Across the UNC System, campuses face a crisis of confidence

When members of N.C. State University’s College of Education faculty voted to express “no confidence” in the university’s chancellor and provost last weekend, it was a first in the university’s history. But the largely symbolic vote reflects greater tensions on campuses across the UNC System, as faculty say they feel locked out of high level decision-making by administrators and political appointees.

Faculty say they are increasingly concerned about academic freedom, shared governance and the direction of the system. As chancellor searches begin under a new process that diminishes the faculty’s representation in that key decision-making, faculty votes to criticize, censure or express lost confidence in campus leaders have become more common in the last few years, as those conflicts intensify.

“The vote at N.C. State may be a unique example,” said Wade Maki, chair of the system-wide UNC Faculty Assembly. “But I think we have seen similar votes at other campuses over the last few years and I do think it is, to some degree, reflective of pressures and tensions everyone in higher education is feeling right now.”

The vote at N.C. State rebuked university leadership for poor communication over investigations into Poe Hall, a campus building contaminated with cancer-causing chemicals and the cluster of cancer cases among those who have worked there. With 99 full-time faculty in the college eligible to vote, 65 voted online last weekend. They passed motions of “no confidence” in Chancellor Randy Woodson by 54% and in Provost Warwick Arden by 58%. A similar motion on College of Education Dean Paola Sztajn failed with 49%.

“It is clear from this vote that faculty are divided,” read a statement released with the results. “We view our role as members of the faculty who can help facilitate this process and work towards actionable measures that will restore confidence and community within the College of Education.”

The vote was the first successful expression of “no confidence” in a chancellor since faculty at Appalachian State University similarly rebuked Chancellor Sheri Everts in 2020. Faculty there opposed Everts’s decision to return to in-person instruction and on-campus living in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Last month the Faculty Senate at UNCG voted to censure Chancellor Frank Gilliam and provost Debbie Storrs amid ongoing tensions over the process administrators are using to cut programs at the university. Maki, a lecturer in Philosophy at UNCG, had problems with that vote but said it was better than a vote of “no confidence,” which faculty members did discuss.

“That’s the nuclear option,” Maki said. “And you have to ask yourself if it’s worth it.”

 Only a campus-level board of trustees can initiate the actual removal of a chancellor; the UNC System’s Board of Governors ultimately decides on a dismissal. Both boards are composed of political appointees, which makes faculty votes on university leadership decisions symbolic. But they can, Maki said, have real impacts on the relationship between faculty and administration.

“The thing about ‘no confidence’ votes is, that’s not ‘you have to sleep on the couch tonight’ –   it’s a divorce,” Maki said. “You don’t come back the next week after a ‘no confidence’ vote and say, ‘Okay, now we have some confidence.’ You are ending a relationship. You are burning a bridge. And in faculty leadership, what I advise all faculty leaders is just be very careful about when you use that, because you only get to use that one time.”

Building and burning bridges

The votes at App State in 2020 and UNCG just last month didn’t change the administration’s behavior. Everts proceeded with a COVID plan opposed by faculty and Gilliam went through with eliminating all 20 programs through a process criticized by faculty, students and alumni.

In both cases, the chancellors hewed more closely to the will of the system’s Board of Governors than the sentiments of students, faculty and staff. Both chancellors also reacted to the “no confidence” votes by questioning their legitimacy and criticizing the faculty groups initiating them.

But at N.C. State, Woodson, one of the UNC System’s longest serving and most well-regarded chancellors, had a very different reaction.

In an open letter after the faculty “no confidence” votes this week, Woodson assured faculty he and his administration are being as transparent as they can. While he said he and the provost were ‘disappointed’ in the votes, he didn’t question or diminish faculty opinions. Woodson expressed confidence in the ongoing investigation, but he didn’t leave it there.

“Regardless, I hear your concerns, and I want to reassure you that we’ll be reaching out more frequently,” Woodson wrote. “ Even if just to provide an update that we’re waiting for more results and information from our consultants. We’ll also continue to provide updates on our website.”

“Moving forward, if you feel confident in one thing, I hope it’s the fact that the university remains committed to doing the right things to ensure this is a safe place to work, learn and live,” Woodson wrote. “Know that we hear your concerns, and we’ll do all that we can to earn and keep your trust.”

That sort of reaction isn’t guaranteed, Maki said.

“What I’ve always said is, as faculty we’re better off building bridges than burning bridges,” Maki said. “If we’re going to bridge some of these divides between faculty and administration or the board of governors, we have to do it carefully.”

The specifics around faculty votes opposing campus leadership are important, Maki said. But they also indicate a growing faculty discontent that is more about the difference in perspective, culture and values with political appointees on governing boards and the chancellors they choose. 

