Responding to 10 diversity, equity and inclusion-related recommendations that the Board of Regents issued in November to its universities, Iowa State University has barred anyone on campus from compelling students, employees, applicants or visitors “disclose their pronouns.”
“While the full implementation plan is not due to the regents until April, the university is taking initial steps,” according to the ISU directive. “Students, faculty and staff may choose to voluntarily disclose their own pronouns to another individual, but it is not a requirement.”
Neither ISU nor the universities of Iowa or Northern Iowa have or have ever had policies requiring students, employees, applicants or visitors disclose their preferred pronouns. As to why, then, a board “DEI study group” included among its 10 recommendations one barring compelled disclosure, regents reported receiving feedback and anecdotal evidence of “situations when students, employees or visitors on campuses were asked to provide information regarding their personal use of pronouns in ways that made them uncomfortable.”
“We went to an official U of I function and were supposed to put pronoun stickers on our name tags,” wrote one of the thousands of respondents who answered an open-ended regent survey question seeking general comments about DEI programming across Iowa’s public universities.
“Many employees refused to apply them,” that anonymous respondent wrote. “I refused … that is a controversial idea and does not need university endorsement. This is Iowa … not California.”
Regent President Michael Richards in March 2023 formed a study group of three board members — David Barker, Jim Lindenmayer and Greta Rouse — after the Iowa Legislature passed a law requiring the board conduct a comprehensives study of DEI efforts across its campuses.
That law ordered the campuses to “cease all hiring related to the institution’s diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts” — and Richards ordered them to pause implementation of any new DEI programs — following sharp criticism from Republican legislators in the 2023 session.
“Just the top DEI staff at our regent universities — those four positions alone, just four people — account for about $750,000 in salaries,” Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis, said during a 2023 subcommittee meeting. “If you account for the staff underneath them and their departmental budgets, we're talking about millions. Millions of taxpayer dollars that are being used to push an ideological agenda and not focus on academic excellence.”
In February 2023, the regent universities reported employing a total of 129 faculty and staff working full-time in DEI — with Collins criticizing the three campuses for spending a combined $9.7 million on the efforts annually.
As part of the regents’ subsequent study, the board in November reported to lawmakers a total of 142 full- and part-time DEI-related staffers across the three campuses making a combined $13.3 million in compensation.
The board also posted to its website a feedback form and more than 8,400 people responded to at least some of the questions. Of those, 7,461 were students, faculty or staff. The rest were alumni, parents, employers, members of the public and government officials — who accounted for 38 of the responses.
To a survey question of whether the universities’ mandatory DEI programs emphasize a particular political agenda, 3,289 people responded — with 2,573 saying “no” and 716 saying “yes.”
“DEI has become synonymous with a leftist agenda,” one respondent wrote, according to 422 pages of anonymous answers the regents provided.
“The DEI programs are not doing anything wrong,” another person wrote. “I support them, and I’m a Republican.”
Some survey responses either criticized or supported the pair of regent study group recommendations that barred mandatory pronoun disclosure and any requirements that employees or applicants “submit a DEI statement or be evaluated based on participation in DEI initiatives.”
“Efforts have become excessive, such as including required personal DEI statements as part of annual professional reviews and application material for faculty candidates,” one person wrote.
Another person highlighted a “Path to Distinction” document the UI Executive Vice President and Provost’s Office produced in August 2021 aimed at centering faculty search and recruitment strategies around DEI goals.
“It focuses almost exclusively on DEI,” the survey respondent wrote. “There is little discussion of other hiring considerations. In fact, it goes so far as to suggest discounting traditional measures to evaluate candidates.”
A bullet point on job candidate interviews advises committees to “include questions about commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion during distance interviews and on-campus interviews.”
“We are required to invite at least one female candidate to visit campus as part of our search for a tenure-track faculty member,” a survey respondent wrote. “Candidates should be selected based on their abilities, qualifications, and experiences. Gender and race should NOT be a factor.”
As to the pronoun recommendation, several raised concerns.
“They pressure untenured staff to jump on the transgender bandwagon and attach pronouns in their email names and signatures,” one person wrote.
“Us, them, they pronouns are used for a singular person,” another wrote. “Aren’t we teaching institutions? This isn’t even proper English.”
Still, some commenters expressed a need for respectful pronoun use.
“Asking about pronouns should be encouraged,” one person said, as did another member of the LGTBQ community. “I have felt a recent lack of respect from both staff and students regarding pronouns and my identity due to the culture shifts in U.S. politics,” the commenter wrote. “DEI is not a political agenda. It is an ethical principle that our institutions cannot bypass.”
Other recommendations, which the campuses are working to implement and will report back to the regents on in April, include:
Despite the criticism, many respondents expressed strident support for the universities’ DEI programming.
“I believe diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and activities at Iowa’s public universities are essential to growing and fostering a caring community,” one person wrote. “These programs teach faculty, staff, students, and the general public about all individuals and how to cultivate communities of belonging, access, and welcoming environments.”
www.thegazette.com
“While the full implementation plan is not due to the regents until April, the university is taking initial steps,” according to the ISU directive. “Students, faculty and staff may choose to voluntarily disclose their own pronouns to another individual, but it is not a requirement.”
Neither ISU nor the universities of Iowa or Northern Iowa have or have ever had policies requiring students, employees, applicants or visitors disclose their preferred pronouns. As to why, then, a board “DEI study group” included among its 10 recommendations one barring compelled disclosure, regents reported receiving feedback and anecdotal evidence of “situations when students, employees or visitors on campuses were asked to provide information regarding their personal use of pronouns in ways that made them uncomfortable.”
