## Facts

- Natthu S. Parate was a nontenured, tenure-track associate professor in civil engineering at Tennessee State University employed on an annually renewable contract.
- In a course he taught, Parate announced grading ranges (e.g., 90–100% for an A; 80–90% for a B) and stated he might consider individual extenuating circumstances.
- Two students who earned roughly 86% sought changes from B grades to A grades.
- Parate changed one student’s grade based on extenuating circumstances but refused to change the other student’s grade, believing an A was academically unjustified.
- The student whose grade was not changed appealed to Dean Edward Isibor.
- Isibor instructed Parate to change the grade to an A and allegedly threatened adverse consequences if Parate refused.
- Parate changed the grade under protest, asserting he did so because of administrative pressure rather than his academic judgment.
- Parate alleged subsequent retaliatory actions by administrators, culminating in the university’s decision not to renew his contract.
- Parate sued university officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for alleged First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment violations and asserted related state-law claims.

## Issues

1. Whether compelling a professor to personally change a student’s grade against the professor’s academic judgment violates the First Amendment, including academic freedom and the prohibition on compelled speech.
2. Whether nonrenewal of a nontenured, annually renewable faculty contract deprives the professor of a protected property or liberty interest without due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

## Decision

- The Sixth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
- The court reversed the dismissal/summary judgment on the First Amendment claim, holding Parate presented a viable claim that he was unconstitutionally compelled to personally alter a grade contrary to his professional judgment.
- The court affirmed summary judgment for defendants on the Fourteenth Amendment due process claims, holding Parate lacked a protected property interest in renewal and failed to show a liberty interest based on stigma-plus.
- The court left undisturbed the district court’s disposition of pendent state-law claims (dismissed without prejudice).

## Legal Principles

- A public university may maintain procedures to review and administratively change grades, but compelling an individual professor to personally enter a grade the professor believes is academically false or unwarranted can constitute impermissible compelled speech under the First Amendment.
- Professorial grading may be treated as an evaluative communication tied to academic freedom interests protected by the First Amendment.
- A nontenured faculty member employed on an annually renewable contract generally lacks a constitutionally protected property interest in continued employment absent an independent source of entitlement under state law, contract, or established rules.
- A Fourteenth Amendment liberty-interest claim based on nonrenewal requires a showing of stigmatizing, public charges plus a tangible alteration of status or foreclosure of future employment opportunities; nonrenewal alone, without stigma-plus, is insufficient.

## Conclusion

The Sixth Circuit held that a professor may pursue a First Amendment claim when university officials coerce the professor to personally change a student’s grade against the professor’s academic judgment, but it rejected due process claims tied to the nonrenewal of a nontenured, annually renewable appointment absent a property entitlement or stigma-plus showing.


Parate v. Isibor, 868 F.2d 821 (6th Cir. 1989)