Faculty Guide to the Implementation of Advance Ohio Higher Education Act (SB1)

SB1 affirms that Miami faculty retain full academic freedom to teach any concepts, topics, or materials relevant to a course and its approved learning outcomes, even if those materials are considered controversial or divisive. The law does not limit the subjects, topics, or materials that can be addressed in an academic course.  

Furthermore, SB1 requires all instructors, including faculty, staff, and graduate students serving in instructional roles, to support the fullest degree of intellectual diversity and to allow students to reach their own conclusions on controversial beliefs and policies without promoting any social, political, or religious point of view.

SB1 defines intellectual diversity as “multiple, divergent, and varied perspectives on an extensive range of public policy issues.” It defines a controversial belief or policy as “any belief or policy that is the subject of political controversy, including climate policies, electoral politics, foreign policy, diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, immigration policy, marriage, or abortion.”

What this means for Miami instructors

• You may continue teaching challenging or controversial material when it is relevant to your course outcomes and consistent with Miami’s Statement of Essential Teaching Practices.
• You should create opportunities for students to share different viewpoints and form their own conclusions through critical engagement with course content.
• You retain the right to set and enforce clear course objectives, assess student performance according to those objectives, and determine when and how to move through topics.
• You may use your professional judgment to decide how best to foster intellectual diversity in your discipline, provided that judgment does not limit legitimate viewpoint expression.
• You may address conflict or disruption as you normally would, using established university protocols for classroom management and student conduct.

Grading and Assessment under SB1

SB1 affirms that instructors retain full professional judgment in determining how to foster intellectual diversity within their academic discipline and in setting grading standards that align with the course’s learning outcomes and disciplinary expectations.

Grades must reflect the quality of a student’s academic work, their demonstrated mastery of course material, and their achievement of the stated learning outcomes. Instructors may not:

• Require students to endorse or reject a specific political, ideological, or social position to receive a grade
• Reward or penalize students based on agreement or disagreement with the instructor’s personal views
• Discourage the expression of different perspectives on controversial beliefs or policies when relevant to the course and expressed in accordance with class expectations

In cases where understanding or applying the consensus or foundational beliefs of an academic discipline is central to the course, instructors may assess a student’s ability to accurately explain, analyze, or apply those principles, even if the student personally disagrees with them. This approach ensures that grading remains based on academic performance and the standards of the discipline, while also supporting the intellectual diversity protections required by SB1.

Syllabus guidance

SB1 calls for more intentional framing of values-based statements in syllabi. Faculty may wish to review or revise diversity or inclusivity statements so that they align with Miami’s mission and with SB1 requirements. 

A sample statement could include the following language:

This course is guided by Miami’s commitment to free inquiry, civil discourse, and personal growth. Discussions may include controversial issues, beliefs, or policies, which are presented to support understanding of the curriculum and course objectives, not to promote any specific point of view. Students will be assessed on their mastery of the subject matter and relevant skills. Our goal is to foster a classroom environment grounded in curiosity, respect, and the pursuit of knowledge.

Complaint process

SB1 requires the university to respond to complaints regarding any administrator, faculty member, staff, or student who interferes with the intellectual diversity rights of another using the process provided for in our Campus Free Speech policy and inform students and employees of its protections. 

The university is drafting a policy on Diversity, Equity & Inclusion and Other Concepts to include the rights granted by SB1 regarding intellectual diversity violations which follows the same process set forth in the Campus Free Speech policy. This process provides an opportunity for complaints to be submitted through EthicsPoint and includes a review, investigation, and hearing before a panel to ensure adherence to the rights of all involved.

Under SB1, all Ohio public universities must make undergraduate course syllabi publicly available beginning in the 2026–2027 academic year. This requirement applies to any course offered for college credit, except for College Credit Plus courses taught in a secondary school by a high school teacher.

SB1 defines a course syllabus as a document produced for students by the course instructor that includes:

• The name of the course instructor;
• The instructor’s professional qualifications;
• The instructor’s contact information;
• A calendar for the course outlining materials and topics and when they will be covered; and,
• A list of any required or recommended readings

SB1 also states that a publicly available syllabus is not required to include the location or time of day at which a course is being held.

How Miami will implement the requirement

Miami will meet this requirement in a way that minimizes additional workload for faculty while ensuring compliance. The University anticipates contracting with a vendor to provide a syllabus management system that will allow instructors to submit syllabi once and have them automatically posted to a publicly accessible, searchable web page.

