WCU AAUP in the News (Again!)

Three new state laws affect K-12 and higher education - Lily Levin for Smoky Mountain News 

WCU American Association of University Professors President and Co-Founder Vincent Russell said AAUP is also concerned about the constitutionality of the law, especially since it limits the teaching of certain things — for example, the racist and sexist basis of meritocracy — but permits the opposite.

“That can constitute viewpoint discrimination,” he said.

Russell pointed out what he saw as ironic within the legislation.

“The language of the law is saying that it prohibits compelled speech — it is actually compelling speech in its own way, because it’s compelling educators to endorse or avoid these particular viewpoints that the legislature is now deemed divisive,” he said.

Several years ago, New Hampshire had its own version of a divisive concepts law, which was struck down in 2024 as an unconstitutional limitation on instructional content.  

Russell doesn’t think the state should be dictating what professors instruct because faculty should have primary responsibility for curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction.

“Faculty,” he told SMN, “are distinctly qualified to exercise this decision-making authority in our areas of expertise.” (7/1/2026)

Notes from Chicago

Earlier this month, WCU AAUP member Nora Radway Moore was elected as one of the North Carolina delegates to the 2026 AAUP Higher Ed Summit and Biennial Meeting in Chicago, IL. Below, Nora offers a report of her travels and experiences at the summit. We’re incredibly proud to have Nora represent our chapter and the entire state at this national convening. She is an associate instructor in the Communication Department at WCU and serves on both the WCU AAUP Organizing and Events Committees.

Notes from Chicago: Dispatch from the 2026 AAUP Higher Ed Summit and Biennial Meeting

By: Nora Radway Moore

The four days of the 2026 Higher Ed Summit and Biennial Meeting were absolutely jam-packed with workshops, plenary sessions, and, finally, the official biennial meetings on Friday and Saturday. The food and beverage service staff at the Magnificent Mile Hyatt Centric (represented by UNITE HERE Local 1!) provided a great setting for the conference, with a range of beverages, including two flavors of La Croix and actually tasty, iced coffee, as well as plenty of snacks and other treats available between every single session.

Day One

The first day began with a workshop titled "How to Have a Great Organizing Conversation." There was a lot of good conversation with members of larger, well-established chapters, and we all practiced having these vital conversations. The major key to a good organizing conversation is finding out everyone’s “why” for interest in the AAUP and passion for higher education. Organizing conversations can be tough or awkward, but it is so important to push through that and keep trying. As one wise person reminded us in the session: – The “Boss” never stops working, so we can’t stop, either. We lose campaigns when we don’t keep working in the “off season.”  

Next, I attended a session about equal opportunity policies and procedures related to Title VI and Title IX on college campuses. The leader of this session stressed the importance of knowing where these policies originated, who wrote them, if they sufficiently protect faculty, and how appeals are handled. It’s particularly unsettling that there is a company, the Association of Title IX Administrators (ATIXA) who offers prepackaged “one policy, one procedure” structures to institutions. ATIXA functions as a risk management company, wherein faculty are the risk and not included in creating the policies and procedures. The National Association for Behavioral Intervention and Threat Assessment (NABITA) handles appeals of ATIXA decisions. ATIXA and NABITA have the same parent company, so it’s basically like a pyramid scheme with faculty cut out of the decision-making equation completely. How these policies, particularly Title IX, are being applied is giving administrations and those outside the university, space and backing to push through specific ideology. We need to work to understand the policies that apply to us here at Western and how to ensure faculty are being appropriately represented and protected.  

The third session I attended was a discussion about how faculty on contingent appointments can and should get involved in shared governance. As the number of contingent faculty grows across all campuses, representation of contingent faculty on governing boards is not growing proportionally. Simply, shared governance is good because it works, but it only works if everyone is allowed to participate, including contingent faculty, staff, and students. AAUP National is clearly making an effort to include more contingent faculty in organizing and advocacy. As a non-tenure-track faculty member myself, this is encouraging.  

