October 5, 2012
Meeting of the Faculty Council
Friday, October 5, 2012
Hitchcock Multipurpose Room
Sonja Haynes Stone Center for Black Culture and History
Chancellor Holden Thorp and Professor Jan Boxill, Chair of the Faculty, presiding
Twitter hashtag: #FacCouncil
3:00 Chancellor’s Remarks and Question Period
- Chancellor Holden Thorp
3:20 Provost’s Remarks and Question Period
- Provost Bruce Carney
3:25 Chair of the Faculty’s Remarks and Question Period
- Chair of the Faculty Jan Boxill
3:35 Report on the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions
- Prof. Steve Bachenheimer, Chair, UNC-CH Faculty Assembly Delegation
- Resolution 2012-14. On the UNC Strategic Plan (Presented by the Faculty Assembly Delegation)
- Background reading:
- News release including the membership of the Advisory Committee
- Strategic Planning Overview and Charge document, from UNC General Administration (date 9/25/2012)
- UNC: Our Time, Our Future, strategic planning working paper (date 9/2012)
3:45 Educational Policy Committee Resolutions
- Prof. Theresa Raphael-Grimm, Chair, Educational Policy Committee
- Resolution 2012-11. On Guidelines for Course Syllabi. [revised, marked-up version]
- Resolution 2012-11. On Guidelines for Course Syllabi. [revised version, clean, for easy reading]
- Resolution 2012-12. On Revising the Regulation Concerning Independent Studies for Credit.
- Background reading: Report of the Independent Study Task Force, 10 April 2012 (See Appendix A, “Independent Study Definitions”)
4:15 Invited Guest: Dr. Taffye Benson Clayton, Vice Provost for Diversity and Multicultural Affairs
4:25 Open Discussion
4:40 Closed Session
- 2013 Distinguished Alumnus/a Award Nominees [Faculty Council members log in with ONYEN and password]
- 2013 Honorary Degree Nominee [Faculty Council members log in with ONYEN and password]
- Presented on behalf of the Honorary Degrees and Special Awards Committee by Prof. Joseph Ferrell
Journal of Proceedings of the Faculty Council
October 5, 2012
The Faculty Council of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill convened October 5, 2012, at 3:00 p.m. in the Hitchcock Multipurpose Room of the Sonja Haynes Stone Center for Black Culture and History.
The following 62 Council members attended: Bachenheimer, Balaban, Bhardwaj, Boettiger Cooney, Boulton, Boxill, Brice, Bulik, Bunch, Cavin, Chambers, Chen, Chenault, Copenhaver, Eaker-Rich, Earp, Engel, Ferrell, Garbin, Gerhardt, Gilland, Grabowski, Guskiewicz, Hackman, Hill, Hirsch, Hodges, Ives, Jones, Joyner, Kang, Koomen, Kramer, Kurtz-Costes, Lee, Leonard, Lund, Maffly-Kipp, Mayer, Mayer-Davis, McMillan, Milano, Miller, Moracco, Moreton, O’Shaughnessey, Parker, Parreiras, Paul, Persky, Pertsova, Reiter, Renner, Schoenbach, Spagnoli, Swogger, Wang, Waterhouse, Watson, Watson, Webster-Cyriaque, and You.
Call to Order
Chancellor Holden Thorp called the Council to order at 3:00 p.m.
Chancellor’s Remarks and Question Period
The chancellor thanked the faculty for their support at the rally on Polk Place in reaction to his resignation announcement. He said the event was one of the highlights of his life and he is humbled to serve as chancellor and looks forward to resuming his faculty position next year. He expressed confidence that the reforms now being implemented will restore integrity in athletics and academics.
The chancellor spoke of the recent visit by Dr. Hunter Rawlings, the President of the American Association of Universities, who delivered an address on the challenges of public higher education in the 21st century. Dr. Rawlings identified five such challenges: the need for increased financial support from state governments; the need to ameliorate the tensions that “flagship” institutions often experience in relationships with systems such as General Administration; the growing questioning of the value of a liberal arts education; the increasing complexity of large institutions; and the proper role of intercollegiate athletics in the life of the institution.
