Texas A&M University did not have good cause to fire Melissa McCoul, an English professor thrust into the spotlight after a video of her discussing gender identity circulated online and drew political backlash, a faculty committee unanimously found in a new report.<\/p>\n
The university fired McCoul after a student secretly recorded her in a summer class teaching that there are more than two genders. The video was posted to X by state Rep. Brian Harrison<\/a>, R-Midlothian, an Aggie who has used his social media to pressure universities to remove course content he finds offensive. <\/p>\n Texas A&M did not dismiss her until after Harrison\u2019s post in September went viral. It said it did not fire her<\/a> for teaching there are more than two genders, but for failing to change her course content to align with the catalog description. There is no state or federal law prohibiting instruction on gender identity in college classes. She appealed the termination through the university\u2019s Committee on Academic Freedom, Tenure and Responsibility.\n<\/p>\n An eight-member panel from the committee held a full-day hearing on Nov. 3 and issued its findings to Interim President Tommy Williams on Nov. 18. Williams can accept the finding and reinstate McCoul or reject it and uphold her termination.<\/p>\n The committee reviewed all three reasons Texas A&M gave for firing McCoul \u2014 that she failed to perform her duties, violated policies and acted unprofessionally \u2014 and unanimously rejected each one. It also found the university failed to investigate, did not follow its own policies and never proved the allegations used to justify her dismissal.<\/p>\n \u201cThe university did not provide any documentary evidence that it conducted an investigation, nor did it provide compelling testimony to explain the decision to forgo due process,\u201d the report said, adding that the lack of review \u201ccaused considerable confusion in the president\u2019s office and the TAMU administration.\u201d<\/p>\n Texas A&M administrators are required to meet with an instructor and notify them when a dismissal is being considered so they have an opportunity to respond before any action is taken. The committee said it heard testimony from university officials acknowledging that they didn\u2019t do that with McCoul.<\/p>\n The committee also found that McCoul was never told to change her course content and did not have the authority to assign a different course number, even though one university official cited that as \u201cone of three strikes\u201d against her. <\/p>\n Finally, the committee said the university should\u2019ve investigated the student who recorded McCoul to determine whether her behavior violated university rules that state disrupting or interfering with instruction can lead to disciplinary action.<\/p>\n A separate faculty committee concluded in September that McCoul\u2019s firing appeared to violate her academic freedom<\/a>, but university officials said that committee lacked authority to review her dismissal and rejected its findings.<\/p>\n Texas A&M said in a statement that officials are aware of the Committee on Academic Freedom, Tenure and Responsibility\u2019s \u201cnon-binding findings\u201d and that Williams has received the report and will review it \u201ccarefully before making a decision in the coming days and weeks.\u201d<\/p>\n McCoul\u2019s attorney, Amanda Reichek, said in a statement that her client is \u201cpleased and thankful\u201d with the committee\u2019s findings and waiting to see if Williams will reinstate her. If he does not, she said, McCoul will \u201cswiftly pursue her First Amendment, due process and breach of contract claims in court.\u201d<\/p>\n Reichek also argued the firing followed political pressure, saying \u201cthe sequence of events establishes that A&M terminated Dr. McCoul shortly after Governor Greg Abbott implored them to on X<\/a>.\u201d She called the university\u2019s stated reasons \u201ca pretext for the University\u2019s true motivation: capitulation to Governor Abbott\u2019s demands.\u201d<\/p>\n The incident involving McCoul triggered restrictive curriculum policies<\/a> and reviews<\/a> at Texas A&M and other university systems across the state. It also unfolded as Senate Bill 37<\/a> took effect, giving governor-appointed regents greater authority over curriculum decisions.<\/p>\n