Ohio Senate Bill 1 (S. B. 1) has officially been signed into law by Gov. Mike DeWine. The bill provides many changes to Ohio’s higher education standards, one of which is requiring universities to refrain from publicly sharing opinions on highly controversial political issues to keep access to federal and state funding. The goal is for universities to remain seen as objective and unbiased institutions.
Following this policy can help to prevent universities from losing enrollment numbers. We have seen big companies and corporations like Tesla face public criticism because of Elon Musk’s political alliances he has shared publicly. We can see this drop mostly among younger generations, who tend to not separate the product from the company owner, just as we do not separate the art from the artist.
The goal of this policy is to make students more comfortable expressing their opinions in the classroom. If universities were to make its alignments known, then those of the opposing beliefs would feel cornered and unprotected. However, it is more important for professors to refrain from sharing their political opinions with students.
Dave Faller, my uncle and a high school history teacher, told me once, “I know I did my job well when the students don’t know my political opinions at the end of the year.”
This mindset is what needs to be taught to all educators to ensure that every student feels safe and comfortable speaking in the classroom.
The goals of this policy are noble and admirable. However, they will have no true effect if professors can not teach their courses without sharing their political opinions.
While legally binding neutrality sounds good and helpful for universities, no matter what universities do politically, they will lose half of the country’s support. If universities express their political opinions leaning one way, they will lose the support of the opposing opinion.
However, if they do not express their thoughts, everyone will assume that the university’s beliefs are on the opposing side of them. This will inevitably lead to losing more support than if they were to express a chosen side.
Even if universities refrain from expressing their opinions, people will then look to the leaders of the university and even make assumptions about their personal political opinions based on religious affiliation and more. No matter what universities do in today’s political climate, people will assume the worst, and there is not a single winning situation for the universities.
It would be a good idea for universities and other companies to stay out of the political world completely. This would not be a neutrality statement; it would simply be avoiding public political opinions. University would never address anything in the political sphere and refrain from entertaining either party, while allowing students to learn about each party and make the decisions for themselves.
Universities and companies adopting neutrality have noble intentions. However, they do not realize how they could be jeopardizing their enrollment numbers. There is no benefit universities experience from making a neutrality statement. It would be more advantageous to all universities if they stay out of politics all together.
Enjoy what you're reading?
Signup for our newsletter
Jamie Gowans is a first-year student in the Farmer School of Business. She is a marketing major with a history minor. She is a first-year writer for The Miami Student.
Read More
The ChatGPT surge began in your 8 a.m. lecture: How academia drove students into AI’s arms.
By Gabriel Slark | 1959 minutes agoRecently, I witnessed a student presenting to the class, empty eyes at the front of their face, and that distinct ChatGPT grey highlight glaring around the words on the board behind them. To make matters worse, the student struggled to pronounce all the long words, and they did so in such a way that when class ended, I left feeling deeply concerned.
Dear Gov. DeWine, Senate Bill 1 betrays your alma mater
By Landon Morrison | 2 days agoTo Mike DeWine, you have betrayed the community that built you. I am shocked that a Miamian would directly attempt to turn away a diversified group of people, ideas and experiences.
A new “Arena District” on Cook Field, but at what cost?
By David Prytherch | April 16, 2025I therefore write – as an educator with two decades of experience at Miami, teaching geography and urban planning – to express profound concern about the proposal to build a new arena and corporate hotel on Cook Field, especially amidst a budget crisis.