The University of Connecticut Senate met to discuss the future of a U.S. Anti-Black Racism course amidst federal government scrutiny at 4 p.m. on Oct. 6 in the Student Union.
Moderator Del Siegel began the meeting with a land acknowledgement before turning the microphone over to interim provost S. Pamir Alpay, who is temporarily taking over the provost role after Anne D’Alleva’s departure to Binghamton University. Alpay delivered the presidents’ report for the evening as UConn President Radenka Maric was on vacation at the time.
Alpay thanked those in attendance and requested that senators provide their input on the university’s budget, which was later discussed further in-depth during the meeting. Alpay also expressed that UConn has been working closely with the Connecticut government on tackling federal challenges.
When asked if UConn would concede to federal demands if it meant receiving funding, Alpay answered that UConn must abide by the law.
Alpay also noted that UConn is currently being “nationally recognized,” referring to the recent release of the US News Rankings. UConn placed #32 in the Top Public Schools ranking.
Alpay then turned the microphone to Senate Executive Committee (SEC) chair Bob Day, who began to discuss the new general education program, which includes new course learning objectives for the university. This has included the U.S. Anti-Black Racism (ABR) course, which was previously passed as an acceptable requirement but has since been pulled so the university can discuss its legality, according to The Daily Campus.
Day then presented the senate with a motion to rescind the original May 2023 resolution that made the ABR course a requirement for students.
“Following guidance issued by the federal government, it is the opinion of the University General Counsel’s Office that the ABR requirement as originally passed by the University Senate would be considered illegal by the current federal administration,” the senate agenda packet read.
“I’m very reluctant to say, give legal advice, because I’m not aware,” Day said. Day noted that this hesitancy to let the resolution continue comes from a group of statements and advice, not directly from the federal government.
“This would not be legal because it calls out a particular racial or ethnic group,” Day said about requiring the course. Day also explained that the ABR course is completely legal by itself, but whether or not UConn can make it a requirement is up for debate.
Sen. Douglas Kaufman of the Neag School of Education argued that this action could be seen as “acquiescence” to a federal government that is “imposing an authoritarian mandate on us.”
“I am very concerned about how this was rolled out to us,” Kaufman said. “I don’t see this as a valid legal challenge; I don’t see it as a valid moral challenge.”
Sen. Beth Ginsberg, from the UConn Stamford campus’ Political Science department, labeled the rescinding of the resolution as a “slippery slope,” having taught classes based on LGBTQ+ and African American politics.
“What’s next?” Ginsberg asked. “My courses are optional, not required. I think they are vital.” Ginsberg also expressed worry that professors will become scared to teach specific courses.
Day explained that the ABR course is the only one that is a concern, as it is a required course. According to Day, classes related to specific communities, such as Ginsberg’s classes, will not come into question as long as they are not required.
Day added that the motion to rescind the original decision is so that the SEC can create a taskforce to begin working on the ABR course specifically.
“Right now, what we want to do is have a blank slate so the task force can convene and do their work,” Day said.
Nicole Fournier Gelston, the general council to the university, attended the meeting virtually, and weighed in her own opinions as someone who helped raise the idea that the ABR course should be reconsidered.
Gelston explained that requiring the ABR course is not strictly illegal, as there is no specific legal document that prevents it being a required course. However, she noted that this does not mean the federal government can’t take it down if the ABR course requirement was given federal attention.
“It’s sort of taking into consideration all of the guidance and existing law,” Gelston said. “If challenged, would this course be considered legal by the federal government? Probably not.”
Phoenix Harper, the chief diversity officer of UConn’s Undergraduate Student Government, also weighed in on the issue at hand. She noted that taking away this requirement could be seen as a “letdown” to students.
“One of the highest incident reports in regards to prejudice is racism against our Black and brown students,” Harper said. “Universities have control over their curriculum.”
Sen. Joseph MacDougald proposed that the senate move to pause the course instead of fully removing it, stating that this would give more time for the SEC and the senate in full to consider all issues. Sen. Jennifer Dineen seconded the motion to pause, which received near-unanimous approval from the senate.
The meeting then moved to a budget update from Reka Wrynn, UConn’s interim vice president for finance. This update was focused on the results from fiscal year 2025.
In June 2025, CT Insider reported that UConn was in a budget deficit of more than $100 million. Wrynn announced that the deficit is now at $12.6 million, in part helped by a rise in research at the university.
Wrynn noted that she hopes the budget will be balanced by the end of the year, but that the university’s changes are not permanent ones, and UConn must continue working to find a solution to the deficit.
The University Senate meeting adjourned at 6:06 p.m. The next meeting will be on Nov. 3, in SU 330/331, or virtually on WebEx.
Embarrassing that this was ever considered in the first place. Of any class or topic to be made universally required, this is the most important?