Category: Funding

Putting UNC’s Accreditation at Risk

Posted on

The NC Senate is working on a new bill that would force UNC System colleges and NC Community Colleges to change accreditors. Accreditation is the key determiner of a higher education institution’s credibility, value of degrees, and ability to secure federal funds for financial aid. Politicians trying to interfere in the accreditation process in any way is extremely dangerous. Below are images of the draft bill. You can also access it here (copy and paste this URL in your browser if you get an error as they sometimes block referrals from our website https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookUp/2023/S680):

UNC Faculty Council Addresses “Bucket of Chaos”

Posted on

On Friday, February 17, 2023 the UNC-CH Faculty Council met to address the “bucket of chaos” created by yet another incidence of trustee (BOT) governance overreach. In its most recent overreach actions, the BOT failed to consult, or even inform, the faculty, chancellor, students or staff–normally charged with making such decisions– about a proposed new degree granting “School of Civic Life and Leadership”. Instead of working with the faculty and staff, the BOT paid a PR agency $50,000 to mount a national campaign to sell the proposed school on right wing media with the promise that the school will inject more right wing viewpoints onto campus. Below is a video of the entire Faculty Council meeting.

During the meeting the council passed two resolutions. One of the resolutions made clear that the previously approved “IDEAS in Action Curriculum” is different from the proposed new school and should not be used to confuse the public or justify the recent governance overreach. Here is the full text of that resolution:

“Resolution 2023-1. On Supporting the Implementation of the IDEAS in Action Curriculum

The Faculty Council resolves:

The College of Arts and Sciences should be fully supported in implementing the IDEAs in Action
curriculum. We maintain that implementing the IDEAs in Action curriculum and establishing the
proposed School of Civic Life and Leadership are conceptually separate undertakings that should not be
entangled. The Faculty Council supports the adequate provision of resources to the College for the
purpose of implementing all aspects of the IDEAs in Action curriculum.”

Submitted by Professor Harry L. Watson (History)

.

The second resolution directly addressed the recent overreach actions and made clear the faculty’s role in creating new schools.

“Resolution 2023-2. On Disapproving the Creation of a New School at UNC-Chapel Hill

The Faculty Council finds:

1. On January 26, 2023, the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees adopted a resolution requesting the administration of UNC-CH to accelerate its development of a School of Civic Life and Leadership with a goal of a minimum of 20 faculty members and degree opportunities for undergraduate students. During the Board’s meeting, the resolution was described as an outgrowth of a budget request for $3 million to implement the existing requirements of the IDEAs in Action curriculum.

2. On February 5, 2023, the Faculty Executive Committee received a copy of an undated budget
memo requesting $5 million in recurring funds to create a new School of Civic Life and
Leadership within the College of Arts and Sciences. The initial funding would be used to support
“development of the school, hiring of leadership, faculty, programming, staff, and expansion of
the curricular work of the existing Program for Public Discourse.” The budget requirements of
the proposed new School were projected to grow to $12.6 million by the 2026-27 fiscal year.

3. Section 2-6 of The Faculty Code of University Government empowers the Faculty Council “to
determine the educational policies of the University and the rules and regulations under which
administrators and faculty will conduct the educational activities of the University” and “to
prescribe the requirements for admissions, programs of study, and the award of academic degrees
by the University in the context of the basic educational policies of the University and the special
competencies of the faculties of particular colleges and schools.”

4. The faculty has not been consulted about the creation of a new degree-granting school at UNC-
Chapel Hill. Until the Board of Trustees’ public adoption of its January 26 resolution, faculty
leaders were unaware that any such school had been proposed.

Based on these findings, the Faculty Council resolves:

The creation of a new degree-granting school on the UNC-CH campus is a matter for which faculty are
responsible. The proposal for a new School of Civic Life and Leadership did not originate with the
faculty, was not communicated to the faculty in advance, and has not been studied by the faculty. Faculty
members’ questions about the vision for the new program–such as the sequencing of coursework, the
scholarship that supports the discipline, any overlap with existing courses or programs, and the utility of
the program to our graduates—have gone unanswered.


Moreover, the Faculty Council anticipates that the proposed school will consume badly needed resources
for the University’s existing programs and facilities.

