Announcement of School of Civic Life and Leadership Leaves UNC Faculty and Student Government Shocked while Conservatives Celebrate

The infamous UNC Chapel Hill Old Well, which stands just across the street from the administrative South Building. Source for photo: UNC School of Medicine

This February, along with media coverage of an uncharacteristically lackluster basketball season, many news outlets have been reporting on the happenings of a different group associated with UNC- its own Board of Trustees. The UNC Board of Trustees recently made a motion to create the School of Civic Life and Leadership for future UNC students.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill appearing in local, state, and national news throughout the month of February may not be a surprise for many Tarheel fans. This news coverage usually has to do with the performance of the UNC Men’s Basketball team and their chances at dominating the upcoming tournament of “March Madness.” However, this February, along with coverage of an uncharacteristically lackluster basketball season, many news outlets have been reporting on the happenings of a different group associated with UNC: its own Board of Trustees. 

January 26th, 2023 brought a surprising and unanimous 12-0 vote by the UNC Board of Trustees to create the School of Civic Life and Leadership for future UNC students. In a message from Chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz the day after the decision he wrote, “I will be working with our faculty to study the feasibility of such a school and the ways we can most effectively accomplish our goal of promoting democracy in our world today.” While some interpreted the message as showing hints of surprise at the Board’s vote, Guzkiewicz ended the message by encouraging both students and faculty at UNC to continue being “stewards of democracy” for both our campus and the surrounding community.

The controversy of this choice by the Board came when members of both UNC faculty and student government revealed they were completely blindsided by the decision. Mimi Chapman, chair of the university faculty, was quoted by many national news sources as being surprised by the announcement and asserting that no faculty on UNC’s campus were consulted or involved in the decision. Others compared this decision by the Board of Trustees as being in line with past controversial decisions made with no input from faculty or students, including the denial of tenure for Nikole Hannah-Jones and the handling of the removal of the infamous Silent Sam statue from campus. While the Board isn’t necessarily required to share all proposals or conversations that happen behind closed doors, there has been a certain principle of co-governance the Board has claimed to maintain with faculty and students that was obviously breached with this surprise decision. 

Regardless of many outspoken critics, the move made by the Board has been praised by many conservative voices, including those at the Wall Street Journal, who likened UNC to an echo chamber for liberal ideals. Fox News called the decision to create the school a “rare win for free speech,” claiming that the School of Civic Life and Leadership would provide a space for those of all political ideologies to be taught and expressed freely. Personnel from Fox also praised David Boliek, chair of the Board, for implying a political element would be added in the hiring process to staff this new school in an attempt to balance out the current “left of center” faculty. Many conservative outlets think of UNC as an institution that amplifies liberal ideas at the expense of students with differing ideals. While the truthfulness of this view is certainly debatable, conservatives seem to think that the creation of this new school will provide a Republican beacon for conservative students on UNC’s campus struggling to express themselves. 

While the School of Civic Life and Leadership certainly has a long way to go before it becomes a reality on campus, UNC faculty and student government will still be left to work with a Board who seems to have little interest in co-governance. Future Student Body President, Christopher Everett, felt that because “the decisions [the Board of Trustees] make govern and affect the lives of students across our campus… the least the Board could do is be honest about new proposals and decisions that are being made without student input.” Since Everett will be in close communication with the Board throughout the next academic year, he asserted he “plan[s] to do all [he] can to build relationships and foster communication with the Board of Trustees” and wants to focus on being “proactive, rather than reactive.” With individuals like Chris providing a voice for the students in closed door conversations, hopefully the Board of Trustees will learn from this decision and recommit itself to collaborative, co-governance in the future.