Christian professor who criticized DEI wins battle for tenure at Michigan State U.


Internal documents reveal how administrators use “diversity checks” to influence the hiring process and engage in discrimination.


The College Fix

By Pedro Rodriguez-Aparicio

July 11, 2025


Civil rights group says school violated professor’s First Amendment rights


An accomplished nematologist now has tenure at Michigan State University after initially being passed over following her criticism of “diversity, equity, and inclusion.”


Professor Marisol Quintanilla recently won tenure from the public university in Lansing after intervention from the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism.


The civil rights group intervened after Quintanilla (pictured) failed to obtain tenure despite two decades of teaching experience and “21 peer-reviewed publications, over $6.2 million in grants, and 189 extension talks,” according to a news release.


The group argued in a January letter that the school discriminated against Quintanilla after she faced backlash in 2022 for criticizing DEI policies. She also declined to list her gender on university forms, “believing these questions implicitly endorsed ideological positions contrary to her faith.”


“FAIR’s advocacy for Dr. Marisol Quintanilla reflects our core commitment to protecting academic freedom and ensuring that faculty members can express their deeply held convictions without facing professional retaliation,” a spokesperson for the non-profit told The College Fix.


Michigan State U. said the letter did not lead to tenure.


“A letter from any outside organization would have no bearing on the review process,” spokeswoman Amber McCann told The Fix via email.

“Each submission for reappointment, promotion and tenure (RPT) review is considered on the merits of the case, according to university policy and procedure,” McCann said.


A free speech group who previously helped Professor Quintanilla called the resolution a “positive outcome.”


“The university cannot dictate a professor’s speech. It is a positive outcome that the university reversed course and offered the professor tenure,” Graham Piro with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression told The Fix on a phone call.


In 2023, the group helped Quintanilla when her department chair, Hannah Burrack, mandated the professor “write a DEI statement as part of her annual review.” Burrack also had asked Quintanilla to retract an article criticizing diversity initiatives.


The College Fix contacted Burrack via email on Thursday morning to ask for her side of the story, but she deferred to McCann, the university spokeswoman. She said DEI statements are not required for performance reviews.


Piro said the university did not act in alignment with previous court decisions, where courts sided with people who chose not to disclose their gender identities.


“It is worth noting that there is a decision from a 2006 Circuit Court of Appeals that was a violation of the professors first amendment right and expression of religion,” Piro told The Fix on behalf of the free speech group. “The court believed that addressing the student by their identity fell on the ideological side.”


“If there is a blanket requirement of the preferred pronouns it would be an infringement of the First Amendment right,” Piro said.

“Universities have the right to limit faculty speech in a particular way but a generic requirement that dictates how a faculty is addressed would not be allowed.”



December 11, 2025
Student evaluations subject professors to perverse incentives.
December 10, 2025
Written by John Craig December 10, 2025 On October 27, the Manhattan Institution’s City Journal published a major, breakthrough analysis of the performance of 100 prominent US (and one Canadian) universities and colleges, “Introducing the City Journal College Rankings,” For the first time, this new performance system includes data on measures (68 in all) like freedom of expression, viewpoint diversity tolerance, quality of instruction, investment payoff, and campus politicization that are not considered in the other major higher ed ranking systems. How did Davidson measure up in City Journal’s performance assessment? On a scale of one (bottom) to five (top) stars , Davidson is among the 63 schools that received 2 stars. Schools that, according to City Journal, have “Mostly average to below-average scores in all categories with no particularly noteworthy strengths. Significant, focused policy changes are needed at these schools.” (Full rankings available here College Rankings | Rankings ) To summarize the methodology, the City Journal team selected 100 schools that are highly touted by other ranking systems, widely known to the American public, and/or of high regional importance. The researchers gathered data on 68 variables across 21 categories covering four major aspects of on- and off-campus life. The Educational Experience categories were Faculty Ideological Pluralism, Faculty Teaching Quality, Faculty Research Quality, Faculty Speech Climate, Curricular Rigor, and Heterodox Infrastructure; the Leadership Quality categories were Commitment to Meritocracy, Support for Free Speech, and Resistance to Politicization; the Outcomes categories were Quality of Alumni Network, Value Added to Career, and Value Added to Education; and the Student Experience categories were Student Ideological Pluralism, Student Free Speech, Student Political Tolerance, Student Social Life, Student Classroom Experience, Campus ROTC, Student Community Life, and Jewish Campus Climate. No other higher ed ranking system includes as many variables. (Read more about methodology at College Rankings | Methods ) The data included publicly available information from sources such as the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the Department of Education’s College Scorecard, and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s College Free Speech Rankings. The researchers also developed original measures for the project, such as the ideological balance of student political organizations and the partisan makeup of faculty campaign contributions. Each variable was coded so that higher values mean better performance and was weighted to reflect relative importance. For example, student ideological pluralism (as measured by self-reported student ideology and the left-right balance of student organizations) accounts for 5 percent of a school’s score while City Journal’s estimate of how many years it will take the typical student to recoup their educational investment to attend a given college accounts for 12.5 percent. A school’s overall score is the sum of points across the 21 categories, with the top possible score being 100. While the assessment system is for the most part hard-data-based, it has, like other ranking systems, subjective elements—like the weighing system. So methodological challenges will come and will doubtlessly lead to improvements the next time around. That said, the methodology strikes me as defensible and a marked improvement over that of other popular rating systems. I will conclude with some comments on the findings. Note that the Average score (out of 100) for the 100 institutions is 46 and the median score is 45.73—so overall, this is not a “high performance” group of institutions. No institution receives a 5-Star rating, and only two receive a 4-Star rating (University of Florida and University of Texas at Austin). Only 11 schools receive a 3-Star rating—Having “Mixed results across the four categories, showing strengths in some and weakness in others. These schools typically have several clear paths to improvement.” Because assessment scores are generally low and tightly clustered in the middle, the rankings by score are misleading: Davidson, at 51.16 with a rank of 25, looks to be in the top quartile (between Princeton and Georgetown), but in fact gets just a 2-Star assessment
November 11, 2025
Report from Ivy League school finds rampant grade inflation, but students complain administration is moving goal posts
Show More