Some Kansas Faculty Uneasy Over “Vague” DEI Definitions

The Kansas Board of Regents last week formally defined the terms “DEI” and “CRT,” paving the way for state-mandated curriculum changes that will eliminate gender-, race- and ethnicity-focused courses from general education requirements at public universities.

Free speech advocates called the definitions “vague and confusing” and say they leave faculty and students “on shaky ground.” Public university faculty have mixed feelings on the definitions. Some said they could have been worse, and others said they pave the way for serious infringements on academic freedom.

In compliance with House Bill 2513—which passed the Legislature in March and which Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly grudgingly signed—the board of regents defined “DEI-CRT” as “diversity, equity, inclusion and critical race theory” and stated that a DEI-CRT course is one whose “title, course description or learning outcomes include DEI-CRT-related content.” That content is defined as anything which “intentionally establishes and promotes the preferential treatment of groups based on race, color, gender, ethnicity or national origin,” according to board documents. CRT content also includes anything that “presents racism as systemic within laws, policies, or institutions and promotes acceptance of that viewpoint rather than presenting it as a subject of scholarly, historical, or legal study.” Discussion of race, racism or the history of the civil rights movement is not considered DEI-CRT–related content under the policy. 

The approved definitions are a “half win,” said Michael Smith, a political science professor at Emporia State University and president of the Kansas American Association of University Professors chapter. He said the chapter had been hoping to meet with the board to help craft the definitions, but that they were “unsuccessful” at reaching board members. 

“We’re thrilled that they’re pretty narrow, and the regents even went out of their way to state that this does not ban teaching about race, it does not ban teaching about civil rights. So the faculty are very pleased with that,” Smith said. They do “seem to be based more on the popular understanding of DEI and CRT among the MAGA movement and others, and we were hoping for … an academic definition of CRT. It’s something that’s taught in law schools and some graduate programs. It’s very rarely ever taught to undergraduates.” 

Ron Barrett-Gonzalez​, co-chair of Kansas AAUP Committee A, does not think the definitions are narrow enough. He said they are “so nebulous that [they] could apply to almost any kind of speech. It threatens the … basic components of what we do as academics.” 

The board’s policy stops short of barring faculty members from teaching DEI-CRT content—for now. Those restrictions could come during a more comprehensive step two; HB 2513 dictates that before the 2028–29 academic year, the board must certify that all institutions have “established curricula and designated courses … in a manner that does not require or constrain students to enroll in a DEI-CRT course in order to satisfy the requirements of any academic program.” Programs focused on racial, ethnic or gender studies may request an exemption. 

Alongside the definitions, the Kansas board adopted a “statement of understanding” that acknowledges the multiyear plan outlined in HB 2513 that will expunge gender-, race- and ethnicity-centered content from general education requirements at state universities. Both actions are required to access $12 million in state funding for fiscal year 2027.

Amy Reid, the Freedom to Learn program director at PEN America, said in a statement that the free expression advocacy organization spoke out against the restrictions in HB 2513 earlier this year because “we understood it would result in the stifling of important classroom conversations about race and social inequity.” The new policy compounds the problem because it fails to define what is or isn’t allowed in the classroom, she added. 

“How will faculty judge whether classroom discussions about the goals, successes and challenges of the civil rights movement toe the line of ‘scholarly, historical or legal study’ or ‘present racism as systemic’? Would the discussion of laws that did discriminate on the basis of race, sex or ability, or of a court decision in favor of affirmative action violate the provision by ‘promot[ing] the preferential treatment’ of certain groups? Under these definitions, it seems unclear whether a professor could even ask students to discuss arguments about whether or not racism is systemic,” Reid wrote in her statement. “They may have felt boxed into a corner by the legislature, but by adopting these vague and misleading definitions of ‘DEI-CRT-related-content,’ the Regents have codified educational censorship in Kansas.”

Barrett-Gonzalez, an aerospace engineering professor at the University of Kansas, said the board policy and the requirements in HB 2513 put him in direct conflict with the standards of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, which accredits KU’s program. 

“Their ethical guidelines include many things, but among them is treating all persons with respect, fairness and dignity and never engaging in any form of harassment or discrimination,” he said. “Our foremost professional society essentially demands the inclusion of all individuals and DEI, and so how are we going to comply with state law and maintain accreditation?”

Tensions between state law and accreditation standards aren’t unique to Kansas. In Texas, public institutions dissolved their faculty senates and, in some cases, introduced broad restrictions on gender, race and sexuality content. Both changes violate the accreditation standards of the Commission on Colleges and Universities—formerly the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges—which accredits many Texas public institutions. The same is true in Alabama, where Auburn University’s board recently decided to dissolve its Faculty Senate and assume control of the curriculum; these moves also appear to violate CCU’s standards. 

Barrett-Gonzalez said much of his time is spent connecting with K–12 educators and recruiting students at predominately Hispanic or African American schools. One of those students—Lauren Fitzpatrick—became the first Black woman to graduate from KU’s aerospace engineering program and the first Black woman to win the AIAA’s international design competition, he said. 

“What the state is doing is striking against much of what I’ve centered my work on, and what many of us in academia have been working towards—making a more inclusive society,” he said. “DEI programs are important in making our society better.”