Day One finished with the first plenary session. AAUP President Todd Wolfson affirmed the importance of the higher ed summit and in-person biennial meeting. With his wise and impactful words, he reminded us that this meeting is not about discussing the problems, but about the actions we can take to solve these problems. He also talked about how we are a diverse group of people with different roles in higher education and different specific priorities, but when we are dealing with hostile administrations or other opponents, we must act as one. Wolfson stated, “The 2026 AAUP Biennial is a turning point – not only for our organization, but for the future of higher education and democracy in the United States.” This was also the same day Elon Musk became the world’s first trillionaire, which, when mentioned, elicited a “boo” from everyone in the room. A great end to a great first day.

Day Two

Day Two started with a session about the AAUP Legal Strategy, discussing legal wins of the last year or so, as well as important things to remember when potentially entering a legal battle. The hosts of this session stressed the importance of rallying your network to get broader support, including students, alumni, and community members, when preparing for a campaign or potential legal battle. When we are able to speak with one voice, we are stronger and more capable of winning.

Plenary Session II was a panel discussion focused on Democracy, AI, and the Fight Against Authoritarianism. Belle Boggs (AAUP NC President) was on this panel and gave AAUP NC a shoutout that got a big audience response. Boggs also wonthe 2026 Georgina M. Smith Awards for exceptional leadership in improving the status of academic women. North Carolina is currently the fastest-growing state section! She reminded us that investment in AI by our government and our institutions should be considered theft of our resources, academic freedom, our knowledge, our everything! As we are having conversations about AI on our campuses, we need to focus on how students are being cheated, not on students cheating. The fight against AI is a fight we can win, both on our campuses and in our communities. As Mohsen Modawi, a Palestinian activist and graduate student at Columbia University, asserted, “Tthe spirit of the people is stronger than the man’s technology.”

Plenary Session III featured Jason Wozniak from Debt Collective to discuss external threats to shared governance. Wozniak illuminated the audience on the link between student debt, university debt, and creditors. Credit rating agencies act as a sort of “shadow governing body.” When campuses face austerity measures due to their debt burden, this often leads to the shuttering of student programs and tuition increases, which then leads to student debt increasing and a weakening of our universities. The power of credit rating agencies encourages anticipatory obedience and is yet another threat to shared governance and academic freedom.

That session led well into the next workshop about shared governance at institutions with faculty senates. As an AAUP chapter, we need to consider what ideals, principles, and goals we are aiming to achieve with shared governance. Then, we can try to form a relationship between AAUP and senate leadership and even get members involved in senate committees and other forms of governance. To quote every liberal’s favorite musical, Hamilton, we need to get “in the room where it happens.” Faculty senates work within the university setting, and AAUP works outside the university setting., Ttogether, we can make progress to protect academic freedom.  

The last session I attended on day two was about building solidarity among tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty. The organizers of this panel emphasized the importance of thinking of tenure as economic security. While AAUP has historically been more focused on protecting the job security and academic freedom of tenured faculty, an attack on one faculty member is an attack on all faculty, regardless of status. The specifics of a job title don’t tend to matter very much if you’re unemployed. Academic freedom is entwined with economic security, and we need to ensure that everyone on campus has a genuine voice to represent their concerns.

Day Three

Day three started with an extremely timely session on fighting CPHE. Just the day before, our current accrediting body, SACSCOC, released information about their upcoming new “brand identity.” This new identity likely comes in response to the threat of CPHE on SACSOC’s regional accreditation monopoly. But instead of SACSCOC trying to protect the institutions and standards they have held for many years, they are instead bowing to the so-called “Christian morality” standards that CPHE and other state-run accreditation bodies are trying to push onto our universities. While this is primarily impacting universities in the Ssouth right now, it is likely coming for us all. It is essential that we approach this as an opportunity for political education. I learned that the people behind CPHE have been slithering around building power since at least 2002. All faculty, staff, and students need to be aware of what is happening and how this will impact all aspects of higher education and student life.

By the afternoon on day three, we had finally made it to the first session of the Biennial Meeting. President Wolfson gave us an overview of what to expect from this meeting and a solid rallying cry to keep us focused and bring up the energy after a couple of long days. In reference to a significant thunderstorm, including tornado sirens that interrupted an after-hours AAUP karaoke event, the evening before Wolfson said, “AAUP is preparing for a larger storm. A political storm.” Reports from the membership committee noted that AAUP membership has grown about 40% in the last two years, and much of that growth can be credited to advocacy chapters. Labor and educators at all levels have been at the root of social justice movements throughout history. Our work is not new, but it is essential to continue to move from advocacy to power.

