[ad_1]
RALEIGH, N.C. — Keely Muscatell always told prospective students they could study anything they dreamed of at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Now, with many diversity programs across the state’s public university system at risk of elimination, she isn’t so sure.
“We’ve had some really, really sad and difficult conversations within my lab,” the UNC psychology professor said. “Can we, in good conscience, continue to try to recruit and advocate that people go to graduate school here? Especially people of color?”
The UNC Board of Governors took the major step in May of revoking a diversity policy spanning its 17 institutions — meaning roles will be reassessed and possibly eliminated. Republican General Assembly leaders encouraged and then applauded the move. House Speaker Tim Moore previously decried DEI efforts as wasteful spending and “wokeness” to indoctrinate students. “At the end of the day, let the students have the free exchange, but don’t allow coercion of ideas and don’t allow folks to be marginalized,” he said in April.
The new policy commits the schools to free speech, academic freedom and institutional neutrality — values UNC System President Peter Hans calls necessary to prevent institutions from taking political stances.
It’s part of what Muscatell describes, however, as a “structural effort” to squelch diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, and the overhaul of how public universities handle DEI work plays a large role in her dissatisfaction. Earlier, mounting pressure to dismantle DEI programs were part of the reason Muscatell left her role as the psychology and neuroscience department’s diversity initiatives director in May.
The Associated Press spoke with several UNC-Chapel Hill faculty members who reported feeling uninformed on the sweeping policy’s implementation. Many, like Muscatell, say the lack of campuswide guidance raises concerns about what’s next.
UNC System campuses must submit documents by Sept. 1 outlining eliminated and realigned positions, program changes and funding reallocations under the new policy.
North Carolina is not alone in DEI rollbacks. Conservative-led pushback notably gained traction at the University of Florida and the University of Texas, which cut diversity offices and jobs, while other universities in Kentucky and Nebraska are eyeing changes.
UNC-CH declined to comment on campus changes before Sept. 1 but added that “targeted initiatives that welcome and support underserved students” can continue if they abide by nondiscrimination and neutrality rules.
In June, Leah Cox, the university’s chief diversity officer, accepted an additional one-year appointment as the university’s executive vice provost, according to emails and contracts obtained by The Associated Press. Cox’s responsibilities include reorganizing certain diversity initiatives within the provost’s office, her contract said.
UNC did not comment on whether Cox’s new appointment was a result of the policy. But administrators did say the policy change, coupled with the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision to ban affirmative action in college admissions, played a role in the recent discontinuation of a program aimed at diversifying the university’s workforce.
The program VITAE — Valuing Inclusion to Attain Excellence Hiring Program — provided substantial funding for salaries of underrepresented faculty members seeking a foothold at the university. VITAE stopped accepting applications this month and a new initiative launched last week will support hiring faculty that contribute to “academic, curricular, and intellectual diversity goals” of the university, said Provost Christopher Clemens in an internal email obtained by AP. Officials said funds already committed through VITAE will be honored.
Kurt Ribisl, the health behavior department chair, recalled hiring talented faculty through VITAE and said discontinuing it would be a major loss. About half of tenured or tenure-track underrepresented faculty members were VITAE participants as of 2020, records show.
“You want to have a faculty who represents the sort of composition of our state, and students want to see people in the classroom teaching them who look like they do,” Ribisl said.
Several faculty members said major changes in 2023 set the stage for the policy shift. First, the UNC system adopted a compelled speech ban that bars soliciting candidates’ diversity statements or political belief declarations in job decisions. And the Supreme Court affirmative action ban prompted drastic changes for race-based scholarships, fellowships and awards.
In Muscatell’s final year as director of diversity initiatives, she felt the impact: Small tasks passed through several levels of approval and she said her ideas were often questioned. When Muscatell asked about DEI programming, she said others told her to do whatever invited less scrutiny.
Muscatell’s colleague Margaret Sheridan said it felt like administration was “looking over our shoulder.”
Before fall classes began, Ariana Vigil said a few incoming students asked about her well-being and if they could still major in women’s and gender studies, the department Vigil chairs.
Generally, Vigil said she feels supported and her department hasn’t faced explicit administrative opposition.
She also sees increasing diversity in her classes. From 2016 to 2023, Black student enrollment increased by less than a percentage point to 8.6% of the student population while Hispanic and Asian student populations reached 9.1% and 12.9%.
However, the fear of what’s next remains, Vigil said, calling the change to campus diversity policies “demoralizing.”
“It’s more just, like, sitting around waiting for the bad news,” she said.
Ahead of an April UNC Faculty Assembly meeting to discuss the policy, UNC-CH’s faculty chair Beth Moracco said she was flooded with enough faculty feedback to fill 13 single-spaced pages — some in support and the rest “overwhelmingly of concern.”
Moracco said she’s been reassured policy changes shouldn’t affect research — a major worry for some health researchers whose federal funding commits them to addressing inequities.
The new policy states research is protected under academic freedom.
Sheridan is less troubled about her research — how structural inequality shapes children’s brain development — and more about the general research environment. She noted a “less diverse and less open” workplace could prompt some faculty to leave, draining talent and innovation.
“More of us will go, and I honestly feel like we’re not the obvious targets, our own research is not specifically threatened,” Sheridan said. “But if the larger goal was supported at the university, I think it would make it a climate where we wanted to stay.”
Muscatell says that’s a factor in her looking elsewhere. Despite her love of UNC, she said finding a faculty position at a university without a “hostile climate toward diversity and equity work” is a priority for her.
“It definitely feels to me like, we’re just kind of, yeah, I don’t know, that we are replaceable,” she said.
