Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.

Amid an ever-changing landscape in higher education and college athletics, the Syracuse University Senate passed motions extending special committees to advise on free speech and name, image and likeness deals in the body’s final meeting of the academic year.

During the meeting, senators discussed strategies to ensure student, faculty and staff involvement in university decision-making as academic institutions face unprecedented direct interference by the federal government. Senators called on SU administrators to maintain communication with the senate and welcome its input.

“There are many, many reasons, having to do with timetables, compliance issues and so on, that administrators work the way they do, but nevertheless, the concerns of students, faculty and staff about having input in the process are valid concerns,” said Crystal Bartolovich, an SU professor and member of the ad hoc committee for free speech and university policy. “We wanted to balance those things out a little bit better.”

Bartolovich proposed 20 recommendations for SU’s “Syracuse Statement,” which offers protections for faculty and student speech on campus. The statement has been a source of concern for many in the senate since it was first introduced last May. Bartolovich said the committee’s concerns generally revolve around senate involvement in decision-making and advised frequent contributions from senators on issues regarding freedom of speech.

In an October senate meeting, Senator Steven Diaz, a professor in SU’s Mathematics department, said the statement should have been overseen by an elected body, such as the senate, instead of an ad hoc committee formed with unelected members.

These concerns extend beyond the statement, with hundreds of faculty members signing a petition in February to protest the administration overriding their proposed changes to SU’s Liberal Arts Core curriculum without further faculty consultation.

While acknowledging senators’ doubts, Bartolovich said she trusts administrators haven’t acted in bad faith, but the expertise of many campus community members would be beneficial in future dialogue.

“There are hundreds of policies that affect absolutely everyone,” Bartolovich said. “Anyone in the university can start the process of putting university policy in motion, which is a great thing to know. Actually, many people did not know that before we started our work.”

Amid conversations about freedom of speech on campus, senators also pressured Provost Lois Agnew to shed insight on SU’s broader strategy for protecting freedoms for marginalized groups and academics. Senator Biko Mandela Gray expressed frustration in the SU administration’s lack of clarity, and called on Agnew to offer clearer plans should the university face pressure from the federal government — as seen at institutions such as Harvard University and Columbia University.

Gray specifically noted illegal deportation schemes occuring at many schools, and said many members of the campus community are fearful multiple SU programs will cease to exist, including African American and LGBTQ Studies.

“I have graduate students who are scared to leave,” Gray said. “(Administrators) don’t have to tell us what it is, but can (they) at least assure us that there is a plan?”

Solange Jain | Photo Editor

Provost Lois Agnew said the federal government’s activity and policy changes regarding higher education are difficult to plan for, but assured SU’s government relations office is in regular correspondence with politicians and policymakers.

Agnew said the federal government’s activity and policy changes regarding higher education are difficult to plan for, since no one “knows what’s coming.” With constantly changing expectations from the White House, Agnew said the university is doing its best to “stay ahead” and taking extra care in communicating with students, faculty and staff.

She also assured SU’s government relations office is in regular correspondence with politicians and policymakers to best plan for the unknown.

“To say yes, ‘We have a plan,’ means everybody pictures that somewhere there’s a big board with a plan on it,” Agnew said. “(Legislators) are sending us to talk to people who need to hear about the importance of what we’re doing, and we are doing the best we can to talk about what’s going on and respond to things as they’re happening, knowing that it’s not appropriate to respond to things that haven’t happened yet.”

Tim Wong, SU’s Student Government Association speaker pro tempore, said student input in changes to higher education is essential in university planning. He noted faculty and staff have found his input valuable since joining the Senate’s free speech committee, and advocated for further undergraduate involvement in conversations.

He also acknowledged administrators face a “double-edged sword” when procuring information for the broader campus community. On one hand, the lack of communication protects the university from funding cuts and potentially impacted community members from persecution, he said. On the other, Wong said he sees his peers struggle daily from anxiety and fear as a result of the many unknowns.

“There’s a lot of misinformation going around,” Wong said. “And I don’t think it’s exclusive to just what’s going on with the federal government, but there’s understandably a lot of pressure on the administration, so I want to give them the benefit of doubt.”

Unprecedented times in higher education also extend to college sports, as the NIL era introduces new funding pressures and changing expectations of college athletes.

Members of the senate ad hoc Committee on the Future of College Athletics at SU outlined four key recommendations; primacy of the academic mission, transparency regarding athletic finances, accountability, equity and opportunity and integration of athletics with the university community.

Senator Jodi Upton, an SU journalism professor and co-chair of the committee, said the committee’s work has felt like “attaching the wings as the plane heads down the runway,” given the unpredictable nature of college sports.

She specifically discussed an ongoing federal class-action antitrust lawsuit filed by college athletes across the country, essentially demanding the direct payment of athletes by their academic institutions. Should the case be approved, schools would be allowed to directly pay athletes a combined $20.5 million across athletic programs.

While the case is expected to be approved by Judge Claudia Wilken by July 1, Upton said the committee’s suggestions will likely change following Wilken’s decision. Regardless, committee members advocated prioritizing academic scholarships, making opportunities like study abroad more available to student athletes and equity in spending between a diverse group of athletes.

“We had representatives from faculty staff, four students, seven student athletes, athletics and administration,” Upton said. “We didn’t always agree, but we believe these recommendations passed unanimously by the Senate Committee on athletic policy are a good start for guidelines in a very chaotic future.”

Both ad hoc committees were approved to continue operations in the 2025-26 academic year.

Published on April 16, 2025 at 10:21 pm
Contact Duncan: digreen@syr.edu