The chancellor observed that state support is a problem for Carolina, but that we are still in relatively good shape in comparison to many of our public peers. We receive $448 million each year in state appropriations, which is about 18 percent of the total budget. That number is less than in previous years, but it is a much more than our peers around the country.
The issue of tensions between system schools and flagships seem to be less of a problem here than elsewhere, the chancellor said. He believes that the 17 institutions in the UNC System enjoy a collegial relationship. The chancellor reiterated his confidence in a liberal arts curriculum, and said emphatically that a liberal arts education is what has differentiated America in the way we have built our democracy and our economy. It is the job of the university to impart the intellectual skills that our students need for jobs that don’t yet exist, he said.
Chancellor Thorp acknowledged that universities are becoming more complex, a trend often characterized as the “corporatization” of the university. To him, that means that chancellors everywhere are charged with running not only academic enterprises, but also with managing big hospitals, investments, police departments and hotels. He believes that Carolina has done well at managing these operations. He expressed confidence in Karol Gray who was recently joined the administration as Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration and noted her progress on labor relations on the campus.
Finally the chancellor agreed that there are challenges posed by intercollegiate athletics and noted that recent events have triggered many conversations about the role of intercollegiate athletics in the life of the university. He said that these discussions are difficult, but that he is optimistic that the measures we have taken will move us in the right direction.
The chancellor concluded his remarks by expressing his support for the resolution on course syllabi placed on today’s agenda by the Educational Policy Committee. He said that he understands the misgivings expressed by some members of the Council at the last meeting, but he is persuaded that the measure is needed.
Provost Bruce Carney reminded the faculty about his recent announcement inviting applications for Junior Faculty Competitive Awards and said that he is announcing Senior Faculty Research Leaves today.
He said his office has received enrollment projections for the coming year. There are still too many large course sections and not enough small ones, but he was confident that we will make progress on increasing the number of small sections with this year’s tuition revenues. The provost concluded by noting that UNC’s ranking in The London Times of the best universities in the world improved from 43rd to 42nd. He thought this was outstanding progress given the tough financial times we have weathered recently.
Chair of the Faculty’s Remarks and Question Period
The Chair of the Faculty identified four areas that are integral for the success of the university over the next year: 1) the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions, 2) the search for chancellor, 3) the search for a new provost, and 4) the Implementation of the recommendations of the Faculty Executive Subcommittee report on athletics. (See Appendix A.)
Report on the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions
Prof. Steve Bachenheimer (Microbiology and Immunology), UNC-CH Faculty Assembly Delegation Chair, gave an overview of the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions.
He began by recalling the planning process initiated by President Erskine Bowles entitled UNC Tomorrow and pointed out that the current initiative is part of a standard planning process that the Board of Governors has mandated to take place every five years.
Prof. Bachenheimer spoke to the composition of the Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions, a topic that has been much discussed in the press and around campus. He noted that there are 31 members involved. Eight members hold positions General Administration or are otherwise directly involved in governance of the UNC System; three are political leaders; ten are business leaders; ten are from the academy as either faculty or chancellors; one member represents the System staff; and one member is a student. He contrasted this composition with the UNC Tomorrow Committee which had 25 participants: ten from the Board of Governors; ten were affiliated with the university as faculty or administrators; nine who were business leaders; and one student. In the UNC Tomorrow process, the North Carolina Scholars Council was created to generate faculty input. The Council sponsored discussions at each constituent institution. Prof. Bachenheimer pointed out that the UNC Tomorrow process was initiated early enough to allow a more leisurely time frame. In contrast, the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions is scheduled to complete their process by January before the legislature meets.
Chancellor Thorp commented that one major issue before the Strategic Directions Committee is the appropriate level of degree attainment that North Carolina should be seeking for its citizens. He said that we want as many people as possible to get a college degree, but we must balance that against our capacity to produce graduates with degrees that are of the quality we have come to expect. There are practical considerations that will influence how many students will be able to complete a college degree program.
