Florida Sociology Professors Defy State Restrictions on Race and Gender Teaching
Across Florida universities, sociology professors are quietly choosing not to modify their courses in response to new state guidelines that restrict how topics like race, gender, and sexuality can be discussed. Instead of rewriting syllabi or removing foundational material, as the new demands would require, they continue to teach their classes as originally designed. These educators see the preservation of their curricula not as an act of defiance but as a professional responsibility to provide students with a comprehensive and rigorous education.
New Guidelines and Their Impact
In late January, Florida's department of education introduced what many professors describe as a censored sociology textbook for use in public colleges and universities, along with a list of proposed guidelines at state schools. These guidelines restrict various discussions related to systemic discrimination, gender and sexual identity, race-conscious remedies, and the structural causes of inequality. Faculty members argue this move reflects a broader effort to narrow academic freedom in higher education, following several years of legislation aimed at reshaping public university curricula under the banner of combating "woke ideology."
"This is part of a coordinated assault on civil rights in the state, in the country, including censoring the nation's history," said Zachary Levenson, an associate professor of sociology at Florida International University. "The warning is clear to professors: shut up or lose your job."
Prohibited Topics and Ambiguity
Professors note that the new proposed guidelines are intentionally broad, discouraging instruction that could be interpreted as promoting certain perspectives on privilege, oppression, or structural discrimination. "It's left at a level of vagueness where it's unclear what exactly might get faculty in hot water," said Levenson, who is a member of the United Faculty of Florida union. "There is no stated sanction. We have repeatedly requested this language and they refuse to provide it." Florida International University did not respond to a request for comment.
Levenson highlighted a list of prohibited topics in the guidelines, which bars course content that frames systemic or institutional discrimination as a driving cause of present-day inequality, suggests bias is inherent among Americans, or describes institutions as intentionally oppressive. The guidelines also restrict discussions arguing that most gender differences are socially constructed, proposing race-conscious remedies to address historical discrimination, or asserting a causal relationship between institutional sexism and unequal outcomes. Even material explaining how individuals understand their sexual orientation or gender identity falls within the scope of what instructors are told to avoid. For sociologists, whose field often analyzes structural inequality through these lenses, the language is deeply unsettling.
"What I find most concerning is that we're in this phase now where instead of telling us what not to teach, they're telling us what to teach," Levenson said. "That feels especially terrifying and authoritarian." Florida's department of education did not respond to a request for comment.
Broader National Context
Levenson, who has studied historical sociology, noted that this pattern is not unprecedented. Even where the language does not explicitly forbid a topic, its ambiguity encourages self-censorship. "I think the purpose of it is to remain at this very ambiguous level so that the chill effect can be really effective," said an associate professor at Florida International University who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution. "There's no discussion, there's no email trail. And so this is how authoritarianism works: everyone starts complying and stepping into their intended agenda."
Similar efforts to restrict how universities teach race, gender, and inequality have emerged in legislatures across the country. "This isn't just about Florida, and it isn't just about sociology. There's a much broader attack happening nationally on academic freedom and freedom of speech in universities and elsewhere," warned Ruth Milkman, a sociology professor at the City University of New York and former president of the American Sociological Association. "I think all of us in academia have an obligation to speak out and protest when our rights are being trampled on. And that's what's happening here."
Stakes for the Discipline and Students
Sociology emerged in the 19th century as a discipline devoted to studying the structures that shape social life, from labor markets to family systems, and education to criminal justice. To remove sustained examination of race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation from that framework, scholars argue, is to hollow out the field. Some faculty members worry about the long-term impact on students, especially those whose identities are directly implicated by the bans. Restrictions on discussing structural inequality risk sending a message that certain histories and lived experiences of their students are unimportant.
"They're being told, not only that they don't matter, but that narrating their own experiences is a threat," Levenson said.
Political Backing and Faculty Response
The legislative push to reshape sociology and other disciplines has been championed in part by Ron DeSantis, Florida's governor, who aligns with the national conservative movement. This coalition argues that universities have become ideologically captured by progressive values. "These are people who are committed to a kind of white replacement theory. They think that their own interests are threatened by the advancement of civil rights for people of color and women and immigrants," Milkman said. In this zero-sum view, expanding education about systemic inequality and the historical exploitation of marginalized groups is seen not as progress, but as a threat.
Faculty resistance has taken multiple forms. Some advocates, such as former FIU professor Marvin Dunn, who teaches Black history outdoors, have organized learning opportunities and events for students, separate from universities. Others have coordinated with colleagues across Florida campuses to draft public statements or seek legal analysis. "Part of the work we've been doing is building networks across all the campuses so we can exchange information," Levenson said. "We have to know what's happening across the state so we can all protect ourselves."
Union Protections and Risks
The United Faculty of Florida, the statewide union representing many public university professors, has been vocal about legal protections. "We're reminding people that they can't discipline you based on word of mouth. If they're threatening to suspend or investigate someone, or issue a letter of caution, it has to be based on something," said Robert Cassanello, president of United Faculty of Florida and an associate professor of history at the University of Central Florida. "We're telling everyone to demand written directives, which would give us grounds for legal challenge."
Yet union protections themselves are under pressure. Recent legislative proposals could weaken collective bargaining rights for public-sector faculty, including senate bill 1296, introduced by Republican lawmakers during the 2026 legislative session. The bill is now headed to the senate for a vote. "Without union protection, the stakes for speaking out will reach a new level," said Anne Barrett, a sociology professor at Florida State University. "Collective bargaining agreements provide enforceable protections, including provisions related to academic freedom. Faculty at all ranks will be more exposed to political and administrative pressure." Florida State University did not respond to a request for comment.
Tenured professors may feel somewhat insulated, though tenure in Florida is not a means of absolute protection. "In 2023, the state mandated post-tenure review for university faculty, undermining one of the traditional safeguards of academic freedom. Tenure no longer provides the level of protection from political pressure that it historically did," Barrett said. Under this new policy, tenured professors must undergo periodic performance evaluations, typically every five years, conducted by departments and university administrators, placing greater authority in the hands of boards of trustees appointed by state political leaders.
For adjunct and non-tenure-track faculty, who are often employed on a semester-to-semester basis and may work multiple jobs, even minor scrutiny can have serious consequences, including the loss of a contract renewal. "There's also a risk of being shamed in public, being dragged," said the FIU professor, mentioning an incident where a sociology professor was attacked on X. "In this climate, choosing to resist could be very dangerous, especially if you're part of a marginalized group."
Long-Term Consequences
The censorship is also affecting who wants to work in Florida. "These attacks on academic freedom are leading to a growing number of professors leaving Florida schools and making it hard to recruit some of the best talent," said Cassanello, who has been a union member for nearly 20 years. "The people who are leaving are the people that the lawmakers in the state of Florida want to remain in Florida. They don't realize the damage they're doing to higher public higher education." University of Central Florida did not respond to a request for comment.
For now, several sociology classrooms in Florida continue under heightened scrutiny, even as some professors refuse to restrict or alter what they teach. What remains uncertain is whether the discipline can retain its critical core under mounting political scrutiny. As Barrett put it: "It is difficult to fully grasp how profoundly our workplaces could change if those protections disappear."
