Members of an Ohio State University governing body renewed concerns about academic freedom and tenure at the Salmon P. Chase Center for Civics, Culture & Society, as a proposed bill bolstering such civic centers works its way through the Ohio Statehouse.
The Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility shared a report at Ohio State's University Senate meeting on Oct. 22 that raised concerns that the Chase Center's mandate "poses a credible threat to academic freedom."
In 2023, the state General Assembly passed Senate Bill 117, which mandated the creation of five new independent academic centers at five state public universities,
including Ohio State. Under the law, the Chase Center must be an independent academic unit physically located at the John Glenn College of Public Affairs with the authority to hire 15 tenure-track faculty who hold their appointments within the center.
The Chase Center's mandate, according to the law, is to “educate students by means of free, open, and rigorous intellectual inquiry to seek the truth" and is responsible for “offering university-wide programming related to the values of free speech and civil discourse” and “expanding the intellectual diversity of the university's academic community.”
Tristram McPherson, professor of philosophy and member of CAFR who shared the report, said the Chase Center's mandate would seem to promote academic freedom for faculty.
But "the unusual and largely unaccountable power vested in the director of the Center" and "the nature of its mission" are two "worrying features" that give faculty members pause, according to the report.
Typically, according to the report, creating new academic centers at the university would require approval by the Office of Academic Affairs, University Senate and Ohio State's Board of Trustees. But the Chase Center was mandated by law, and the legislation "guarantees it an unusual degree of autonomy from other parts of the university and vests extraordinary power in the director of the Center."
For instance, McPherson said the law gives the director complete curricular oversight of what is taught at the center. That wording, he said, "appears to grant the power to unilaterally determine what is and isn't taught" to the director, which is in conflict with faculty's academic freedom to propose and teach course's based on one's expertise.
McPherson noted that the report's concerns are about "the powers vested in the director of the center, not the character of the current director." The Chase Center is currently led by Executive Director Lee Strang.
Though Strang has not demonstrated any problematic behavior regarding academic freedom, McPherson said, "even a benevolent and judicious despot renders their subjects unfree."
McPherson said the report also claims that the Chase Center was "created with an ideological mission." The Chase Center's mission "should be understood in the political context of its creation" and "was created by legislation that received votes only from members of one party," according to the report.
CAFR said in its findings that "the combination of the unaccountable power of the director of the Chase Center, together with the ideological nature of the Center’s de facto mandate, create conditions that deprive the Center’s faculty of robust academic freedom" and this "deprivation threatens the academic freedom of the broader University community."
The report recommended that University Senate create an ad hoc committee to clarify the university's policy on the academic freedom of the faculty of the Chase Center; clarify Chase Center policies and how they protect the academic freedom of their faculty; and make recommendations concerning these policies to University Senate in light of CAFR’s findings concerning academic freedom.
Additionally, the report recommended that University Senate "formally request a revised proposal from the Chase Center with includes assurances for the protection of the academic freedom of its faculty."
In January 2025, University Senate members voted against a proposal to formally establish the Chase Center, which would've extended tenure-initiating status to the new civics center. Though the vote was not required for the Chase Center's continued existence, members said at the time that the outcome could affect how it interacts with and operates within the university.
McPherson said the center "should continue that process until we get to a situation in which the university community and its administration and the Chase Center are all on the same page."
Michael Clune, a professor at the Chase Center, shared a prepared response from faculty members at the Chase Center during the meeting rebuffing CAFR's report.
Clune said that he and his colleagues "have not experienced any diminution of our academic freedom, but the committee's description of the conditions they believe threaten our academic freedom is wrong in every respect."
Clune said the Chase Center's director does not have unaccountable power because he is accountable to Ohio State' provost, president and board of trustees. He also said the committee did not reach out to Chase Center faculty to discuss their experiences.
"We correct this puzzling omission by stating now that we've never felt our academic freedom to be impinged in any way," Clune said.
Kaleb Duarte, an undergraduate senator, said that Senate should take the concerns raised in CAFR's report very seriously, but also found it concerning that Chase Center faculty were not consulted.
"If we're seeking to protect their academic freedom, their experiences should inform the reforms that we pursue," Duarte said. "Ultimately, I worry that this resolution risks becoming more of a political gesture rather than a substantial effort at institutional change."
Ramsey Piazza, a staff senator, said it's important to note that the Chase Center's function is still being determined at the statehouse.
In June, Sen. Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland) introduced Senate Bill 461 to ensure the five centers remain well-funded and independent. Directors would have "sole and exclusive authority" over hiring, promotion and tenure of faculty and "exclusive and unlimited authority" over curriculum.
If the bill becomes law, directors at two of the programs – one at Ohio State University and another at the University of Toledo – would be promoted to deans by Jan. 1. The other programs – at Miami, Cleveland State and Wright State universities – could follow.
Senate members voted to further discuss the report with members of the Chase Center in steering committee.
Higher education reporter Sheridan Hendrix can be reached at shendrix@dispatch.com and on Signal at @sheridan.120. You can follow her on Instagram at @sheridanwrites.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Ohio State faculty raise alarm over academic freedom at Chase Center