Prof. Bachenheimer acknowledged that some faculty members are concerned that the membership of the committee is not sufficiently representative. He said that he believes the faculty point of view will be well argued, and that the outcomes will be positive.
Referring to the resolution on this subject that has been placed on the Agenda by the Faculty Assembly Delegation, Prof. Deb Stroman (Exercise and Sports Science) asked why the resolution differs from similar resolutions being considered by other faculty senates in the System. Specifically, she thought we should be asking that more faculty members be added to the committee.
Prof. Victor Schoenbach (Public Health) observed that the content of the document that the Strategic Planning Committee produces will be important, but he thought that who participates in developing it will be just as important. The composition suggests that President Ross was trying to involve people in a position to influence public policy in the educational area, which may serve the goal of furthering the University as much as the actual content of the report. Prof. Bachenheimer said that he hopes that will be the case.
Prof. Lloyd Kramer (History) said that he hopes that Chancellor Thorp will reiterate for the Committee his earlier remarks about the value of a liberal arts education.
Resolution 2012-14. On the UNC Strategic Plan
It was moved and seconded that the Rules of Procedure of the Faculty Council be suspended to allow consideration of a resolution that had not been circulated in advance. The motion was adopted.
Prof. Boxill laid before the Council a resolution On the UNC Strategic Plan, submitted by the Faculty Assembly Delegation.
Responding to an earlier question as to why the resolution does not expressly request the addition of more faculty members to the planning committee, Prof. Ferrell explained that he had been asked to draft the resolution on very short notice. He said that he had chosen to paraphrase a similar resolution adopted by the UNC Faculty Assembly.
Prof. Sherryl Kleinman (Sociology) moved to amend the resolution by inserting the following: “Be it further resolved that, to fully embrace the University of North Carolina’s mission to ‘discover, create, transmit, and apply knowledge to address the needs of individuals and society,’ the faculty of UNC-Chapel Hill request that the membership of the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions be expanded to include faculty representation from this university and from the other UNC campuses.”
Prof. Vic Schoenbach asked if that wording means adding 16 faculty members as representatives from all the institutions in the UNC System. Prof. Sherryl Kleinman said that is the intent.
Prof. Diane Leonard (English and Comparative Literature) reported that the UNC-CH Chapter of the AAUP supports the amendment.
Prof. Harry Watson (History) moved to delete the word “the” in the last line of the amendment. The amendment was adopted.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted without dissent, and is ordered enrolled as Resolution 2012-13. (See Appendix B.)
Educational Policy Committee Resolutions
Prof. Theresa Raphael-Grimm (Nursing) laid before a resolution On Revising the Regulation Concerning Independent Studies for Credit. (See Appendix D.)
The resolution passed without dissent and is ordered enrolled as Resolution 2012-12.
Prof. Theresa Raphael-Grimm laid before the Council a resolution On Guidelines for Course Syllabi. She explained that a subcommittee of the Educational Policy Committee had meet for a year to develop this syllabus resolution. Prof. Raphael-Grimm said that in light of the discussion at the September 7, 2012, Faculty Council meeting, the Educational Policy Committee had redrafted the resolution. One of the changes addresses the concern about whether a syllabus constitutes a contract with students in the course. She pointed out that the version of the resolution now before the Council quotes language from the Undergraduate Bulletin that negates that claim.
Prof. Gregory Copenhaver (Biology) said that last month he was critical of the resolution, but that he now understands that it enhances transparency and it has his full support.
Prof. Cal Lee (Information and Library Science) moved to amend by inserting before the words “four years” the words “at least”, to the end that the resolution would require syllabi to retained for “at least four years.” The amendment was adopted.
Prof. Kristin Reiter (Public Health) asked if syllabi could be provided to students either on paper and online. Prof. Theresa Raphael-Grimm responded that either on paper or electronically would satisfy the requirement.
