Dive Brief: 

• The Manhattan Institute, an influential conservative think tank, shared model legislation last week that proposes giving states and governing boards greater authority over general education, signaling that state-level efforts to shape classroom instruction could accelerate. 
• The proposal would also weaken shared governance by limiting faculty bodies to advisory roles. Under the model legislation, state funding would be contingent on colleges complying with the general education requirements. 
• The think tank has helped drive a wave of bills aimed at stamping out college diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. Just last year, state lawmakers proposed 25 anti-DEI bills influenced by model legislation from the Manhattan Institute and another think tank, five of which became law, according to an analysis from PEN America, a free expression group. 

Dive Insight: 

When sharing the model legislation, two Manhattan Institute scholars argued state lawmakers should expand their oversight of public colleges by shifting more control over general education curriculum to governing boards, whose members are typically politically appointed. 

The model legislation contains some of the same language as a sweeping law enacted in Texas last year mandating course reviews and stripping away power from faculty bodies. 

The think tank’s proposed bill would require boards to review core courses each year and certify they are “foundational and fundamental to a sound postsecondary education,” they are needed for civic or professional life, and they reflect “core content and methodologies of historical liberal arts and preprofessional disciplines.”

John Sailer, director of Manhattan Institute’s higher education policy, and Tal Fortgang, a legal policy fellow, also took aim at what they described as faculty members being “captured by the fervor of ideological movements.” 

“Democratic oversight, in the form of board governance, offers a corrective path,” they wrote. 

Their model legislation would relegate faculty bodies to “a strictly advisory role,” effectively stripping away the authority of faculty senates. It would also require an institution’s leader to appoint the head of the faculty body. 

“These powers would challenge some conventions of shared governance, but the time is ripe for such a challenge,” the Manhattan Institute authors contended. 

In a November report, the American Association of University Professors decried state legislation in recent years limiting faculty bodies to advisory roles. Indiana, Ohio and Texas have enacted such laws. 

The Texas law has the heaviest restrictions, according to the AAUP, including by giving governing boards the discretion of whether to create faculty bodies at all. AAUP described the legislation as the most “extreme assault” on shared governance yet. 

The Manhattan Institute’s model legislation would also mandate governing board involvement in creating tenured faculty positions and administrator hiring. They would be charged with approving all job postings for tenured faculty positions and hiring decisions for key administrators, from deans to provosts. 

It would also require at least 60% of hiring committee members for presidents and provosts to be board members. 

The Manhattan Institute’s model legislation is just the latest effort to more tightly control classroom instruction. 

Florida lawmakers supercharged the effort in 2023, when they passed a law requiring colleges to review their general education courses to remove those that “distort significant historical events,” teach “identity politics,” or are “based on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege” are inherent to the U.S. and created to maintain inequities. 

During those course reviews, officials flagged concerns such as public university content focusing on women or low-wage workers, according to documents from college and system employees obtained by The Chronicle of Higher Education. 

In January 2025, the governing board of Florida’s university system approved general education changes, massively reducing which courses were part of the core curricula. Florida’s Board of Education, which oversees the state’s community colleges, likewise approved changes that month. 

Similarly, Texas lawmakers passed a bill requiring general education reviews in 2025. 

Afterward, the Texas A&M University System adopted a policy to restrict instruction in November, barring professors across its 12 campuses from teaching content about race, sexual orientation or gender identity without prior approval from their university presidents. 

The policy has led to university officials canceling or modifying courses, including by asking a professor to remove some works by Greek philosopher Plato from an introductory course. 

In response, American Association of University Professors President Todd Wolfson called the decision to censor Plato an “academic absurdity.” 

“Barring a foundational philosopher who is a cornerstone of Western thought because his work touches on race or gender is a blatant attempt at thought policing that will not survive legal scrutiny,” Wolfson said in a statement.

More recently, the University of Texas System’s governing board adopted a policy to limit instruction on “controversial” topics — a term left undefined in the text. Faculty members have decried the policy, arguing it threatens their academic freedom and will harm student instruction.