It’s time for policy makers to invest in what matters most–faculty, instruction & learning.

A college degree–and all of its benefits–didn’t always cost this much. Since around 1980, tuition and fees have increased far faster than inflation. At the same time, policymakers in Ohio and Washington, D.C. reduced grant aid and shifted toward student loans, placing more of the financial burden directly on students and families.

This shift reflects a broader ideological change. Higher education was once viewed as a public good worthy of public investment. Beginning in the 1980s, it was increasingly treated as a private commodity—something individuals should pay for themselves. As public funding declined, students and families were forced to borrow to make up the difference.

The irony is striking: many of the same voices that championed the shift from grants to loans now point to the debt from those loans to question whether students are getting their money’s worth. It’s a losing-and false- argument since study after study has shown that people with a bachelor’s degree earn significantly more, about $1 million more over the course of their career, than those with only a high school diploma. Yet, policy makers in Ohio and D.C. stopped funding higher education and told working families to figure it out—using loans and amassing debt to go to further their education.

If we’re serious about value, we need to focus on and invest in what actually drives student success.

Faculty are the foundation of higher education. They teach, mentor, conduct research, connect students to careers, and shape the intellectual and professional growth that defines the college experience. More than 90% of students report turning to faculty for guidance—clear evidence that faculty-student relationships are central to student success.

And yet, faculty are not where most tuition dollars go.

Faculty salaries and benefits typically account for just 18–25% of public university budgets in Ohio—and roughly one-quarter to one-third nationally. Despite this relatively small share, faculty compensation has grown slowly compared to tuition. Between 1990 and 2000, for example, tuition at public four-year institutions rose 48% (adjusted for inflation), while faculty compensation increased by only 4%.

At the same time, colleges have made choices that move resources away from instruction.
Administrative staffing has surged. Since the late 1980s, the number of full-time non-academic professional staff has doubled at public universities and grown by more than 40% at private institutions. Today, faculty are a minority of full-time staff, with administrative roles often outnumbering faculty positions by as much as 3 to 1.

Institutions have also increasingly replaced full-time, tenure-track faculty with lower-paid, part-time adjunct instructors. Today, about 40% of faculty positions are part-time. While this shift may reduce costs in the short term, it often comes at the expense of student support, continuity, and educational quality.
Meanwhile, colleges continue to invest heavily in amenities and large-scale projects designed to attract students—from luxury housing to multimillion-dollar athletic facilities. These spending priorities reflect competition for enrollment, but they raise an important question: are institutions investing in what matters most for student learning?

Even as sticker prices can overstate what students actually pay—and have even declined slightly in inflation-adjusted terms in recent years—the long-term trend remains clear: students are paying more, borrowing more, and shouldering more risk.

If we truly care about affordability and student outcomes, we need to realign our priorities.

That means reinvesting in faculty—the people most directly responsible for student learning and success. It means strengthening full-time teaching and mentoring, not replacing it. And it means asking hard questions about administrative growth and spending choices that do little to improve educational quality.

Higher education is an institution, not a business and college is not just a product—it’s an investment in an individual AND in advancing society’s collective future. And at the center of that relationship is faculty. If we want students to succeed, faculty cannot remain a shrinking priority in a growing budget.

The 2026 Ohio Conference AAUP Board of Trustees elections will be held electronically from March 15-March 31, 2026. Each member who is in good standing, which includes being current on their dues, will be emailed a ballot from BallotBoxOnline, the secure voting platform OCAAUP has used in past years.

---

CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT

Name: Dr. Gretchen McNamara

Institutional Affiliation: Wright State University, Senior Lecturer of Music, Trombone and Music Education

Why do you want to serve on the OCAAUP Board of Trustees the Ohio Conference of the American Association of University professors?

For over a decade I have been actively involved in my faculty union, the American Association of University Professors. I became a member and involved in leadership from the very beginning of the Non-Tenure Eligible unionization efforts at Wright State in 2012. I became intimately and immediately aware of the power of our faculty union, and while it is not usually easy work, it is good work. I am ‘good trouble.’

I am running for President of the OCAAUP, a position I have held for four years, to continue the work of higher education advocacy in the state. The Ohio Conference is the largest and most successful AAUP state conference in the country, and I like the work it will take to keep it that way. Union leadership requires strong communication and organizational skills, both of which I possess. It requires thoughtful responses to head on attacks and an ability to reason. Given the current state of higher education in Ohio and the ongoing political attacks, there is no more important time to be actively involved and to continue to lead our conference. It is with confidence and commitment that I’m running for re-election.

Bio: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-tH6iwtUFYA4-iCi1_QrP9QdhX1f2euT/edit

---

CANDIDATE FOR SECRETARY

The candidate for this position withdrew their nomination very recently. According to the OCAAUP Code of Regulations, it was past the deadline for other potential candidates to be considered by the Nominating Committee and added to this ballot. As such, the committee will put out another call for nominations and a special election will be held for the position of Secretary. Look for more information on this in the next few weeks.