“We have a major disconnect between sort of the traditional faculty culture and the culture that the members of the board or legislature are coming from,” Maki said. “As you know, I don’t think there’s a single member of the Board of Governors that has ever been a faculty member. And I’m not even sure any have been in university administration before they were on the board, so you’re going to experience those kinds of disconnects.”

David Rice, executive director of Public Ed Works, spoke to the pressure chancellors feel from all sides in an interview this week with NC Newsline.

“The first thing people need to recognize is how many constituencies chancellors have to,” Rice said. “First and foremost the students. But also very important, the faculty, alumni, governing boards at both the campus and system level. So they are having to juggle a whole lot of personalities, frankly. So you need to appreciate that.”

On Thursday former UNC System Presidents Tom Ross and Margaret Spelling will come together for an online discussion of potential system reforms that could make the UNC Board of Governors more diverse and concentrate less power in the hands of political appointees. The discussion, moderated by former UNC-Chapel Hill Chancellor Holden Thorp, is likely to touch on the tensions and disconnects leading to faculty discontent with campus leadership.

Those disconnects – both cultural and political – extend to current searches to find new chancellors at four UNC System campuses, Maki said.

New leaders, new process

The appointment of Darrell Allison as chancellor at Fayetteville State University in 2021 and December’s appointment of Lee Roberts as interim chancellor at UNC-Chapel Hill symbolize those disconnects for faculty. Both men were members of the UNC Board of Governors who stepped down to assume campus leadership positions. Neither had a background in academia or administrative experience at the university level. Faculty prefer that chancellors have those qualifications and are skeptical of political appointees moving into university leadership. But UNC System President Peter Hans and the Board of Governors see appointing the board’s own members as ideal.

“We now have Chapel Hill as a sort of experiment,” Maki said. “We’ve had other examples, at FSU for instance. But if a non-academic Chancellor can succeed at the flagship of one of the biggest and best university systems in the country, that really pushes the argument in a certain direction in terms of these national arguments.”

This week Hans announced the members of the UNC-Chapel Hill chancellor search committee. Faculty across the campus noticed and pushed back on the diminished voice of faculty on the committee, pointing out that the search committee who found former Chancellor Carol Folt included five faculty members and the committee that led to the hire of former Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz included eight.

This time, under changes to the process passed by the board of governors last May, there are just two faculty members on the search committee. The voices of political appointees have been amplified, with three trustees, two members of the board of governors and Hans himself on the committee.

The full committee includes 13 people:

• Cristy Page, professor and executive dean, UNC School of Medicine and chief academic officer of UNC Health, chair of the search advisory committee
• Kellie Hunt Blue, member of the UNC Board of Governors
• Jennifer Evans , member of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees
• Christopher Everett, UNC-Chapel Hill student body president
• Veronica Mora Flaspoehler, president of the UNC General Alumni Association
• Frank Gilliam, chancellor of UNC Greensboro
• Peter Hans, UNC System president
• Beth Moracco, chair of the UNC-Chapel Hill faculty
• Katie Musgrove, chair of the Employee Forum
• Jim Phillips Jr., partner at Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard
• John Preyer, chair of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees
• Randy Ramsey, chair of the UNC Board of Governors
• Malcolm Turner, vice chair of the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees

While the most high profile, the UNC-Chapel Hill chancellor search is just one of four now unfolding across the system. The other three are all historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) –  N.C. A&T State University, Winston-Salem State University and N.C. Central University.

Faculty at each of those campuses have bristled at the revised search process they say puts more power in the hands of political appointees at every step of the process.

“I think this process the board of governors has come up with is indicative, or part of a trend of more centralization in the system office for searches of whatever sort,” said Rice, director of Public Ed Works.

That trend isn’t limited to chancellor searches, Rice said.

“There have been other instances where the board of governors is asserting its control over the individual campuses,” Rice said.

Faculty are increasingly uncomfortable with that, Maki said, as major changes including the sort of program evaluations and eliminations seen recently at UNCG become common across the system.

“I think we’ve seen members of the board of governors say they believe UNCG is a leader on this,” Maki said.

“It is certainly the case that they have changed Chancellor searches to be more centralized at the system and Board of Governors level than at the campus level,” Maki said. “And that’s difficult for faculty leadership, because anybody in faculty leadership is trying to find ways to bridge these divides.”

“On some things, like chancellor searches, there are now fewer faculty involved,” Maki said. “On other things, and certainly at the Faculty Assembly level, we’re been more involved in policy decisions. But as we continue to see enrollment and financial and performance pressures, I think the pressure builds and we’ll see more of these faculty votes on more issues as that continues.”

The UNC System Board of Governors will hold committee and full board meetings on February 28 and 29. Many of the underlying issues driving tension between faculty, administration and UNC System leadership will be discussed.