with a 21-11 vote on Feb. 12, and the House passed it 59-34 on March 19. It was later passed again in the senate to account for amendments before Governor Mike DeWine signed the bill into law March 28.

Now, a few months past SB1’s implementation date of June 27, student life in this new era has begun to set in. With the shutdowns of campus identity centers and other DEI initiatives across the state that provided a place for community, other alternative spaces are being used to fill that void. 

At Ohio State, the university recently created the Buckeye Commons once administration learned it’d have to close its identity centers. The space is for students to connect, build community and feel a sense of belonging, but it hasn’t lived up to the expectations that campus identity centers set. 

“It’s not quite what it’s hyped up to be,” Estevez said. “I don’t think you can ever make up or fill the hole that has entered our university since we lost the identity centers.” 

In the wake of the identity center’s closing, students have been the ones stepping up to find their own sense of community and belonging, Estevez said. She added that student organizations, affinity groups and even help from community members have outreached and crowdsourced different ways to remedy the loss of vital student resources. 

“Students are just taking care of students,” Estevez said. “If the university won’t or can’t; then we’re trying to make up for that.”

Both Estevez and Delgado hope that SB1 is repealed within the next few years, but they also understand that it’s not a very realistic outcome. However, they believe that with enough student activism and involvement, that there’s a chance. 

“We have to keep the fight up and the pressure on,” Delgado said. “If we give up at any moment in time, I don’t think it’s going to happen.” 

Reflecting on his own journey as a professor and student at Kent State, Okantah said it was hard to see spaces and programs he had played a part in creating shut down. He hopes students take note of what’s missing and attempt to bring that back to campus. 

To Okantah, every generation has its historical moment, and individuals can either seize it or let it pass by them. Due to changing times from when Okantah was a student, he said the path forward for current students would be different than the path he and others took. 

However, he did say it starts with studying and talking with elders and friends. 

“I’m not without hope, but it is what it is,” Okantah said. “It’s not going to be easy, and it might get worse before it gets better.”

https://app.flourish.studio/visualisation/26359919/edit – LINK TO DATA VISUALIZATION FOR CLEARER LOOK.