Kathryn Burns: Faculty role

February 5, 2013 

Faculty role

In the Jan. 23 article “Faculty not sold on 5-year UNC strategy proposal”, UNC system president Tom Ross stated that details of the strategic plan will be fleshed out with faculty input during implementation.

Why should faculty depend on the vague promises of administrators? Faculty are required to design, deliver and assess curricula, not only provide input during the implementation of a plan they did not create.

UNC’s accrediting body, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, states that faculty must be in control of all curricular matters. Faculty control should be written into the entire plan but especially in the sections on general education, assessment, distance education and efficiencies relating to class size and program consolidation.

On Jan. 18, the faculty assembly of the UNC system made it clear in its letter to President Ross and in its resolutions that the general administration should immediately make the FA’s specified changes to the plan, before the draft goes to the board of governors for a vote Friday.

If not, the board of governors should make those changes before the plan is approved and pledge to work closely with faculty in all phases of implementation.

Kathryn Burns

Professor of History, UNC-Chapel Hill

Don Nonini

Professor of Anthropology, UNC-Chapel Hill

Chapel Hill

This letter was endorsed by 34 other members of the Progressive Faculty Network of UNC-Chapel Hill.

News & Observer is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service