And so it continues: FIU faculty navigate statewide anti-Semitism review

Carla Mendez | Staff Writer 

As Florida’s statewide review of course material at public universities continues, FIU finds itself at the center of controversy. 

The investigation, which began after allegations of anti-Semitic content in a Terrorism and Homeland Security course, has left many faculty members grappling with questions about academic freedom, censorship, and the role of politics in education. 

Last spring, adjunct professor Mario Reyes faced public scrutiny after quiz questions from his Terrorism and Homeland Security course were posted on social media, specifically X. The questions, drawn directly from the textbook provided by the university, sparked accusations of anti-Semitism. 

“Everything was going perfectly fine in my course,” Reyes said in an interview with PantherNOW. “I didn’t know there were controversial questions in the quiz until I was contacted by the university saying that some of my students took screenshots of the quiz and put it up on social media”. 

The social media posts quickly spread from the students to other platforms such as the X account Documenting Israel, drawing widespread criticism until they caught the attention of Representative Fine. The post garnered a significant amount of backlash and criticism of Reyes and the university. 

“I was called all sorts of names,” Reyes said. “But not at any point were those questions made by me, nor were they my views.” University textbooks come with a pre-prepared test bank used for quizzes test back, which is where these questions were derived from. Reyes clarified he had no part in choosing the textbook or the questions used for the quiz. 

“I didn’t even know those test questions were in there,” Reyes said. “Had I known they would have never been included”. Following the incident, the quiz was removed, and Reyes worked closely with the university to ensure no further controversial material would appear in his course. 

While Reyes acknowledged the inappropriateness of the questions, he emphasized the importance of academic freedom within classrooms. “When it comes to academia, to a certain level, controversial topics are okay, until they reach that significant level”.

Reyes also expressed concerns that situations like his might have a chilling effect on academic freedom. “It’s difficult. On one hand, you want to ensure students feel safe in an academic environment. On the other hand, it’s within the professors right through academic freedom to lead controversial questions in the material”.

He emphasized the importance of communication between students and professors. “Had the student that was upset or offended by the questions spoke to me or the university prior to posting on social media, the situation could have been resolved before it reached the level that it did,” Reyes concluded. 

The controversy surrounding Reyes’ course materials marked the beginning of a broader statewide review of university course content. Over the summer, Florida’s Board of Governors issued a data request, asking universities to submit course materials, textbook lists and syllabi for review to ensure compliance with recent state laws on anti-Semitism. 

Dr. Oren Stier, a professor of Religious Studies and Director of the Holocasut and Genocide Studies Program at FIU, is critical of the Board of Governors’ approach, calling it “misguided.”

Stier shared his concerns about the potential for government overreach and censorship in higher education in Florida. “We do have concepts of free speech and academic freedom in this country, and we need to honor and respect them,” Stier said. “Any professor should have the freedom to teach the material they feel is appropriate to the subject matter they are tasked with teaching”.

As the review is being conducted with a keyword-based approach, Stier questioned the Board’s effectiveness in trying to expose anti-Semitism within course material. “The approach is not just insufficient, it’s completely misguided. If there is a concern about anti-Semitic or anti-Israeli bias it would be best handled locally through individual departments,” Stier said. “Let the experts figure out themselves what are the best techniques and methods to teach this”.

“Academics need to have the freedom and confidence in our jobs to teach,” expressed Stier.

There is not much known about how the Board of Governors is evaluating the data they are collecting from the universities. Professors at FIU were simply told to submit their syllabi, course material and textbook list to department heads. Stier shared his concerns on how this review will affect adjunct professors specifically, as they are the most vulnerable professors with no tenure protections. 

“My chair did ask me for my list of textbooks and all that information is readily available,” Stier stated. “The Board of Governors did not need to ask the individual universities, they could have simply searched the available records and found the information for themselves.” By requiring faculty to submit extensive data about their courses, many professors now feel scrutinized and fear potential threats to their job security. 

Stier also raised concerns about the long-term consequences of government interference in academic matters. “You’ll now have a lot of faculty who are nervous about the scrutiny that we are being subject to,” Stier said “Jewish faculty especially, it’s like we’re being surveilled”.

As the investigation continues, the tension between government oversight and academic freedom remains a focal point. The situation has left many faculty and administrators feeling undermined by the Board of Governors decision.

“We have once again a governmental perspective that does not really understand the idea of casualty governance and self-regulation,” Stier said. “And the fact that we are the experts that know best how to teach our subject matter”.

Stier emphasized the troubling precedent this review might set, asking, “What happens with the next subject the board of governors is concerned about and decides to review?” With limited transparency on how the course material data is being evaluated, the potential consequences remain uncertain. 

“This is just the potential tip of the iceberg, and that is what’s truly concerning”, he said.