---

CANDIDATES FOR AT-LARGE MEMBER—PRIVATE INSTITUTION

There are two nominees for the position of At-Large Member-Private Institution. OCAAUP members will vote for one person when voting opens on March 15, 2026.

Name: Liz Klainot-Hess

Institutional Affiliation: Capital University, Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology and Criminology

Why do you want to serve on the OCAAUP Board of Trustees the Ohio Conference of the American Association of University professors?

My name is Liz Klainot-Hess and I have been an Assistant Professor at Capital University for the last 3 years. Prior to that I taught at two other private colleges in Ohio – Denison and Kenyon. I have always been heavily involved in the labor movement, starting in high school, and was the co-chair of the UW-Milwaukee Graduate Assistants union while in my Master’s program. I also wrote my dissertation and several articles about the unionization of contingent faculty and the problems faced by these faculty and currently have a book on the topic under review. 

I think unions and labor advocacy groups are now more important than ever, especially with the threats facing both unions and universities/colleges. One thing that makes the private colleges in Ohio different from the other Ohio colleges is that tenure-track faculty cannot unionize. At the last state meeting I noticed that there were only representatives from two private schools (including Capital) and three advocacy chapters in attendance. I would like to encourage more Ohio private colleges to get involved in AAUP activities and attend the annual state meeting. It would also be great to have some specific programming or activities specifically for private colleges and advocacy chapters. I also think it is important for the AAUP chapters at Ohio private colleges to begin to collaborate with each other.

Bio: https://elizabethklainothess.com/

Name: Rosemary O’Neill

Institutional Affiliation: Kenyon College; Professor of English and Chair of Gender and Sexuality Studies

Why do you want to serve on the OCAAUP Board of Trustees the Ohio Conference of the American Association of University professors?

I started an advocacy chapter of the AAUP at Kenyon College in 2023 after years of feeling frustrated about the loss of faculty voice in decision-making in my institution. Our chapter has only gotten more energized as austerity-driven cuts and political pressures bear down on our school (like so many others). What started as a core group of less than ten members has grown to a chapter of over forty.

On the OCAAUP Board of Trustees, I look forward to representing the perspectives of private college faculty and increasing collaboration among Ohio’s SLACs on labor issues. It has always been illuminating for me to compare notes with other AAUP chapters at Ohio private colleges, and I hope to formalize this in some way in the years to come through a SLAC caucus and/or programming specifically for chapters at SLACs. 

Bio: https://www.kenyon.edu/directory/rosemary-oneill/

---

Thank you to all the nominees for their willingness to serve in these positions!  

Students, Faculty, Staff Deserve Better; Board of Trustees Must Engage Them In Next Presidential Hiring Process

Attribution: Jennifer Tisone Price, Executive Director, American Association of University Professors-Ohio Conference

“The students, faculty, and staff of the Ohio State University deserve better. Better looks like respecting colleges and universities as institutions of higher education; not running them like businesses. Better looks like focusing on providing quality, affordable education. Better looks like investing in instruction, learning, and programs to support students. Better looks like improving faculty to administrator ratios. Better looks like standing up for education rather than bowing down to powerful special interests, big donors, and politicians.

This is OSU’s third president since 2020. If the university wants to do better with the next one, it must have a transparent hiring process that honors shared governance which includes the input from faculty. Shared governance isn’t just a bureaucratic nicety. It’s how universities stay honest.

OSU needs a president that prioritizes education, supports students, respects faculty, and values diversity. When faculty have a voice in hiring and curriculum, students win. Faculty don’t just teach the curriculum — they are the curriculum. No one understands what students need in the classroom better than the people standing in it every day. Faculty must be meaningfully engaged in the hiring process if OSU is going to do better and continue to hold itself out as a top-tier university.

Carter’s administration boasted about bringing in revenue and silencing faculty and students. What did we get with that approach? A president stepping down because of an inappropriate relationship and peddling access to leadership for personal gain. A conservative think tank professor assaulting a reporter. The board of trustees needs to do things differently. They can start by showing they value the voices of faculty and students.”

-30-

In a time of heightened uncertainty around campus activism and immigration enforcement, understanding your rights is essential. Join the University of Cincinnati-AAUP on Friday, March 6, from 3 – 5 p.m. for a Know Your Rights training focused on faculty activism and interactions, including those involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Gain insights from legal, labor, and community voices on how to navigate activism on campus.

This training is being held in conjunction with AAUP national office and open to all OCAAUP members. The webinar does require pre-registration and chapter leaders are strongly encouraged to participate.

To register in advance for this webinar please click HERE. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

HB 698 Analysis

FUNDING

HB 698 requires the Governor to “ensure” that future executive budgets set aside a portion of the State Share of Instruction (SSI) for institutional compliance. This directive raises separation-of-powers concerns, as the General Assembly is effectively instructing the Governor regarding budget recommendations. While the Ohio Constitution requires the Governor to submit a budget, the General Assembly retains ultimate authority to amend and pass appropriations legislation.