Prof. Lloyd Kramer asked who in the department should collect the syllabus and who would enforce the policy. Prof. Theresa Raphael-Grimm said that the School of Nursing usually emails faculty to submit syllabi and occasionally there is an audit done. Prof. Ferrell (Government) said that the details of administration would be up to the departments.
Prof. Beth Moracco (Maternal & Child Health) asked if the requirement would hold for both graduate and undergraduate courses. Dean Bobbi Owen (Arts & Sciences) replied that it would apply to both. Prof. Moracco pointed out that the last sentence in the resolution about final exams may not apply to graduate courses, to which Dean Owen agreed.
The resolution, as amended, was adopted without dissent and is ordered enrolled as Resolution 2011-11. See Appendix C.
Invited Guest: Taffye Benson Clayton, Vice Provost for Diversity and Multicultural Affairs
Vice Provost Taffye Clayton presented an overview of the new structure of the Office of Diversity and Multicultural Affairs and outlined opportunities for Carolina to take the lead in promoting diversity and recognizing challenges faced by underrepresented minority groups. (See Appendix E.)
Prof. Steve Bachenheimer (Microbiology and Immunology) asked about the potential impact of Fisher v. University of Texas on Diversity and Multicultural Affairs programming. Dr. Clayton said that people who are engaged in diversity work are following this litigation closely. She said that the university has recruitment programs that have been successful at attracting a diverse pool of applicants.
Vice Provost for Enrollment and Undergraduate Admissions Steve Farmer replied that the Fisher case worries the administration greatly. The university filed an amicus brief about the value of diversity in admissions for higher education.
Prof. Chris Jones (Mathematics) asked about partnerships with other North Carolina universities to addressing diversity issues nationally. Dr. Clayton explained that there are already efforts taking place state-wide to increase diversity in public universities in North Carolina. The National Association of Chief Diversity Officers in Higher Education is one of those organizations.
Prof. Charlotte Boettiger (Psychology) asked about the black minority male achievement gap and whether it is higher for athletes than non-athletes. Prof. Joy Renner (Allied Health) replied that African American males who are athletes have higher graduation rates than non-athletes.
Prof. Jan Boxill opened the floor for discussion.
Prof. Deb Stroman (Exercise and Sports Science) asked whether there were plans to review the Naval Science class identified in a recent News and Observer article as a class where athletes clustered. Chancellor Thorp responded that there is no reason to think there was anything wrong with the class in question.
The Faculty Council went into closed session to consider nominees for awards and distinctions.
On behalf of the Committee on Honorary Degrees and Special Awards, Prof. Ferrell presented five nominees for Distinguished Alumnus and Distinguished Alumna Awards to be presented at the University Day Convocation on October 12, 2013. He also presented a recommendation for the award of an honorary degree to the 2013 Commencement speaker. Each nominee was approved and will be recommended to the Board of Trustees for final approval.
The Council returned to open session. Having completed its business, the Faculty Council adjourned at 5:00 pm.
Joseph S. Ferrell
Secretary of the Faculty
Chair of the Faculty Remarks
Indeed it is going to be a pivotal year for the university and faculty governance must play a large role in the decisions that will affect all of us and given what we have seen in the last few weeks I really believe we are up to the task. I want to thank you all for coming out on such short notice to support Chancellor Thorp.
I can’t help but wonder had we done so earlier whether his decision might have been different. But I think that in accepting his decision, we have an opportunity to work with him during these next 8 months to make significant changes that will keep this University the beacon on the hill. The faculty meeting and the rally were impressive demonstrations of support, and they give me hope that we can accomplish a great deal together. We need to keep this energy and interest in working together to define who we are and who we want to be.
One way to retain our solidarity, collegiality, and visibility is to participate in the University Day processional next Friday. We’ll gather at 10:30 am at the Old Well.