For these reasons, the Faculty Council recommends no further action on this new school until such a time as a proposal from the faculty towards this school is developed and then properly discussed.”

Submitted by Professor Harry L. Watson (History)

Higher Ed Funding, Paul Fulton, and The Cooper Commission

Posted on

Paul Fulton

Huge congratulations to Coalition for Carolina advisor Paul Fulton! 

Paul, former dean of the Kenan Flagler business school and NC business executive, is a tireless advocate for North Carolina public education.  He was recently honored by theNorth Carolina Society of New York at its annual Dinner Dance.

Since 1947, the Society has recognized 79 honorees, including John Motley Morehead III, John M. Belk, Dean E. Smith, Richard Hampton Jenrette, Julian and Josie Robertson, Gov. James Baxter Hunt, Jr., Dr. James and Ann Goodnight, and Thomas W. Ross.

Below is a video of Paul’s remarks.  This video was submitted by an attendee at the event. If it is difficult to hear what Paul is saying, please follow this link to read Paul’s full remarks.

Funding Higher Education

The funding of public higher education is facing challenges around the country.  In a recent post, we celebrated Carolina’s milestone achievement in raising private funds to support the university and noted that such “once in a generation” funding is no substitute for state funding. This thinking is underscored in a Chronicle for Higher Education opinion piece written by James Nguyen H. Spencer. He considers the importance of funding and investing in our youth and discusses the importance of public higher education as a public good.  Spencer goes on to

 point out how public higher education is facing funding challenges across the country and proposes a novel solution that would enable us to invest in our young people’s education, address current funding challenges, and realize a favorable return on the investment.

From the article:

 “In years past, public-college tuition was kept very low by state investment in public universities. But today, levels of investment have in many cases dropped from about half of a university’s budget to less than 10 percent. In some states, these aggregate reductions have been mitigated by the creation of state programs funding individual tuition support for residents, as in South Carolina and Louisiana, yet it’s still clear that states will no longer be the primary source of public-university support.

…

Financing an equitable higher education can be done: The U.S. has near-universal water supplies, transportation, and electricity for even its poorest residents. What would happen if we applied the same principles to the public goods that universities provide?

…

This could be done with the financial support of state-supported bond programs — or less preferably through the private capital markets (after all, student debt is a $1.5-trillion market), like most conventional forms of infrastructure. Upon graduation, a graduate would be asked to pay a small percentage of income back to the university for the duration of the graduate’s career — let’s say 3 percent to 5 percent. The graduates who become millionaires will financially outweigh those who drop out of the labor market. This mechanism should ensure that the monthly costs aren’t too burdensome.

The economic fundamentals of “investing” in our young people in this way are solid.”

Read more here: https://www.chronicle.com/article/higher-ed-is-a-public-good-lets-fund-it-like-one

Support for The Governance Commission

The Winston-Salem Journal has published an opinion piece in support of Governor Cooper’s commission on university governance.  They view the new commission as “a necessary first step to protect taxpayers’ investment in our university system and to right a ship that has listed starboard. We’ll watch for their recommendations with interest — and with hope that the legislature will be persuaded to take their recommendations seriously.”  

In supporting the commission, the Journal highlights some of the problems that have arisen as a result of one political party having “a lock on the UNC System”. They cite incidences where lawmakers used their power “at times to turn students into political pawns, as in the era of the HB2 ‘bathroom bill,’ when they tried to impose harmful limitations on where some UNC students could relieve themselves. Questions have also arisen over Republican-appointed board members who have improperly tried to influence university hiring and contract decisions, as well as, in one case, a student election. A couple of board members sought university chancellorships for themselves.”

The piece includes quotes from Governor Cooper and co-chair Margaret Spellings.

  Follow this link to read more of the Winston-Salem Journal’s point of view on the new commission.

Calibrating UNC Governance

Posted on
Higher Ed Works has published a great post about Governor Cooper’s newly established commission on governance. We asked, and received, their permission to re-publish the entire post below.
RALEIGH (December 1, 2022) – Two former Presidents of the UNC System who will lead a commission to assess the System’s governing structure say the panel will examine models across the country and try to better define the roles of board members.

“It’s a good time to stop, look and listen to how things are organized,” said Margaret Spellings, a Republican who was the System’s president from 2016-19. “As I like to say, we need to be organized for success. It’s a good time to take stock.”

