What Instructors Need to Know About New Kansas DEI/CRT Legislation

Dear Colleagues,  

I am writing to provide awareness of recent state-level changes related to DEI-CRT related content in Kansas higher education. No action is required at this time, but because implementation guidance will continue to develop, I want instructors to understand the current context and what is, and is not, expected now.

State-level changes and timeline 

As you likely know, the Kansas Legislature included a new proviso in this year’s state budget, House Bill 2513. The proviso directs Kansas universities to ensure students are not required to complete courses containing certain defined DEI-CRT-related content as degree requirements, except in limited circumstances. It also directed the Kansas Board of Regents (KBOR) to establish formal definitions of DEI- and CRT-related content.  

What this means for instructors now

The budget proviso directed KBOR to establish these definitions by July 31, 2026, although most implementation requirements of HB 2513 do not take effect until the 2028-2029 academic year and remain subject to additional legislative, regulatory, and KBOR processes. At this time, there is no legal or regulatory requirement that instructors make changes to courses, curricula, or instructional practices in response to this legislation. Instructors should continue to engage students in rigorous scholarly inquiry and critical analysis while remaining attentive to future guidance from KBOR and the university as implementation requirements become clearer. 

On June 22, 2026, the Chancellor’s Office provided a link to the KBOR meeting notes that define DEI- and CRT-related content. Importantly, the adopted policy explicitly states that discussions of race, racism, and the history of the civil rights movement do not, by themselves, fall within these definitions. Faculty and instructors may continue to teach and discuss these subjects, as long as they are presented in the context of scholarly, historical, legal, or disciplinary analysis. In the KBOR definition, a distinction is made between presenting ideas for scholarly analysis and critical examination versus promoting or endorsing a particular viewpoint. 

Optional syllabus language

Although there is no immediate need for course redesign or significant curricular changes, instructors who are concerned about student questions or reactions between now and the implementation period of the legislation in July 2028 may wish to include brief statements in their syllabi or classroom discussions explaining that course materials are presented for scholarly analysis and critical examination and that students are evaluated on their reasoning and use of evidence rather than agreement with a particular viewpoint. Sample statements, like those provided below, can help clarify and document instructional intent to students and others.

• This course examines complex and sometimes contested issues through evidence, scholarship, and critical analysis. Students are not expected to adopt a particular viewpoint and are encouraged to engage thoughtfully with multiple perspectives. 
• This course will address complex and sometimes contested issues, including topics related to race, gender and sexuality, law, history, and society. Our goal is to examine these topics through evidence, scholarship, and critical analysis. You are not expected to agree with a particular perspective, but you are expected to engage thoughtfully and respectfully with the material and with one another. 

Support, resources and next steps

Feel free to work with your College or School leadership to develop additional or tailored statements for your syllabi. My office will coordinate assistance and expert help to your leadership as needed.  

A resource page providing additional guidance for instructors is being developed and will be available before the start of the fall semester. Resources will be expanded as more materials become available into the implementation phase. Please reach out to your Dean, Chair, or Program Director if you have questions that require more immediate attention. 

I want to thank many colleagues, including several faculty members, who helped analyze this change and offered guidance. Equally important, thank you for all you do for the University of Kansas. I appreciate your work to ensure our students grow in their disciplines and as critical thinkers and leaders.  

Sincerely, 

Arash Mafi, Ph.D. 
Chief Academic Officer, Provost & Executive Vice Chancellor