The Faculty Executive Committee approved the following statement at its regular meeting on Monday, July 29, 2013:
Steven Bachenheimer, Michael Gerhardt, and Laurie Maffly-Kipp (in absentia), join with the following current and former members of the UNC Faculty Executive Committee to express our full support for Jan Boxill throughout her leadership as Chair of the Faculty. We have complete confidence in her judgment and integrity.
Signed:
Steven Bachenheimer (Microbiology and Immunology)
Michael Gerhardt (Law)
Laurie Maffly-Kipp (Religious Studies)
Mimi Chapman (Social Work)
Gregory P. Copenhaver (Biology)
Jean DeSaix (Biology)
Louise Dolan (Physics)
Jo Anne Earp (Public Health)
Joseph Ferrell (Secretary of the Faculty, School of Government)
Kevin Guskiewicz (Exercise and Sports Science)
Susan Irons (English and Comparative Literature)
Tim McMillan (African, African American, and Diaspora Studies)
Suchi Mohanty (University Libraries)
Leslie Parise (Biochemistry)
Shielda Rodgers (Nursing)
Vin Steponaitis (Anthropology)
4 Responses to “Faculty Executive Committee issues statement in support of Jan Boxill”
UNC Professors Issue Statement Of Support For Jan Boxill - Chapelboro.com
[…] HILL – UNC’s Faculty Executive Committee issued a statement Monday supporting Jan Boxill, the faculty chairwoman for the University. It was revealed last week […]
Thomas Ricketts
I cannot join in this statement of support as I feel I do not have enough information. I felt that Ms. Boxill’s reactions to some very troubling happenings in South Building, especially the incidents involving the AHEC planes and their use was not sufficient. In the case of the athletic department issues, I also feel that we, the faculty, have not been given the full account of what has and is going on. I do not feel that the faculty have pursued their responsibility in these matters because the leadership is responding with un-critical allegiance to the administration. We do not really have much say in things, do we?
David Pike
I can only second Tom Ricketts comments – this, yes, ATHLETICS scandal and the administration’s reactions to it (as well as the faculty council’s) point to deep-seated, serious problems here that were not addressed, and aren’t going to be addressed. Regular faculty, unfortunately, are in no real position to affect the outcome of this scandal (which is what it is); the faculty council falls into line behind the administration, and that’s largely the ball game. I’ve never been in many years here an unqualified supporter of what the N&O writes about UNC-CH, but in this case, I hope they keep digging. But I don’t think it will make a difference here. The administration (and faculty council) has decided, “We are moving on.” I think Prof. Michael Hunt, in his commentary in the N&O some weeks ago, got the situation right. Everyone should read what he wrote. I also wonder, does no one care about how many hundreds of thousands of dollars South Building spent on a PR firm to give Thorp advice on his one-line comments about the scandal? I don’t think the previous chancellor is in any way at fault for the athletics scandal, just for the weak-kneed “investigation’; but he WAS responsible for the Matt Kupec affair. For him these things ended as they usually do for administrators – H. Thorp moved on to a new job since being an administrator is what he wants to be. I wonder why?
David Pike
It occurred to me to provide any possible readers of this site a link to Michael Hunt’s N&O commentary from last February. He nailed it:
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/02/18/2690101/at-unc-ch-deficits-of-democracy.html
He also commented upon former Chancellor Moeser’s disturbing comments:
http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/05/20/2906173/ex-chancellor-moeser-criticizes.html
ex-Chancellor Moeser’s remarks reflect the kinds of attitudes, sadly, that are at the heart of the problems here and also underscore the reasons why they will not be addressed. (I have been at UNC-CH for 32 years; these things don’t change, and won’t.)