In North Carolina and across the country, she said, governments are attempting to calibrate the proper balance between the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

Tom Ross, a Democrat who served as UNC System President from 2011-16, will co-chair the commission with Spellings. In a joint interview with Higher Ed Works, Ross said the group will examine how state universities are governed across the country – and there are lots of models( 1).

Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper announced creation of the commission Nov. 1 and the members of the commission last week (3). 

Ross called the members “a really high-level group of people.” He said he is encouraged “that it’s a bipartisan commission that the governor appointed … this ought to be a bipartisan issue.”

Spellings said one of the commission’s aims will be a governance structure that lasts through shifts in political power “to protect this mighty engine of North Carolina.”


THE LEGISLATURE

Currently, all 24 members of the UNC Board of Governors are appointed by the NC General Assembly. And the Board of Trustees at each of the UNC System’s 17 campuses are appointed by the General Assembly and the Board of Governors. The Republican-led legislature removed the governor’s power to appoint campus trustees after Cooper was elected governor in 2016.

Since Cooper announced creation of the commission in an executive order, many have questioned whether legislators will pay heed to the commission’s recommendations.

“We’ll make the case – we’re going to learn a lot through this process,” said Spellings.

“If we can make recommendations to make the System as strong as it can be, we’ll do that,” said Ross.

Both political parties have always been interested in improving the state’s economy, Ross said. 

Given projections of a shrinking supply of traditional high-school graduates and demands of an increasingly technological economy, “It’s going to be a tighter and tighter market and it’s going to demand higher and higher levels of education,” he said.

Ross and Spellings noted the appointments of House Majority Leader John Bell and Sen. Gladys Robinson, D-Guilford, to the commission. Former Rep. John Fraley, R-Iredell, is now a member of the Board of Governors and is also among the members.

Bell told WRAL News last week that any shift in appointment powers to the governor is likely to be rejected by legislators.

But “if this is about putting politics aside and improving higher education in North Carolina, I’m always willing to listen and have an honest discussion about how we can move our state forward,” he said (4).

Spellings noted that Cooper made it clear that any changes in appointment powers recommended by the commission should take effect after he steps down in early 2025. 

The goal is “not a power grab by an individual,” she said.


ISSUES

Some – including members of the Board of Governors – have raised questions about whether the Board has the proper demographic and geographic representation. Others have questioned the appointment of several lobbyists, given that their livelihood depends on state legislators.

In recent years, one or more BOG members have themselves sought university chancellorships. Two trustees at one university tried to intervene in and influence a student government election. Others have tried to influence university hiring and contract decisions.

Ross said one thing the commission will try to define is, “What is the appropriate role of governing bodies? What are their responsibilities versus those of administrators?

“We need to be clear about who has what responsibilities,” he said.

Others say the governing boards have become overly political. Though politics has always been a part of board appointments, Ross said, “Are there ways we can minimize the political influence in the University?”

Spellings said board members also need to understand and respect shared governance between the faculty and administrators, which can affect whether universities remain accredited. 

The University is competing with other states for students, faculty and staff.

“We need the players to play their right and proper role and understand what that is,” Spellings said. “It’s easy to stay in your lane if you know what your lane is.”

Ross said many appointees to university boards have experience in business, but not necessarily in higher-education governance. “Part of it is education,” he said. “That’s true of any board you join, whether it’s higher education or a corporate board.”

Board members also need to show self-discipline, Ross said. “If a board member gets out of line, I think it’s incumbent on the other board members to step up and say, ‘That’s out of line,’” he said. “And I think they can do that.”

1. In particular, Ross referenced extensive research by the NC Center for Public Policy Research: https://nccppr.org/wp-content/uploads/research_reports/THE_STATE_WIDE_UNC_BOARD_OF_GOVERNORS.pdf. 
2. https://governor.nc.gov/news/press-releases/2022/11/01/governor-cooper-signs-executive-order-establishing-commission-future-public-universities-north. 
3. https://governor.nc.gov/news/press-releases/2022/11/23/governor-cooper-announces-members-commission-governance-public-universities-north-carolina.
4. https://www.wral.com/cooper-rounds-out-unc-governance-task-force/20594320/.
Other Must-Read News:

As we consider the task that the newly appointed governance commission has before it, it is worth revisiting a September 2021 Daily Tarheel article where they describe how UNC System governance has changed. Their news article is entitled; “Breaking down the power structure and history of the UNC Board of Trustees”.  It is very well done and gives insight into the challenge that the commission faces.  It also provides examples of some of the governance related problems that Carolina is experiencing.  Our very own Dr. Mimi Chapman is quoted in this excellent post and reading it will remind you of why the Coalition for Carolina came to be.  