The public site will:

• Be accessible from the Miami homepage in no more than three clicks
• Be searchable by keywords and phrases
• Require no login or registration
• Keep syllabi available for at least two years after posting
• Ensure the most recent syllabus is posted before the first day of classes each term

Faculty will not be expected to post syllabi individually on public sites; the University will handle posting centrally.

Pilot and preparation timeline

To ensure a smooth launch in Fall 2026, Miami plans to:

• Conduct a small-scale winter term pilot once the software system is purchased and installed.
• Hold an internal, non-public test implementation during the spring 2026 semester for all courses taught that term. This will test the full process and give faculty time to make adjustments before public posting begins in Fall 2026.

What this means for instructors

• No action is required during the 2025–2026 academic year until the pilot and test implementation begins in Spring 2026.
• Templates and examples that include all required elements will be provided well before the pilot.
  The public syllabus will focus only on the information specified by law; it will not require posting every instructional resource or lecture
• Faculty retain the ability to revise a syllabus during the term in accordance with university policy.
• Professional qualifications in this context refer to academic degrees, fields of study, and other relevant professional credentials.

Preparing ahead

It is a good idea to review your syllabi now to ensure they clearly list:

• Your name and Miami contact information
• Your degrees and professional credentials
• A week-by-week or date-based calendar of topics and materials
• Required and recommended readings

The new American Civic Literacy requirement, established under Ohio SB1, will apply to all undergraduate students graduating in Spring 2030 and beyond. There are no changes to degree requirements for students graduating before that date, and no changes go into effect in Fall 2025 or Spring 2026. As always, students are expected to follow the requirements in place when they matriculate.

Miami’s implementation is designed to integrate smoothly into the Miami Plan without adding credit hours. The Center for Civics, Culture, and Society will offer most sections beginning in 2026–27, with additional offerings from History and Political Science, among others. Courses will be available in multiple formats (in-person, online, hybrid, full-term, and bi-term) and terms (fall, spring, winter, and summer) to ensure student access.

Each course will include a cumulative final examination covering foundational U.S. documents. Students who do not pass will have structured opportunities for remediation and reassessment, with up to two additional exam attempts in the same academic year. Students who are still unsuccessful will retake the course in a later term.

The requirement will be embedded in the degree audit so advisors can monitor progress and help students enroll in an approved course in time for graduation. Special attention will be given to students on non-traditional timelines, including fifth-year seniors.

The goal is to implement this requirement in a way that supports student success, minimizes disruption, and preserves disciplinary flexibility. If the state or university adjusts the requirement, advisors will guide students through any changes in the context of their individual degree plans.

SB1 requires that the universities conduct annual evaluations of full-time faculty and details the minimum standards for the evaluation, many of which are already incorporated in the university’s annual evaluation policies. The university is updating the Evaluation of Members of the Faculty policy, as well as the annual activity report templates, to address each new requirement, including an appeal process for faculty to appeal the final evaluation. The revised policy will be submitted to the Board of Trustees for review and approval to be in effect for the academic year 2025—2026 annual evaluations. 

SB1 also requires that the annual evaluation base at least 25% of teaching assessments on student evaluations, which must include questions determined by the university as well as those provided by the Chancellor of Higher Education. The Chancellor’s required course evaluation questions, listed below, will be added to the course evaluation system beginning Fall 2025.

Does the faculty member create a classroom atmosphere free of political, racial, gender, and religious bias?

• Yes
• No

• Yes
• No
• Not applicable

(1 = not effective at all, 10 = extremely effective)

The Provost’s Office is working with the Center for Teaching Excellence to identify a standardized peer review process and provide training to peer reviewers, including department chairs and associate deans. 

The Provost’s office is crafting guidance for department chairs and deans to standardize and clarify how faculty members’ performance and their areas of responsibility ‘does not meet’, ‘meets’, or ‘exceeds’ performance expectations.

SB 1 requires the university’s Board of Trustees to adopt a post-tenure review policy that is submitted to the chancellor of higher education and reviewed by the board every five years.  The university is drafting a new policy which creates a post-tenure review process in compliance with SB1. As required, the policy will include what initiates a required or discretionary review, be time-limited, include an appeal process, and will not be based on a faculty member’s allowable expression of academic freedom.