Since 2016, Turning Point USA (TPUSA) has maintained its “Professor Watchlist,” aiming to identify college professors who, according to the organization, display bias against conservative students or advance leftist agendas. The list, which now features over 300 academics from more than 100 institutions, has recently drawn renewed attention after the death of TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk. At the University of Michigan alone, 30 professors are currently named on this list.
Monitoring Academic Expression
The Professor Watchlist is built upon anonymous submissions and public reports that highlight professors’ remarks or research deemed politically biased. While TPUSA states its purpose is to help students choose courses, many academics view it as a form of monitoring or surveillance. Professors find themselves on the list for diverse reasons, often unrelated to their classroom instruction. For instance, Anna Kirkland, a women’s and gender studies professor, was included for comments regarding a major legal decision. Similarly, Betsey Stevenson, a professor of public policy and economics, was named due to her research on gender representation in economic textbooks.
Josh Pasek, a professor of communications, media, and political science, who was added to the list in 2022, noted that the watchlist primarily scrutinizes public statements, not classroom teaching. He stated that the accusations against him stemmed from “non-classroom activities based on data about what people thought,” suggesting the list serves a political agenda rather than addressing actual academic bias.
A Chilling Effect on Free Expression
Both students and faculty at the University of Michigan have expressed apprehension about how the watchlist affects free speech. Allison Doroshewitz, co-chair of College Democrats, described the list as a “hit list for people,” implying it could dissuade faculty from freely publishing or conducting research. She also pointed out that many reasons for inclusion seemed minor or irrelevant to teaching duties.
Echoing these concerns, City Councilmember Ayesha Ghazi Edwin, a clinical assistant professor, cautioned that the watchlist might stifle open discussion and free speech by fostering an environment of fear among university members. Edwin elaborated that public shaming of academics can diminish students’ readiness to critically engage with diverse ideas, leading to an atmosphere of caution instead of genuine intellectual exploration.
Unequal Repercussions
The impact of the watchlist is not felt uniformly across all faculty. Silke-Maria Weineck, a German studies professor listed in 2022 after writing an opinion piece, noted that white professors might experience fewer negative consequences compared to their colleagues of color. She observed that while the list didn’t alter her own professional conduct, faculty from marginalized communities frequently encounter heightened scrutiny and increased risk of harassment.
The Irony of “Free Speech”
Critics highlight a striking contradiction in TPUSA’s methodology. Professor Pasek contended that by singling out academics for their public commentary, the organization inadvertently subverts the very free speech principles it purports to uphold. He characterized the watchlist as “an attempt to use various tools to push speech in a particular direction by either intimidating or encouraging some level of harassment.”
Conversely, TPUSA representatives assert that the watchlist’s sole purpose is to assist students in selecting courses and professors. Sarah Baldwin, vice president of TPUSA at the University of Michigan, clarified that the list is designed to help students find environments where they feel most at ease, stressing that it “is not meant to infringe on their free speech or try to stop them from publishing papers or sharing their opinions.”
Broader Implications for Higher Education
The ongoing controversy surrounding the Professor Watchlist brings to light wider issues concerning academic freedom, political leanings, and the function of oversight within universities. While TPUSA frames the list as a helpful tool for students, many educators believe its public existence encourages self-censorship and curtails open discussion. For institutions of higher learning, the task of balancing transparency, offering student guidance, and protecting academic discourse has become increasingly challenging in today’s politically charged climate.
As this watchlist continues to grow and attract notice, the experiences at the University of Michigan underscore the precarious balance between empowering student choice and preserving a truly open intellectual atmosphere. The ultimate effects on campus debate and academic inquiry, whether professors feel targeted or simply observed, remain to be seen.