Click the link below for a link to the Daily Tarheel Piece:
 
Daily Tarheel


Dr. Mimi Chapman is also quoted in a recent Chronicle of Higher Education piece entitled; “The Apolitical University”. This article asks; “Should institutions remain neutral on controversial issues? Is that even possible?”  The author, Adrienne Lu, starts out with a description of how Carolina’s Dr. Barbara K. Rimer posted a statement in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and received an immediate response from some who felt that her statement crossed a line. The author goes on to explore how speech is being handled on campuses and describes how many campuses have embraced the Kalven Report. Dr Chapman expresses her desire that adoption of the Kalven Report at Carolina will not be just  “a mechanism … for muzzling administrators but rather a mechanism for allowing faculty to bring their expertise, knowledge, and practice on the issues of the day to the public square.”  

Read the full Chronicle of Higher Education article by clicking the link below:
 
Chronicle of Higher Education

FIVE BILLION DOLLARS!

Posted on

What a milestone!

We’re absolutely delighted that more than 215,000 people who love and want to support Carolina students, faculty, research, and financial aid were motivated to contribute to the Campaign for Carolina.  Because of their generosity, Carolina has raised an eyepopping FIVE BILLION DOLLARS with a month to go in the fundraising campaign!

The press coverage of this milestone achievement has been glowing and well deserved.  Here’s a sample of what they’re saying:

  • News and Observer –  “The milestone makes UNC the first university, public or private, in the South to raise $5 billion in a single campaign. UNC joins five other public universities, and becomes one of 16 universities total, in the country in reaching that amount. The university described the milestone in a news release as one of ‘the most successful efforts ever in higher education.’”

This achievement is a much-needed boost of encouragement for our university leadership, faculty, and staff at a time when they’ve been bruised by headlines highlighting issues related to university governance and overreach.  This kind of support from those who love Carolina demonstrates tremendous confidence in the chancellor, administrators, faculty and staff.  It also helps to address some of the challenges the university has faced as a result of funding cuts over the past decade.  On a per student funding basis, the UNC system is still not back to pre-recession (2008) levels. (“The state spent $2,900 less per student in the University of North Carolina System in 2020-21 than it did in 2006-07, when adjusted for inflation.”)

Chancellor Guskiewicz expressed his gratitude in a press release saying; “I am immensely grateful for the community of donors and volunteers who have supported us on this journey….” Their generosity represents a strong affirmation of our mission of teaching, research and service. Reaching this milestone ensures that Carolina will continue to prepare generations of students and scholars to solve the grand challenges of our time.”

While we are absolutely delighted at this achievement, we are mindful that this is “once in a generation” kind of fund raising. Carolina remains a public university created for all the people of North Carolina and our sustainability is dependent on taxpayer support administered through the General Assembly.  In a previous post we pointed out how private fundraising has helped keep Carolina as affordable and accessible as possible, but private fundraising is not a substitute for consistent, sufficient, reliable state support. 

In this Thanksgiving season, we are grateful for the generosity of our Carolina community.   We have come together to support our great university at an unprecedented level at a critical time.  This fundraising vote of confidence speaks volumes. Thank you to all who supported, and will support, this effort.

UNC Performance Based Funding

Posted on

The UNC System Board of Governors is looking to implement a new performance-based funding model that has potentially negatively effects on research-intensive schools and lower-income students.  They are also considering raising the out-of-state cap for some system schools, which have faced enrolment declines, but not for Carolina. These changes need more public attention and comment.  They are going to be considered for implementation at the November 16 – 17 meeting.