Meanwhile, as the year rolls on, four things are pivotal to our success:
1. UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions—Blue Ribbon Panel
2. The Search for Chancellor
3. The Search for a new Provost
4. The Implementation of the FEC Sub-committee report
1. Blue Ribbon Panel:
Faculty, staff and students have been meeting to determine how we might best affect the process. The Faculty Assembly discussed the issues in their meetings 2 weeks ago; Steve Bachenheimer, chair of our delegation, will elaborate on this after my remarks. There seem to be 2 main concerns: first that the process is moving so quickly and second, that there is little faculty input with only one faculty member on the panel—the Chair of the Faculty Assembly. The panel says they want faculty, staff, and student input, but how will that be possible, when they are meeting only once a month? What is the role of faculty in this process? The chancellor is on the panel and has spoken about his role, but there remains concern. The Faculty Executive Committee will meet on Monday to discuss just how we might have input. This is critical for us, and vital to the future of this University, as it will determine the direction of higher education in North Carolina.
2. Search for the new chancellor
For us, this is even more critical. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill faces many challenges, but none more pressing than choosing its next chancellor.
We need to have a clear sense of what we want in the next chancellor. Michael Gerhardt, one of your colleagues and a member of the Faculty Executive Committee, will have an op-ed piece in the News & Observer tomorrow (Saturday) that describes just that.
Faculty input is crucial, so as a member of the Search Committee, I hope you will feel free to send me your comments,. Second, to get further input, I want to propose that we send out a survey to the entire faculty. I will be discussing this with the Faculty Executive Committee on Monday afternoon, just after the Search Committee Meeting Monday morning.
3. Search for a new Provost.
This we can table for a while because this won’t take place until a new chancellor is in place. So Bruce, you are not off the hook yet!
4. Implementation of the FEC Special Sub-Committee Report on Athletics and Academics.
Some things have already taken place, but one recommendation involves Advising and Counseling. The report says that “every student should have an academic advisor in Steele Building sign off on courses every semester. While…this suggestion might be unrealistic, we believe that a full, candid discussion about the risks arising from the present student to advisor ratio would be extremely beneficial for our faculty, the administration, and our students.”
Speaking on behalf of the subcommittee, I want to point out first that the committee had high praise for the advisors in Steele Building. And while they realized the recommendation was unrealistic with current staffing levels, they thought a candid discussion would help us think creatively about how students could have opportunities to be seen on a regular basis by an advisor, either in Steele Building, in their departments, or even via technology.
This conversation is separate from a specific new plan to have two new advisors in Steele Building hired especially to work with athletes.
We face many challenges, but we also have amazing talents and brilliance here on our own campus. Together, and sharing in responsibility, harnessing the energy and solidarity shown in recent weeks, I am confident we can take on these challenges become a stronger university that all of us can continue to be proud of. The choice is ours, and I invite you join me in showing that commitment to the University as we walk side by side, in solidarity and in support of one another, and to celebrate who we are, by attending the University Day Celebration on October 12th.
Resolution 2012-14. On the UNC Strategic Plan.
The Faculty Council resolves:
The faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill fully endorses the Resolution on the UNC Strategic Plan passed by the UNC Faculty Assembly on September 21, 2012.
Be it further resolved that, to fully embrace the University of North Carolina mission “to discover, create, transmit, and apply knowledge to address the needs of individuals and society,” the faculty of UNC-Chapel Hill request that the membership of the UNC Advisory Committee on Strategic Directions be expanded to include faculty representation from this university and from other UNC campuses.
Submitted by the Faculty Assembly Delegation.
Comment: The Faculty Assembly of The University of North Carolina adopted the following resolution on September 12, 2012.
UNC Strategic Plan Input
Approved by the UNC Faculty Assembly September 21, 2012
WHEREAS, The UNC System is initiating strategic planning process for 2013‐18 to set current and future priorities, resource planning and allocation, program planning, review and refinement of academic missions reflecting the University’s deep commitment to help North Carolina respond to changing state needs and economic challenges, and
WHEREAS, the Faculty of the UNC system have responsibility for developing, delivering, and assessing the curriculum, and
WHEREAS, the Faculty develop, pursue, and publish original research expanding the knowledge foundation on which our future depends, and
WHEREAS, the Faculty advise, mentor, and engage students in the activities that lead directly to their future occupations and improve their quality of life, and
WHEREAS, all these components contribute immensely to both current job creation and our citizens’ preparedness for the future, and WHEREAS, the Charter of the Faculty Assembly provides “The Assembly shall, through appropriate channels, advise the Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina, the General Assembly, and other governmental agencies and officers on matters of University‐wide importance, and The Assembly shall advise and communicate with the President of the University of North Carolina with regard to the interests of the faculties and other matters of university‐wide importance.”