“We went to an official U of I function and were supposed to put pronoun stickers on our name tags,” wrote one of the thousands of respondents who answered an open-ended regent survey question seeking general comments about DEI programming across Iowa’s public universities.
“Many employees refused to apply them,” that anonymous respondent wrote. “I refused … that is a controversial idea and does not need university endorsement. This is Iowa … not California.”
Regent President Michael Richards in March 2023 formed a study group of three board members — David Barker, Jim Lindenmayer and Greta Rouse — after the Iowa Legislature passed a law requiring the board conduct a comprehensives study of DEI efforts across its campuses.
That law ordered the campuses to “cease all hiring related to the institution’s diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts” — and Richards ordered them to pause implementation of any new DEI programs — following sharp criticism from Republican legislators in the 2023 session.
“Just the top DEI staff at our regent universities — those four positions alone, just four people — account for about $750,000 in salaries,” Rep. Taylor Collins, R-Mediapolis, said during a 2023 subcommittee meeting. “If you account for the staff underneath them and their departmental budgets, we're talking about millions. Millions of taxpayer dollars that are being used to push an ideological agenda and not focus on academic excellence.”
In February 2023, the regent universities reported employing a total of 129 faculty and staff working full-time in DEI — with Collins criticizing the three campuses for spending a combined $9.7 million on the efforts annually.
As part of the regents’ subsequent study, the board in November reported to lawmakers a total of 142 full- and part-time DEI-related staffers across the three campuses making a combined $13.3 million in compensation.
The board also posted to its website a feedback form and more than 8,400 people responded to at least some of the questions. Of those, 7,461 were students, faculty or staff. The rest were alumni, parents, employers, members of the public and government officials — who accounted for 38 of the responses.
To a survey question of whether the universities’ mandatory DEI programs emphasize a particular political agenda, 3,289 people responded — with 2,573 saying “no” and 716 saying “yes.”
“DEI has become synonymous with a leftist agenda,” one respondent wrote, according to 422 pages of anonymous answers the regents provided.
“The DEI programs are not doing anything wrong,” another person wrote. “I support them, and I’m a Republican.”
Pronouns, DEI statements
Some survey responses either criticized or supported the pair of regent study group recommendations that barred mandatory pronoun disclosure and any requirements that employees or applicants “submit a DEI statement or be evaluated based on participation in DEI initiatives.”
“Efforts have become excessive, such as including required personal DEI statements as part of annual professional reviews and application material for faculty candidates,” one person wrote.
Another person highlighted a “Path to Distinction” document the UI Executive Vice President and Provost’s Office produced in August 2021 aimed at centering faculty search and recruitment strategies around DEI goals.
“It focuses almost exclusively on DEI,” the survey respondent wrote. “There is little discussion of other hiring considerations. In fact, it goes so far as to suggest discounting traditional measures to evaluate candidates.”
A bullet point on job candidate interviews advises committees to “include questions about commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion during distance interviews and on-campus interviews.”
“We are required to invite at least one female candidate to visit campus as part of our search for a tenure-track faculty member,” a survey respondent wrote. “Candidates should be selected based on their abilities, qualifications, and experiences. Gender and race should NOT be a factor.”
As to the pronoun recommendation, several raised concerns.
“They pressure untenured staff to jump on the transgender bandwagon and attach pronouns in their email names and signatures,” one person wrote.
“Us, them, they pronouns are used for a singular person,” another wrote. “Aren’t we teaching institutions? This isn’t even proper English.”
Still, some commenters expressed a need for respectful pronoun use.
“Asking about pronouns should be encouraged,” one person said, as did another member of the LGTBQ community. “I have felt a recent lack of respect from both staff and students regarding pronouns and my identity due to the culture shifts in U.S. politics,” the commenter wrote. “DEI is not a political agenda. It is an ethical principle that our institutions cannot bypass.”
Restructuring DEI
Other recommendations, which the campuses are working to implement and will report back to the regents on in April, include:
- Restructuring their central, universitywide DEI offices to eliminate DEI functions that aren’t necessary for compliance or accreditation;
- Reviewing all college, department or unit-level DEI positions to determine whether the job duties are necessary for compliance or accreditation — and adjust or eliminate any that aren’t;
- Assessing services provided by offices supporting diversity or multicultural affairs to ensure they’re available to all students;
- Issuing employee guidance about separating “personal political advocacy from university business and employment activities”;
- Exploring potential recruitment strategies for “advancing diversity of intellectual and philosophical perspective in faculty and staff applicant pools”;
- And exploring a widespread initiative creating “opportunities for education and research on free speech and civic education.”
Despite the criticism, many respondents expressed strident support for the universities’ DEI programming.
“I believe diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and activities at Iowa’s public universities are essential to growing and fostering a caring community,” one person wrote. “These programs teach faculty, staff, students, and the general public about all individuals and how to cultivate communities of belonging, access, and welcoming environments.”
ISU bars campus from compelling people to ‘disclose their pronouns'
Responding to 10 diversity, equity, and inclusion-related recommendations Iowa’s Board of Regents issued in November, Iowa State University has disseminated a directive barring anyone on campus from making students, employees, applicants, or visitors “disclose their pronouns.”
www.thegazette.com
