In the days following the U.S. Department of Education’s release of a Dear Colleague letter outlining the executive branch’s interpretation of the Civil Rights Act as it pertains to federal higher education funding stipulations, frustration among Colorado State University students, faculty and administration alike has grown.

The letter prohibits higher education institutions from “using race in decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies and all other aspects of student, academic and campus life.” 

A 14-day period beginning with the release of the letter Friday, Feb. 14, was provided for institutions to make changes to ensure compliance. An educational institution’s failure to comply with the requirements outlined in the letter could mean the loss of federal funding. CSU receives more than $436 million in federal funding each year.

The Dear Colleague letter was released following an executive order that, among other things, instructed federal departments and agencies to encourage outside parties, including institutions of higher education, to end DEI programming and policies. The initial executive order called into question research funding and resulted in a message from Vice President for Research Cassandra Moseley with guidance for those working on federally funded projects.

The “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” executive order was later subject to a temporary restraining order, therefore extending the original 14-day compliance period outlined in the ED letter, granting CSU and other universities more time to plan and adjust.

Following the release of the letter, university administration released a statement Feb. 18 acknowledging the ED letter and outlining adjustments that would be made to job duties, policies and websites to “reflect the institution’s compliance with federal guidelines.”

Uncertainty falls over campus; students, faculty call for transparency 

Citing a lack of transparency from university officials and concerns about the future of the Cultural Resource Centers, students organized campuswide demonstrations and peaceful protests in the Administration Building and the Associated Students of CSU Senate Chambers, calling for increased communication and interaction between administrators and affected students.

Students participating in the demonstrations said the released statements left more questions than answers, only exacerbating existing feelings of uncertainty across campus.

“Total fear and frustration,” third year student Jessica Gray said in response to the federal directives. “Accommodations get me through minute to minute. The thought of them being gone freaks me out, not to mention the total loss of community. It’s a disgrace.”

Additional statements from CSU President Amy Parsons and CSU System Chancellor Tony Frank followed, with leadership concluding that no immediate changes would befall university practices until further clarification. The hold on the executive order is currently under appeal, thus further delaying the implementation of new federal funding eligibility requirements.

In a special session of the CSU Faculty Council Tuesday, Feb. 25, faculty were given the opportunity to voice their concerns directly to administration staff. From the outset of the meeting, it was made clear that faculty members remain as uncertain as students, with access to quality, timely information from and communication with university leadership serving as a core point of discussion.

Faculty Council Vice Chair Joseph DiVerdi addressed the frustration faculty members have expressed regarding the administration’s response to the current situation.

“One of the contexts that I’m thinking about as we open this up here is trying to identify that … the enemies of the institution are not present in the institution,” DiVerdi said.

Faculty Council leadership shared information regarding their personal communications with members of the administration and stressed that while they understand the frustration, it’s important to consider that university leadership is navigating the situation at hand as issues arise.

“The thing that I keep telling folks is none of us have ever been here before,” Board of Governors Faculty Representative Jennifer Martin said. “This is totally new for every single one of us in the room, as well as our leaders, and then having a level of compassion, understanding that we’re all in this together, and this is foreign territory (is important).”

Faculty members in attendance discussed shared concerns in an open conversation during the half hour prior to the arrival of administration members.

Some in attendance expressed frustration with the content included in leadership communications prior to the meeting, with a focus on the message sent to CSU faculty Friday, Feb. 21, by Frank.

“Definitely a common narrative was about how unamusing the tone and the email from the chancellor had been,” said Antonio Pedros-Gascon, an associate professor in the department of languages, literatures and cultures. “Considering that that person has been president of this institution, it adds an extravagant insult to the situation.”

Geography and anthropology Professor Mary Van Buren stressed the importance of shared governance in response to information regarding an incident management team that the administration is in the process of organizing. 

“I feel like not only do we not have any information, but that this is a time of crisis during which normal semidemocratic processes can be voided, and that concerns me,” Van Buren said.

Members of administration outline current plans, acknowledge communication errors

Administration members first provided updates from their respective offices on their evolving response to the ED’s new directives, beginning with Office of the President Chief of Staff Matt Tillman’s presentation on the university’s implementation of an IMT.

Drawing on the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s command structure, CSU previously implemented an IMT during the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein the situation was similarly fluid, Tillman said. 

It was quickly pointed out that the displayed chart of incident command did not include communication and decision-making with faculty members, to which numerous attendees objected.

Van Buren argued the IMT contradicts CSU’s values of shared governance as detailed in the above statements and in the university’s Principles of Community, as it excludes faculty from crucial conversations. 

“Faculty, as well as students, feel like it has been anything but a transparent process, that we are not included in this conversation,” Van Buren said. “I get the motivation to hunker down and do what you can most efficiently do as quickly as you can, but I don’t think that this crisis should engender a disregard for the democratic processes that are being touted at this university so often.”

Van Buren further pressed the administration on what is being done to include faculty in decision-making processes rather than simply providing updates as they come.

Tillman and Vice President for Inclusive Excellence Kauline Cipriani made repeated references to scenario planning efforts undertaken by administration in the months leading to the Dear Colleague letter, contradicting the group’s repeated use of the phrase, “building the plane as we fly it” throughout the meeting.

Faculty members called attention to the administration’s failure to include experts within the faculty in any conversations ahead of or since the ED’s new directives were issued, with many expressing irritation.

“I heard scenario planning called out three times in this discussion, and you might not even be aware, but there is a scenario planning institute at CSU, which I lead,” School of Education Professor Thomas Chermack said. “I’ve never been asked to do anything for this university. So if you want to talk about scenarios, I’m here and I’m ready.”

Chermack claimed that although he remains a top national expert in scenario planning and directs the CSU Scenario Planning Institute, he was not consulted in the months before the Trump administration took office.

Tillman responded by taking down Chermack’s email address and pledging outreach and increased communication with campus experts.

Continuing to address concerns over faculty communication, Henley outlined the release of a new university website dedicated to maintaining all-campus communications. Several updates directing students and faculty to legal resources and up-to-date federal guidance have already been made, though faculty members remained unsatisfied.

“I think this is a perfect example of what appears to me — I’d love to be corrected — but appears to me to be a failure to involve the faculty and to be transparent with faculty,” Professor of history Jared Orsi said, “If you take anything from today, it’s that tomorrow, all of you need to figure out how to reach out to faculty because there is expertise out there, as (Chermack) mentioned, and there are thousands of us around the campus. So I really would love to get an answer to the question, what has been done? Not an explanation for why it hasn’t been done yet, but what has been done?”

Members of administration acknowledged their lack of communication in the days immediately following the issuance of the executive order, detailing efforts to loop staff and faculty in via email while also pledging additional in-person interactions.

To conclude the meeting, faculty looked for assurance from the administration that the university’s research and student-focused priorities be granted equal consideration for the long-term financial viability of the institution.

Communication studies Professor Karrin Vasby Anderson asked at what point the university is prepared to mark a “red line” against incoming federal directives to uphold the university’s educational and research commitments. 

“Do we have a ‘red line’ that would reassure students and faculty right now?” Anderson said. “If it is crossed, might you consider working with the other public university administrations in the state and really responding from a position of strength?”

Parsons responded by declining to theorize potential future legal avenues but pledged to continue exploring alternative solutions to the issue.

“I don’t know how to answer the ‘red line’ question and I don’t want to act like I’m the CSU General Counsel and answer that from a legal standpoint,” Parsons said. “We are coordinating with the other higher education institutions in the state, and I’ll honor what everybody’s doing here.”

Reach Hannah Parcells and Sam Hutton at news@collegian.com or on social media @csucollegian.