According to documents obtained by The Star, ongoing course audits could cause some courses currently scheduled for spring 2026 to be canceled.
Courses will be required to go through four separate levels of approval in the auditing process. The four levels are faculty review, department chair/school director approval, dean approval and administrative approval.
“Any course in phase 1 that is scheduled for spring 2026 semester that is not approved at any level will not be offered in spring and will require further review,” Texas State Provost Pranesh Aswath wrote in a memo to faculty. “Any course not approved by the deadline for the 2026-2027 academic catalog will not appear in the catalog.”
Documents previously obtained by The Star suggested that class offerings would not be changed until the 2026-27 academic year.
Possible course cancellations under the audits could significantly impact students, as they may have already registered for courses that will no longer exist in the spring. This could lead to loss of financial aid due to dipping below full-time status, delayed graduation due to missing required courses and more.
According to the documents, 685 courses are being audited during phase one. The audits span across most colleges, though all courses audited in the McCoy College of Business are also honors classes. More than a third of all audited courses are in the College of Liberal Arts.
In a statement emailed to The Star, a university spokesperson wrote that no major disruptions are expected.
“Measures are in place to guide students through any adjustments and keep their academic progress on track,” the spokesperson wrote in the email. “We are committed to supporting every student and will provide timely updates if changes occur.”
In a Sept. 30 email, Texas State President Kelly Damphousse wrote that the audit was being conducted to bring courses in line with syllabi and course descriptions, and that course content is in line with the originally approved curriculum for the course.
Damphousse wrote in the email, that a disconnect may exist between syllabi and course descriptions due to changes in faculty teaching the courses and that some courses were originally approved decades ago. He said that while those changes are understandable, he finds them unacceptable.
“Students enroll in classes based on information that is provided in the course descriptions, and it is a reasonable expectation that the material described on the syllabus and covered in the classroom align with the approved course curriculum,” Damphousse wrote in the email. “They also have a reasonable expectation that the material will be taught according to the principle of value-neutral instruction.”
Damphousse wrote in the email that faculty are not allowed to teach unapproved material, but said that faculty still have academic freedom.
The email also referenced value-neutral curriculum, which is one thing courses are being checked for during the audits. While the stated goal of “value-neutrality review” is to ensure course outcomes don’t require students to adopt certain views or require advocacy work, a large majority of courses in the audit relate to race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, religion and culture.
State officials, such as Rep. Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian), Congressman Chip Roy (R-Austin) and Gov. Greg Abbott, have publicly targeted courses, faculty and administrators at universities for teaching courses related to those topics. President Donald Trump issued a national security memo in September that labeled “extremism” on race and gender a “common thread” in political violence.
The Foundation of Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) previously told The Star that the legality of course audits depends on how they are conducted. Michael Hurley, government affairs counsel for FIRE, said targeting “disfavored ideas” could run afoul of First Amendment protections for academic freedom under Keyishian v. Board of Regents.
“The Supreme Court has said that the First Amendment doesn’t tolerate laws that cast a pall of orthodoxy over the classroom,” Hurley said. “Traditionally, academic freedom has included professors having some pretty significant latitude to kind of direct discussion. So a lot of this just depends on what it looks like.”