Resolution 2012-11. On Guidelines for Course Syllabi.
The Faculty Council resolves:
In the section, Suggested Classroom Procedures, in the 2012-13 Undergraduate Bulletin, p. 402, the following statements appear: “In general, instructors are strongly encouraged to follow the guidelines for course design and classroom procedures recommended by the Center for Faculty Excellence. When students enter into a learning relationship, they have certain needs and expectations. They are entitled to information about course procedures, content, and goals. Instructors should provide a syllabus that describes the course and methods of evaluation. Particular attention should be paid to several areas of special concern to students, including provision of reserve readings and grading policy. …. The Faculty Council endorses the following guidelines for the faculty–student relationship. This endorsement shall not be construed as faculty legislation, is not intended to establish a contractual undertaking by the University or any individual, and shall not constitute the basis for civil action in a court or a claim in any administrative or judicial body of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.”
The purpose of this Resolution is to establish guidelines for use by the College of Arts and Sciences and the several professional schools in establishing requirements for course syllabi appropriate to their various learning environments.
Each course offered for credit has a syllabus that addresses the elements detailed below. A syllabus must be provided to students no later than the first day of class and is retained by the respective department or educational unit of the University for a period of at least 4 years.
Course Identifiers: The course number, section number, department, term, and times at which the class meets are stated.
Instructor Identifiers: The instructor’s name, office location, office hours, phone number(s), email address, and web address are provided.
Target Audience: The syllabus explains how the course fits into a broader educational program and to whom the course is targeted.
Course Prerequisites: The syllabus explains course prerequisites or other important rules that describe who is eligible to take the course, who can obtain credit, and how to satisfy any special course registration requirements.
Course Goals and Key Learning Objectives: The syllabus states course goals and key learning objectives. It is important for students to understand what they will accomplish by taking the course. Course goals and objectives are not simply statements about course topics. They are descriptions of competencies that students should expect to develop in the course.
Course Requirements: The syllabus explains what kinds of work students must do to successfully complete the course, such as whether students will be discussing literature, working problems, or undertaking other activities. The syllabus also lists any other requirements such as mandatory recitations, labs, term papers, or mandatory activities outside of class meeting times.
Dates: As far as possible, the dates of all examinations and due dates for important assignments are listed.
Grades: The rules that the instructor uses to assign grades are explained in sufficient detail to clearly inform students as to how their grades will be determined. In particular, the syllabus states how student participation in class will be assessed.
Course Policies: The instructor explains his or her expectations for student conduct during the course. Examples include the consequences of missing an exam; whether regular attendance is expected; the consequences for missing class too often; whether or not late work is accepted and, if so, how late work is penalized. The syllabus states that the course final exam is given in compliance with UNC final exam regulations and according to the UNC Final Exam calendar.
Course Resources: The syllabus provides a list of required text books and other course resources, and an explanation of how to access them. It also lists teaching assistants for the course and provides their contact information, and explains whether and how Sakai is used.
Honor Code: The syllabus explains requirements for the course that could have Honor Code consequences, such as whether students are permitted to work together on problem sets, what help they are permitted to obtain in preparing various assignments, and whether exams are closed or open book.
Time Table: The syllabus contains a course calendar that gives topics and assignments for each class meeting.
Syllabus Changes: It is appropriate to include in the syllabus a clause that informs students of possible modifications, such as “The professor reserves to right to make changes to the syllabus, including project due dates and test dates. These changes will be announced as early as possible.”
Submitted by the Educational Policy Committee.
