By TIM CARPENTER
Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — Thirty-five opponents and three advocates waded into the Kansas House’s debate on legislation striking the principle that tenure awarded at Kansas public universities and colleges carried with it an employment property interest.
The bill drafted by an Emporia State University attorney, who is a defendant in an ongoing ESU labor dispute and recently renounced his tenure, was the subject of a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee attracting state and national attention. A dozen faculty from Fort Hays State University have objected to the legislation, while a half-dozen from University of Kansas and Washburn University shared displeasure. There was criticism from Kansas State University, Pittsburg State University and Baker University.
The bottom line among opponents was that the bill’s broad language would fracture a fundamental safeguard of academic freedom.
“When faculty members can lose their positions because of their speech, publications or research findings, they cannot properly fulfill their core responsibilities to advance and transmit knowledge,” said Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors in Washington, D.C. “The common good is not served when business, political or other entities can threaten the livelihood of researchers and instructors and thereby suppress the results of their work or modify their judgments.”
House Bill 2348 hasn’t advanced beyond the Feb. 11 hearing at the Kansas Capitol, despite maneuvering by House Republicans to bounce it to another committee before returning it to House judiciary.
Gov. Laura Kelly, who holds a master’s degree from Indiana University in Bloomington, said she was convinced the tenure bill lacked traction in the Legislature. She predicted it wouldn’t pass the House and Senate in the 2025 session.
“I’d be very surprised if it gets to my desk,” Kelly said in an interview.
Team Lovett
ESU attorney Steven Lovett, the university’s general counsel since 2023, developed the tenure bill through some sort of rogue, covert operation leading to its introduction by Rep. Steven Howe, R-Salina. Lovett is a defendant in ESU’s legal battle with former university employees that has been winding through state and federal court. In 2022, ESU fired 30 tenured or tenure-track faculty. A portion of those individuals filed a lawsuit to challenge their ouster.
ESU officials said Lovett worked on the tenure reform legislation as a “private citizen” rather than in his capacity as a top university attorney. The CEO of the Kansas Board of Regents, the state’s higher education governing board, said Lovett appeared to have violated policy by directing a bill to the Legislature without consent of the state Board of Regents.
The office of Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach anticipated possible legal challenges if the bill became law, and indicated legal costs could be $250,000.
During the House committee hearing on the bill, Lovett outlined reasons the property interest inherent in tenure had to be repealed for thousands working at six state universities, 19 community colleges, six technical colleges and Washburn University.
His initiative was lauded by Christine Curley, who worked at Wichita State University and Southwestern College in Winfield. In testimony, she said faculty tenure hid administrative incompetence and unethical behavior. Tenure reflected “a systematic failure in leadership and accountability within higher education institutions,” she said.
The other proponent was Selayoa Lovett, who holds a master’s degree from ESU and is spouse of the bill’s designer — ESU’s Steven Lovett.
Selayoa Lovett’s testimony asserted Kansas law made it nearly impossible to dismiss underperforming tenured faculty, including professors at ESU.
“Faculty with a sense of entitlement often exhibit attitudes of superiority, dismissing others as less qualified simply because they lack tenure,” Selayoa Lovett said. “In my current position in the private sector, I frequently go above and beyond my job description to contribute to the success of my company. Why should faculty members not be held to the same standards?”
She said “around 30% of faculty fail to contribute at a meaningful level, relying on tenure as a shield from accountability.”
“The unfortunate reality is that many tenured professors choose to do the bare minimum, working only 20 hours a week and neglecting their students and the need for continuous growth and relevance,” Selayoa Lovett said.
Step backward
Joseph Cohn, director of policy with the conservative Heterodox Academy, said the 2024 Legislature in Kansas took a positive step toward protecting academic freedom by enacting a law aimed at weakening diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Last year’s House Bill 2105, he said, prohibited public universities from using political litmus tests in faculty hiring and promotion decisions.
“But enactment of HB 2348 would be a tremendous step backward,” Cohn said. “HB 2348 would end tenure at Kansas’ public institutions of higher education both prospectively and retroactively. Ending tenure — especially in legislation that offers no alternative protections for academic freedom — would compromise the health of Kansas’ public colleges and universities because it would leave faculty without key protections that allow for open inquiry to thrive.”
Other opponents of the bill took Cohn’s argument a step further.
Lori Kniffin, an assistant professor up for tenure at Fort Hays State, said academic freedom in the education system and wider freedoms espoused in a democracy were at stake. She earned a doctorate at University of North Carolina at Greensboro after receiving bachelor’s and master’s degrees at Kansas State. She works in the School of Criminal Justice, Leadership and Sociology at FHSU.
“I have provided outstanding teaching, research and service through FHSU for the last five years,” Kniffin said. “The tenure process is developmental and rigorous. Tenure is earned, not given.”
Daniel Hoyt, a Kansas State professor and president of the Kansas state chapter of AAUP, said the KSU faculty handbook defined the purpose of awarding tenure as the quest to hire faculty of the highest caliber and to deliver full academic freedom in pursuit of ideas or inquiries without fear of retribution.
“HB 2348 eviscerates the faculty’s freedom to do their work without censorship,” Hoyt said. “We need more support and funding, not political attacks on faculty.”