This week, nearly 200 courses at Texas A&M University were put under the microscope as faculty were instructed to revise or remove course materials that include discussions of race, gender, or sexual orientation or have their classes cancelled or reassigned. On Tuesday, January 6th, just one week before the start of Spring Semester classes, Professor Martin Peterson at TAMU was told to remove course content from his philosophy course on “race ideology and gender ideology,” as well as Plato readings that may discuss those topics. If he refused to remove those modules, he would be reassigned to teach a non-core philosophy class. Peterson said he would revise the syllabus, replacing the Plato readings with lectures focused on free speech and academic freedom.
This is one of many instances of censorship faculty at TAMU are facing right now. In November 2025, The TAMU System Board of Regents adopted a policy requiring campus presidents to approve any course that might be seen as advocating “race or gender ideology,” and barring certain discussions in core curriculum classes unless administrators determine they serve a “necessary educational purpose.” While the changes at TAMU stem from their new Regents’ policy, this censorship foreshadows what’s to come now that the SB 37 provisions on course audits came into effect on January 1st, 2026.
SB 37, one of the most comprehensive overhauls of public university governance in recent history, had two implementation deadlines:
- Universities must have revised their faculty governance policies by Sept. 1st, 2025.
- Universities must begin course audits as outlined in the bill on Jan. 1st, 2026.
The bill establishes a “Curriculum Advisory Committee” at each university and college system and requires the president of an institution to create a process for reviewing minor and certificate programs for the purpose of consolidation or elimination. Although advocacy from Texas AAUP-AFT members removed provisions in earlier versions of the bill that would have censored course topics related to the “belief of race, gender, or nationality, or any social, political, and religious belief as being superior to another,” university systems are still falling victim to political pressure.
Under SB 37’s rubric:
- Regents can justify curriculum changes by arguing alignment with workforce needs or ensuring courses remain “ideologically neutral,” overly broad criteria that are open to interpretation.
- Faculty senates have less power to push back on curriculum changes that originate with boards or presidents.
The firings of Dr. Melissa McCoul and Dr. Tom Alter, as well as the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, has expedited course changes in other Texas public university systems. The Texas Tech University System has issued its own restrictions on certain race and gender course content, while administrators at Texas State University have encouraged faculty to revise course descriptions and titles that might trigger ideological concerns, sometimes using AI tools to audit syllabi for flagged language.
The A&M System’s policies may go further than the text of SB 37 requires, but they reflect Board interpretations of their oversight role – interpretations that SB 37 makes possible by clarifying and expanding regents’ curricular authority. For other universities in the state, the choices made now could define not only course content but the character of public higher education in Texas for years to come.