University of Houston Liberal Arts Faculty Asked to Sign “Not Indoctrinate” Memo Amid Texas Governance Changes

Memo request reaches hundreds of instructors in UH’s largest humanities and social sciences college

University of Houston faculty in the College of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences were asked this week to sign a memo affirming that their instruction is designed to teach critical thinking rather than “indoctrinate” students. The request, distributed to instructors across the college, follows a university-wide directive issued on November 21, 2025, tied to the implementation of Texas Senate Bill 37, a higher-education governance law that took effect September 1, 2025.

The college’s faculty body numbered more than 600 instructors in fall 2025, part of a broader university faculty count of roughly 3,500 that semester. It remains unclear how many other UH colleges issued similar signature requests or whether the same language was used campuswide.

What the memo asks faculty to certify

The document asks instructors to affirm multiple statements centered on pedagogy and classroom practice, including that:

• the primary purpose of higher education is to enhance critical thinking;
• faculty responsibility includes enabling students to form their own opinions rather than being steered toward a particular viewpoint;
• course design and course materials reflect a defined concept of critical thinking;
• instructional methods are intended to enhance students’ critical-thinking skills.

College leadership indicated in writing that there was no evidence instructors in the college were violating the university’s academic commitments. Faculty were told the intent was documentation that instructors were aware of the commitment, had reviewed their courses, and were delivering instruction consistent with it.

Context: SB 37 and a required focus on core curriculum review

The November 2025 university directive framed the review as part of compliance with SB 37, which requires governing boards at public institutions to conduct periodic reviews of the general education curriculum and graduation requirements. The law’s framework includes standards that courses be “foundational and fundamental,” prepare students for civic and professional life, equip them for workforce participation and the betterment of society, and ensure breadth of knowledge consistent with accreditation requirements.

SB 37 does not explicitly require faculty to sign statements about indoctrination. However, the directive used “teach, not indoctrinate” language in describing the university’s educational responsibilities and asked faculty to review course titles, syllabi, and content to ensure they were not violating that commitment.

Faculty responses focus on academic freedom, process, and potential future use

The signature request prompted concern among some instructors about whether signing could later be interpreted as an admission that the issue required remediation, or be used as a tool for increased monitoring of classroom content. Some faculty members declined to sign while still emphasizing that their teaching already prioritizes critical thinking and student analysis.

A faculty advocacy group at UH urged administrators to rescind signature requests, arguing that such directives risk creating informal compliance expectations beyond what the law requires and could chill classroom instruction even in the absence of specific bans.

UH’s leadership has stated there is no evidence of indoctrination in the college while maintaining that the process is meant to document adherence to academic commitments.

Broader Texas higher-education climate

The UH action comes amid heightened scrutiny of curriculum and instruction across Texas public universities. In late 2025, the Texas A&M System adopted systemwide rules restricting certain forms of classroom “advocacy” on race, gender, and sexual-identity topics without presidential approval, along with tighter expectations around adherence to approved syllabi. While UH’s memo does not list prohibited subjects, faculty members have pointed to the statewide trend as shaping how documentation requirements may be interpreted and enforced over time.

UH leadership has indicated that the provost’s office is tracking completion of the review process described in the November directive.