Ohio lawmakers require public colleges and universities to publicly share who they’re inviting to speak on campus – along with how much schools are paying those guests.
But a recent Signal Statewide review found the state’s 14 universities are interpreting this mandate in widely different ways, revealing an example of the gap between lawmakers’ intent to overhaul higher education and what that implementation actually looks like.
One school produced a spreadsheet with an intense level of detail. Others, meanwhile, simply note speakers’ names and the amounts they were paid. Two schools have not posted any relevant information.
This speaker disclosure rule is one of dozens tucked into Senate Bill 1, a state law overhauling how higher education operates in Ohio. It took effect last June.
Republican leaders said the legislation was needed to get rid of what they viewed as colleges’ longstanding liberal bias. In addition to these online disclosures, campuses must invite speakers with “diverse ideological or political views,” among other requirements. Critics said the law is a direct shot at free speech.
Opponents have also panned the 42-page law’s language as vague. They note that it ended diversity, equity and inclusion (or DEI) work without defining what that looks like in Ohio. In a similar vein, the legislation doesn’t provide formatting examples of what these speaker databases must look like.
Suggested Reading
What Senate Bill 1 says about speakers
Senate Bill 1’s explanation about this rule is brief. It says each school is obligated to generate a list of speakers who receive at least $500 in exchange for appearing at a university-sponsored event.
These databases must be searchable by keywords, accessible from the institution’s main homepage “by use of not more than three links” and not be behind any sort of paywall.
Universities say the edict doesn’t apply to speakers hosted by student organizations. It’s unclear whether events hosted by and/or in conjunction with universities’ foundations, which are separate organizations, are also exempt.
Wright State University in Dayton uses a simple text list to show the names of three speakers and how much they were paid. Cleveland State University’s table includes that same information along with an event title, but no additional context such as which department invited a speaker.
A handful of campuses, including Miami and Bowling Green State universities, use similar databases outlining speakers’ names, a description of the event, dates and payment amounts. These can be searched and filtered, allowing users to easily toggle between highest-paid and lowest-paid speakers.
Northeast Ohio Medical University’s compliance page says a report of its invited speakers will be made available “as required.” Central State University officials left a space for the information online but say that no speakers meeting the law’s threshold appeared on campus in 2025.
The cadence of potential updates varies, too. Several universities note changes will be made “regularly.” Others point to monthly or quarterly refreshes. Signal Statewide’s review of these sites took place in late February.
Ohio State, Akron databases vary widely
Two schools’ databases sit on opposite sides of the speaker spectrum.
Ohio State University’s list names 775 speakers, along with date and payment amounts. It does not give any additional information about why guests appeared on campus or which department invited them. The page indicates the information is pulled directly from the school’s human resources and payment program.
“University employees have no responsibilities beyond following the normal Workday process for paying or providing items to speakers in exchange for them speaking,” officials wrote.
The University of Akron, meanwhile, seems to use a different procedure. Its speaker page says employees must file a report about an event no later than one week after it ends.
UA’s lists are offered as two downloadable Excel spreadsheets. Few of its 37 entries in 2025 and four in 2026 show speakers making appearances for class or cultural events.
Instead, most are entertainment offerings typical at many college campuses, such as a casino night hosted by the university’s residence life department and an ice cream social thrown by its Office of Greek Life.
What comes next for Senate Bill 1 compliance
How lawmakers interpret colleges’ compliance with higher education laws could soon matter even more.
State Rep. Tom Young recently introduced enforcement legislation that would tie portions of colleges’ state funding to explicit compliance with Senate Bill 1.
The Republican from Washington Township, near Dayton, declined to give specific examples of institutions not adhering to the law. At a recent press conference, he said he feels “strongly” that some institutions “are just checking the box.”
Yet state Sen. Jerry Cirino, R-Kirtland, does not appear to agree. Cirino, who wrote Senate Bill 1, told the Columbus Dispatch he believes it’s too soon to introduce more implementation rules.