If the legislature wishes to condition SSI funding on compliance requirements, it may do so through the standard operating budget process.

• In FY 2027, $75 million in SSI was set aside in HB 96 for SB 1 compliance.
• HB 698 creates new compliance requirements, outlines a compliance process, and grants the Chancellor investigatory and determination authority.
• Future SSI set-aside amounts would be determined through the biennial budget process.

COMPLIANCE

Institutions must certify compliance within 90 days of enactment and annually by July 1 thereafter. The short timeline raises practical implementation concerns.

• Institutions that fail to certify compliance will have their SSI set-aside funds withheld for the fiscal year, even if compliance is later achieved.
• The Chancellor may audit records, require documentation, and conduct compliance reviews.
• If a compliance report is deemed recklessly false or fraudulent, withheld funds cannot be restored, and civil penalties may apply.
• Even after compliance is confirmed, the Chancellor may investigate subsequent alleged violations and withhold funding beginning with the first disbursement following a finding of non-compliance.

WORKLOAD

HB 698 significantly expands upon SB 1’s workload provisions and increases institutional authority to terminate faculty—including tenured faculty—for failure to meet workload policies.

• Faculty not meeting workload requirements may be censured, required to undergo remediation, or terminated for cause, regardless of tenure status.
• HB 698 removes the Chancellor’s joint authority (under SB 1) to develop instructional workload standards with institutions and grants boards of trustees (BoTs) exclusive authority.
• It eliminates flexibility previously built into standards requiring a “range of acceptable undergraduate teaching” and prohibits minimum workload standards below current levels.
• The Chancellor is prohibited from establishing alternative ranges or standards.

SB 1 required a “special emphasis” on undergraduate learning, allowing flexibility for research and other academic responsibilities. HB 698 instead requires a “primary emphasis” on undergraduate instruction—a phrase that may carry legal implications, potentially suggesting more than 50% of workload time. Unlike prior standards, HB 698 codifies rigidity and removes administrative flexibility to adapt standards without legislative action.

RETRENCHMENT

HB 698 prescribes a detailed retrenchment framework, going beyond SB 1. While SB 1 removed retrenchment from collective bargaining, it did not dictate process. HB 698 does so explicitly and excludes faculty from any defined decision-making role, further eroding shared governance.

• BoTs must adopt retrenchment policies within 90 days, following statutory minimum requirements that function as a model policy.
• The bill explicitly allows BoTs to exceed statutory minimums.
• BoTs have exclusive authority to initiate retrenchment and may delegate implementation to the president or provost. Deans may recommend but not initiate.
• The Chancellor reviews policies for compliance; non-compliant policies must be corrected within 60 days.

Expanded Triggers

HB 698 allows retrenchment for “any lawful academic or operational reason” determined by the BoT, including:

• Enrollment stagnation or decline
• Program reduction or discontinuation
• Organizational restructuring
• Business necessity
• Strategic alignment
• Financial emergency
• Any other lawful reason

These terms are broad and grant significant discretion. “Enrollment stagnation” lowers the threshold from SB 1’s “declining enrollment” standard and may not require multi-year decreases. “Organizational restructuring” could encompass virtually any administrative change.

Retention and Protections

• Seniority, tenure, rank, and length of service (except the 30/35-year provision) confer no retention rights.
• Faculty may not displace or “bump” others.
• Retrenchment is explicitly not performance-based; exceptional performance cannot justify retention.
• Procedural protections must be “substantially similar” to those historically provided, but “historically” is undefined.
• Appeals are limited to whether the institution “materially” complied with its policy and statute—a standard that may allow broad administrative discretion.

Voluntary separation agreements and buyouts are permitted but must be deemed cost-effective or in the institution’s financial or operational interest—terms that are undefined and discretionary.

DEI PROVISIONS

HB 698 reflects legislative concern that institutions are continuing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) activities.

Institutions are prohibited from reassigning or reclassifying positions to continue DEI functions. They must inventory employees who performed DEI functions as of January 1, 2025, and were reassigned by September 25, 2025.

The reporting requirements are extensive and include:

• Employee identifying information
• Prior DEI-related duties
• Reassignment details
• Salary changes
• New duties
• HR and general counsel attestations

Each employee requires a justification report including:

• Narrative explanation of reassignment
• Proof of substantially different duties
• Side-by-side job comparisons
• Compensation breakdown
• Ongoing compliance plan
• Attestation by general counsel

The president and BoT chair must certify the inventory. The Chancellor determines whether new duties are “substantially different” under a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.

These provisions are administratively burdensome and could discourage reassignment of former DEI employees. Because many former DEI staff come from historically underrepresented groups, the targeting and tracking provisions may raise potential Title VII concerns if they result in differential treatment based on protected characteristics. The public reporting requirement could also expose individuals to harassment.

EMPLOYEE TRACKING

HB 698 adds employees of state institutions of higher education to the searchable state and school employee database (Ohio Checkbook), expanding public access to salary and employment data.