Day Four

Day four was when the fun really got started with reports from more committees, voting for council members, council recommendations and proposals, and lots of rousing discussion. If you’ve ever been on a large AAUP National call, you have a decent idea about what the discussion was like, but imagine if everyone was also trapped in the same physical space. President Wolfson did an excellent job of leading and moderating these discussions. I especially appreciated when he affirmed he was elected to do what he thought was best for the AAUP (along with the rest of the executive council), not to represent the average of all AAUP members. Vice President Rotua Lumbantobing gave a report from the organizing and advocacy committee and stated the priorities moving forward need to be growing membership, political work at the legislative level, no longer just with our campus deans and other administration, and making efforts “to be serious, strategic, careful, disciplined, and fun.” The report from legal counsel was extremely powerful and led to a standing ovation from the audience. The full text of that report is available here, so I will only include one quote, “Fear cannot become the operating principle of higher education.” What a powerful message.

Committee recommendations regarding changes to advocacy chapters' membership bands and rates passed along will proposals affirming dues sharing strategies and a proposal about acting like and with unions passed enthusiastically. Finally, the seven recommendations put forth by the council were discussed and then passed unanimously. These recommendations represent, as President Wolfson said, “a decision about who we will be” and include a goals of advancing democracy and confronting authoritarian attacks;, building worker power in higher education by uniting faculty and staff;, advancing a bold public agenda for higher education;, advancing racial, economic, and social justice;, taking control of AI and technology;, securing all faculty;, and building the organization to win. We are at a point where we can choose to just respond to crises campus by campus, or we can build an organization “capable of building power, setting the agenda, and winning structural change.” Saving higher education is intrinsically linked to saving democracy.

Final Takeaways

My biggest takeaway from this experience is that we need to focus on taking action, moving faster, and mobilizing. It is so easy to get bogged down in the negativity and the truly frightening things happening every day, but every day is an opportunity to band together and make the world a better place, together. As a piece of art displayed in the lobby of the hotel shows, Today is a New Day.

Thank you to the WCU chapter and the North Carolina state conference for allowing me to represent our state at the Biennial Meeting. This conference was my first venture away from my son since he was born in January. I’m glad it was for something so meaningful and inspiring. The 110th AAUP Biennial meeting is set for Summer 2028, with specific dates and location to be determined. I encourage all members of our chapter to consider attending and being part of this powerful event. (6/20/2026)

WCU AAUP Approves Resolution Opposing CPHE as Potential Accrediting Body

At our May 8th, 2026, All-Member Meeting, WCU AAUP unanimously voted to approve a resolution opposing CPHE as a potential accrediting body for WCU in the next accrediting cycle. Our next steps are to work with the Faculty Chair and Faculty Senators to have this resolution introduced, voted on, and adopted by Faculty Senate. 

WCU AAUP CPHE Resolution

WHEREAS recent and escalating politically motivated actions by governmental bodies pose a significant threat to the foundational principles of U.S. higher education, including the autonomy of university governance, the integrity of scientific research, and the protection of free speech;

WHEREAS state governments across the Southern U.S. and aligned political actors at the federal level have targeted the independence of institutional accreditation with legal, financial, and political incursion designed to undermine the accreditation process and exert improper control over academic administration;

WHEREAS these state governments have routinely undermined faculty governance and academic freedom with state laws and policies;

WHEREAS these same state governments will choose the board members of the Commission for Public Higher Education (CPHE), and that board will choose a director and officers that will direct the commission;

WHEREAS the influence of state control over this commission will corrupt the independent accreditation process and allow states to steer colleges and universities toward policies, curriculum, hiring standards, and institutional benchmarks that will undermine higher education’s role in our democracy;

WHEREAS the AAUP described CPHE as an illegitimate body designed to give partisan political actors a powerful new tool to pressure universities to conform to a narrow ideological agenda;

WHEREAS three UNC System universities are participating in a trial run for the CPHE without faculty involvement or plausible justification;

WHEREAS the change of accreditors to CPHE coincides with a redefinition of academic freedom in the UNC Code that rendered academic freedom secondary to university policies and the accreditor’s standards, which are considerably less protective of academic freedom in the case of CPHE;

THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED that the Western Carolina University chapter of the American Association of University Professors demands the administration of Western Carolina University formally commit to retaining the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools as its accrediting body AND that any future changes to WCU’s accreditation body must be approved by WCU’s Faculty Senate;

Be it further RESOLVED that the Chapter demands University of North Carolina System leaders withdraw the System’s participation in CPHE’s pilot project and no longer explore accreditation with CPHE. (5/8/2026)

May Day News Coverage of Our Campus Rally

WCU AAUP President Quoted by Student Journalist

UNC System redefines academic freedom by Alex Pickard

"Vincent Russell, assistant professor in Western Carolina University’s Department of Communication and president of the WCU chapter of the American Association of University Professors criticizes this new definition for its potential impact in the classroom.

“Within the professional standard, it says that course material needs to be clearly related to the academic disciplines,” said Russell. “And basically, that opens faculty into disciplinary procedures for things that people perceive as not supporting the mission of the university.”

This definition also opens room for students to disrupt crucial class time for those who might object to certain topics being taught. This may negatively affect the students, the accused faculty, and other classmates.

“The example I’ve been using is an English professor. You might think their sole job is to teach English, but if they assign a novel about climate change, they’re also going to be teaching about climate change. Then, someone could critique and say that they’re only an English professor and don’t know about climate change, which can lead to disciplinary procedures,” said Russell.

While the long-term effects of this new definition for academic freedom are unclear, faculty and administrators expect to see this development when used in everyday classrooms at WCU." (3/24/2026)

They Are Watching Us (Excerpt from March 2026 Newsletter)

They are watching us. I have said some variation of this in every month’s installment of this newsletter and almost every urgent action in between, and it is true. The think tanks and malicious actors in powerful places are watching us.

• They watched all 3000 of us sign the petition opposing the UNC Syllabus Policy and its Doxxing Database.

• They watched us come together and increase our NC Conference membership by 250% year-over-year, which makes us the fastest growing conference in the country.

• They watched all 1000 of us sign the petition opposing the UNC Academic Freedom Policy and the many NC and National Members who pushed their way into the Board of Governors meeting to bear witness to the vote that would pass the new policy.

After they watched how we refused to back down and refused to give up on the principals that make our universities worth the time and effort we put into them as employees, students, and community members, they have started backing down. In the past week, AAUP has had two significant victories in our state:

1) UNC Recording Policy Reversal. After watching our AAUP responses, UNC Chapel Hill reversed course on pursuing its just-announced, proposed Recording Policy that would allow the university to record any faculty teaching at any time. They are scrapping the whole thing. This is a major win for academic freedom within the UNC system, because Chapel Hill is a bellwether for regional campuses like ours.

2)Academic Freedom Policy Concessions. While a version of the Academic Freedom Policy was passed that will still curtail speech in our classrooms, the petitions we signed and the faculty presence we had got several key changes made to the policy. These changes will continue to allow us as faculty to use our expertise as teachers and scholars to make pedagogical decisions about our content. This may seem like small potatoes and it would have been better if this policy had not passed, but these are concessions that hinted that the needle was moving in our direction and allow us to do our jobs and learn more freely than the first draft. Make no mistake, we aren't finished with this policy, but we are still celebrating this victory.

If you signed a petition, you made this happen. If you joined AAUP, you made this happen. If you wrote letters, talked to your friends and colleagues, and/or marched to Raleigh this past Thursday, you made this happen.

If you haven’t done any of those things yet, just imagine the impact we can have with your involvement. I’ll go ahead and put my requisite plug for you to join AAUP and WCU AAUP here.

If you join, let us know. We only get an updated roster once a month and would love to connect with and integrate you into the chapter much faster than National AAUP’s timeline. (3/1/2026)

WCU-AAUP Opposes UNC System Proposal to Publish Syllabi (Op-Ed) Published

Publicly Posting Syllabi Is Part of the Right-Wing Higher Ed Agenda - Op Ed in Asheville Citizen Times

UNC System President Peter Hans announced last week a proposed policy that would require all faculty at North Carolina’s 16 public universities to post their syllabi in an online database. Despite Hans’s claims that the policy will promote transparency, it actually is an assault on academic freedom that furthers the right-wing takeover of higher education and puts faculty and students at risk.