According to a WUNC article, the new funding formula prioritizes graduating in-state students in four years and with lower levels of debt. This is a great goal, but should it be a metric for allocating funds, especially when there are sound reasons for certain students to take longer to graduate?  These priorities align with the UNC System’s strategic goals, according UNC System President Peter Hans.   Board of Governors member Lee Roberts said, “UNC System universities would lose a total of $62 million in state funding based on this year’s enrollment. Under the new model, they would lose $36 million. But Lee also admits that  “13 schools do better under the performance funding model than under the old enrollment model, two schools do slightly worse.” He did not specify which institutions would do worse.  

Schools being rewarded for graduating students in four years — regardless of the student’s chosen fields of study, changes in major, need to work to pay for college, unexpected personal concerns, etc. and being rewarded when students graduate with less debt sounds good, but can be problematic. Both of these changes can make it harder for first generation or lower income students to attend and graduate from more expensive schools like Carolina and State. It also makes it challenging when students shift fields of study due to exposure to a larger world view one experiences with higher education. We recently learned of a real-world example of how a students seeking to change his major was negatively impacted:

John Doe entered Carolina as a freshman enthusiastic about majoring in economics. Between sophomore and junior years, he became very excited about computer science and wanted to change his major.  (This type of exploration, discovery and enlightenment is a good thing and one of the reasons parents send their children to college.) Because he had to take two prerequisites courses, which were not offered the same semester, he couldn’t dive into his new major until senior year.  He would need two more courses to earn enough credits to major in computer science, thus requiring him an additional semester beyond four years. Because he had enough credits to earn an economics major and had completed General College requirements, UNC told him he had to graduate in May with an economics major and meet the four-year graduation goal.  It is wrong to deny this, or any, student the ability to major in their desired field because the university is afraid of losing funding when it is the student who chooses to take more than four years to graduate. 

As for the model providing the schools an incentive to limit the debt students have upon graduating, Carolina is already focused on this and Carolina student debt is lower than the state average. Setting aside the fact that some of the increased debt load is a result of reduced state per-student funding over the years, less debt is a good thing and should be pursued. But, when students run into unexpected life changes, desire to change their major and spend more time in school, or even choose to attend a “stretch” school that requires them to borrow a little more, the school should not be punished with funding cuts.

As for the Board of Governors indicating that some schools will fare worse with the new funding model, while others will do better; why move forward without public transparency on exactly how each school is going to be affected? 

One of the ways schools can, potentially, get around the punitive impact of the proposed funding model is to raise more funds from non-public sources.  Carolina has proven to be very successful at this, however, the UNC Board of Trustees wants to reduce the amount of funding given to the development office. Why the handcuffs?

Why is the new funding model being considered? Historically funding has been based on enrollment and there has been a decline in enrollment across the country and the UNC system. (Carolina has not experienced such a decline.)  The decline in college enrollment was projected after the great recession of 2007-2008.  The birth rate declined during this period as people put off having children.  When the recession was over, the birth rate did not recover.  As a result, analysts began to warn colleges to prepare for enrollment declines projected to start around 2025.  According to their projections, after 2025, some college consolidations and closures could be expected to occur across the country as a result of fewer college-aged students in the population.  Unfortunately, the Covid-19 pandemic was not anticipated in those projections and has only accelerated enrollment declines. So, we are experiencing the projected decline three years earlier and at a rate higher than expected. We are not disagreeing with the idea of altering the funding model. We just think the metrics chosen are ill-advised and also that they need more public awareness.

Randy Woodson, Chancellor of NCSU responded to the proposed funding changes saying; “This is probably the most critical decision this board will make in a decade, because it has the impact of how the campuses operate for years into the future….I’ve got a CFO that’s been the CFO of three institutions in the [UNC] System, and he’s struggling with this.”

Follow this link to read WUNC’s entire analysis

Other News:

“The Public School Forum of North Carolina has released the 2022 North Carolina Education Primer, which serves as a fact-based guide to public education in North Carolina. The Primer provides a comprehensive overview of how education policy is made, along with the current state of public education and the policies guiding it. The Forum produces this guide in order to inform current policymakers, candidates for public office, and voters.

Education policy involves a wide range of interconnected issues such as school finance and facilities, accountability and assessment, technology, teachers and so much more. In order to make well-informed and evidence-based decisions, policymakers and voters face the challenge of understanding complex educational issues.”

In a piece entitled The Myth of Political Neutrality, Volt asks the question; “As higher ed becomes increasingly politicized, can college and university presidents afford to remain silent?”