Comment: The teaching – learning process develops from clearly communicated expectations. A course syllabus serves as a concise vehicle for providing course scope, defining course parameters, establishing course goals, and setting expectations. It is the blueprint from which faculty establish course structure and students build their experiences. Key syllabus components provide students with the framework to move through the course predictably and systematically.
Resolution 2012-12. On Revising the Regulation Concerning Independent Studies for Credit.
The Faculty Council resolves:
The academic regulation concerning independent studies for credit found on page 52 of the 2012-13 Undergraduate Bulletin is amended as follows:
“Independent Studies for Credit The University offers a variety of independent study experiences for students. Such courses, including directed readings, internships, and research courses for an individual student, are offered for academic credit through departments and curricula. Twelve hours of graded independent study credit, excluding honors thesis courses, may be counted toward graduation., though no No more than six twelve hours may be taken in any one semester. Students may participate in formalized programs, or they may make individualized contracts for work under the supervision of a member of the permanent faculty at the department/curriculum level. For information about independent studies courses in their majors, students should consult the director of undergraduate studies in their major department or curriculum.”
Diversity and Multicultural Affairs Presentation by Dr. Taffye Benson Clayton
1. Our Brand As a National Leader
- Diversity is central to our mission and integral to our brand at Carolina
- Leader in higher education access
Access directly linked to diversity and academic excellence
- 21st century high-achieving students
Desire for diverse learning environments
Compositional diversity is an important component
Expectation of access to and interaction with other high-achieving diverse students and faculty
2. Diversity and Inclusion Defined
- Diversity: broad and encompassing
- Inclusion: active, intentional, ongoing efforts to engage diversity to reap its educational benefits
- Inclusive and differentiated: leverage compositional diversity, reap educational benefits, and meet needs of differentiated segments authentically
3. Diversity at UNC-Chapel Hill
Extend knowledge-based services and other resources of the University to the citizens of North Carolina and their institutions to enhance the quality of life for all people in the State
- Academic Plan
- Equity and Inclusion at Carolina—Strategic plan with recommendations to strengthen commitment to diversity and inclusion
- Core values
Believes that it can achieve its educational, research, and service mission only by creating and sustaining an environment in which students, faculty, and staff represent diversity…
4. DMA’s Mission and Vision
The Office of Diversity and Multicultural Affairs (DMA) is an administrative unit in the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost.
Our mission is to provide university-wide leadership in developing and implementing initiatives that promote access to and diversity within our student, faculty, and staff communities. We provide leadership, consultation, and project management of policies, programs, and services that promote diversity as a means of achieving educational excellence and enhancing the quality of life for all members of the University community.
To promote and sustain an inclusive campus community that values and respects all members of the University community
5. Refreshed Vision for Diversity
- Strategically positioned
- Mission-aligned and mission-driven
- Integrated into institution priorities, planning and fabric
6. DMA’s Expanded Charge and Portfolio
- Since its inception, DMA has primarily served historically underrepresented students
- Now faculty, staff and student-focused
7. DMA’s Broad Based Focus
- Institutional diversity
Leadership for university-wide diversity policies, procedures, and practices
Diversity, inclusion, and cultural competence education
- Assessment and research of diversity issues within organizational structures
- Community engagement with diverse populations
- Recruitment and retention of faculty, staff, and students from diverse backgrounds and cultures
- Multicultural programming
- Support programs for diverse student populations
- Diversity, inclusion and cultural competence leadership programs
8. The New DMA Team-New DMA Directors
- Marco Barker, Ph.D., Sr. Director, Education Operations and Initiatives
- Ada Wilson, J.D., Director, Inclusive Student Excellence
- Search underway for Director of Research, Assessment and Analytics
- Josmell Perez, M.Ed., Coordinator, Multicultural Student Programs and Carolina Latino Initiative
- Search Underway, Coordinator, Educational Programs