College classrooms are meant to be spaces where students and faculty explore ideas in the pursuit of truth. The open exchange of ideas requires faculty and students to feel comfortable taking intellectual risks with one another to better understand the world and change it. For these reasons, academic freedom has been a long-standing pillar of higher education in the United States. The American Association of University Professors defines academic freedom as “the freedom of a teacher or researcher in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in their academic field, and to teach and publish findings without interference from administrators, boards of trustees, political figures, donors, or other entities.” With regard to teaching, academic freedom “includes the right of faculty members to select the materials, determine the approach to the subject, make the assignments, and assess student academic performance in teaching activities for which they are individually responsible” without outside interference.

Academic freedom is a bedrock principle of higher education in the United States, and it is one of the things that has made our system the envy of the world. Creating new knowledge means pushing the boundaries of what is known, and these discoveries can sometimes be deemed controversial. One need only look to Copernicus and his heliocentric model of the universe to understand that academics can face persecution for insights society now takes for granted. That is why academic freedom is so essential to higher education—it protects faculty and students from political interference in their search for truth.

Publicly posting syllabi is an effort to prevent the teaching of topics that right-wing actors deem “unacceptable.” Faculty risk being doxed and harassed for simply teaching the generally accepted principles of their disciplines, as has been happening in Texas. Already this year, some classes at UNC Charlotte had to be cancelled for safety reasons because of outside agitators attempting to film those classes. Such instances will increase if this new policy goes into effect, and President Hans acknowledged as much in his statement endorsing the policy. In his eyes, however, the safety of students and faculty is worth sacrificing at the altar of “transparency.”

The reality is that the policy is meant to prevent students from learning about topics the current administration deems unacceptable. This will deprive students of a robust education and put targets on the backs of faculty who choose to teach such content, despite the risks. It positions UNC schools as the new front in a political campaign that will increase the risks of physical violence and exacerbate division while stifling creativity.

For these reasons and others, more than 2,500 faculty, students, and community members have signed a petition calling on the UNC System to abandon this reckless plan. I encourage readers to join the petition and contact the UNC System to express their opposition to this policy.

By Vincent Russell, PhD; President of the Western Carolina University chapter of the American Association of University Professors (WCU-AAUP) (12/19/2025)

Statement in Opposition to the UNC System Public Syllabi Proposal

The WCU-AAUP strongly opposes the latest proposal from the UNC System to force faculty to publish their syllabi. This policy would violate academic freedom and put faculty, students, and community members at risk. Our chapter recognizes syllabi to be the intellectual property of faculty and not public records. This proposed policy is a politically motivated attack on academic freedom that could further exacerbate faculty and students being harassed for simply teaching and learning material essential to their disciplines.

Faculty are hired as experts and leaders in their fields. This type of “transparency” will lead to bad-faith attacks on WCU courses, chilling free inquiry on our campus. Reading lists and course objectives could be weaponized against faculty and departments through complaints about “political” or controversial concepts. WCU already spends exorbitant resources responding to partisan criticism, which disrupts teaching, learning, and research. This policy will harm learning conditions in classrooms, as it damages the trust that’s essential among and between faculty and students to take intellectual risks in pursuit of truth without fear of reprisal.

This decision puts faculty, students, and the entire university at risk of technology-facilitated threats and physical harm. If “disfavored” information appears on syllabi, inexpert and politically-motivated actors may seek to harm faculty or disrupt classes. WCU has already seen campaigns by far-right actors that have resulted in the harassment of transgender students and the closing of the Intercultural Affairs Office. We expect such campaigns and targeted actions against faculty and staff will increase if syllabi are forced to be published.

The WCU-AAUP stands in defense of academic freedom. Academic freedom is the freedom of a teacher or researcher in higher education to investigate and discuss the issues in their academic field, and to teach and publish findings without interference from administrators, boards, political figures, donors, or other entities who are not experts in the disciplines. Publishing syllabi violates this core value and harms the quality of the teaching and research that happens at WCU. The proposed policy may lead to a chill on research and expression from both faculty and students. It will make it harder to recruit and retain the best faculty, which diminishes the university experience for students and ultimately harms Western North Carolina’s economy.

We urge our members and supporters to stand in solidarity with each other in defense of academic freedom and oppose the proposed UNC System policy that would require faculty to publish their syllabi. Anyone who is passionate about higher education can sign this petition to voice their opposition to the proposed policy. (12/10/2025)