10. Administrative Support
- Katherine Max, Executive Assistant
- Miki Kersgard, Communications Specialist
- Margie Scott, Administrative Support Specialist
11. UNC as a Diversity Leader-Opportunities to Lead in Diversity
- Faculty Diversity Recruitment and Retention
- Minority Male Success and Graduation
- Faculty and Staff Diversity Education
- Cultural Competence Skill Development and Leadership
12. Leading in Diversity Presence and Success
- To develop strategies to increase the presence of historically underrepresented populations
- To develop an effective model for minority male student success at Carolina to decrease graduation rate disparities and promote differentiated student success
13. Leading in Diversity Education
- To develop a comprehensive, multiple modality educational strategy, inclusive of faculty and staff at Carolina
- To develop a model for cultural competence skill development and leadership education for students
14. Diversity Seminar Series for Faculty and Staff
Chancellor’s 21st Century Vision Dialogue
Through the Lens of Diversity
The Role of Diversity in Education
- Plenary Keynote
- Dr. Pat Gurin—Nancy Cantor Distinguished Professor Emerita of Psychology and Women’s Studies at the University of Michigan
- Panel Discussion Participants
- Dr. Jeff Milem—Ernest W. McFarland Distinguished Professor in Leadership for Education Policy and Reform in the College of Education, Department Chair and Director, Center for the Study of Higher Education at the University of Arizona
- Dr. Thomas Nelson-Laird—Associate Professor, Higher Education Leadership and Policy Studies, Project Manager for the Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE) at Indiana University
15. Minority Males at UNC
Undergraduate student successà Underrepresented student successàDifferentiated student success
16. Disaggregating the Data
- What does the data tell us about differentiated groups?
- How do we use the data to make data driven decisions that support our institutional mission?
17. Undergraduate Student Data
18,430 students, approximately 7,700 males (42 %)
39 American Indian
566 African American
- Graduation, Current four-year rate is 80%
- 2010 Retention Study four-year rate
American Indian males 64.7%
American Indian females 67.4%
Hispanic males 61%
Hispanic females 77.3%
African American males 49.2%
African American females 71%
Source: UNC Institutional Research
18. Forum and Workgroup Progress
- Minority Male Success Forum, January 27, 2012
Continue momentum developed across campus to address needs of Carolina undergraduate men of color
Respond to student appeals for support, consideration and action
Enhance communication and collaboration on this issue
Strengths-based approach to understanding and supporting recruitment, retention, graduation and success of minority males
Examine current efforts and exchange new ideas for mentoring
- Minority Male Collaborative Workgroup, March 2012
DMA, Undergraduate Retention, Student Success and Academic Counseling, New Student and Parent Programs, Scholarships & Financial Aid, Office of Institutional Research, Student Affairs, CBC
19. Challenges with Target Group
- General success strategies will frequently not meet the needs of many minority males
- More likely to be hindered by economic disadvantages
- Less likely to access existing social/academic resources
- More likely to be first-generation students
- Less likely to have access to information about higher education
- Less likely to have role models among faculty
20. Minority Male Success and Graduation
- Successful minority males at Carolina
Are skilled at academic self-management
Have self-awareness of their academic strengths
Engage in learning activities outside the classroom
Are likely to intentionally engage with non-minority students
May or may not participate in mentorship
21. 3MP Grant Process
- Initiated by General Administration in response to:
- UNC Board of Governors and the UNC General Administration launch the University of North Carolina Tomorrow Initiative (2007)
- Recommendation 4.2.5.
- UNC should increase the educational attainment of all underrepresented populations, especially African American male and Hispanic students
- 2011—UNC launches three 3MP pilots on UNC campuses
- 2012—UNC system to provide funding to additional campuses to expand efforts with minority male students in parallel with Community College System
22. Carolina Millennial Scholars
- Scope—first-year and transfer students
- Connect students to University resources
- Enhance participants’ academic experience and set a path to graduation
- Encourage students to identify their individual strengths
- Help students take responsibility for their education, choices and decisions
- Small cohorts based on academic interests
- Seminar and series of workshops focused on academic success, professional development, and financial literacy
- Faculty and staff mentoring