The University of North Carolina has benefited from a governing board that isn’t asleep at the switch. That, of course, bothers the education establishment and the state’s Democratic governor, Roy Cooper.
Last year, Cooper set up a commission to study UNC, and it was not clear what the point was. Now, however, the reason seems clear: to enlist the university’s accreditor, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, to threaten sanctions if the board’s reforms aren’t overturned.
In today’s Martin Center article, Jenna Robinson explains what’s going on.
She writes: “At the commission’s second meeting, held this week, its true purpose became clear: undermine the authority of existing boards and reinforce campus orthodoxies. ‘It’s pure politics,’ said one observer. The meeting featured a presentation by SACSCOC president Belle Wheelan, who has a record of opposing board oversight. This time, Wheelan targeted the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees and UNC’s planned School of Civic Life and Leadership.”
College accreditation is at best useless and is often detrimental, now that accrediting groups have been captured by leftist activists.
And why do accrediting agencies have power? Because schools lose eligibility for federal student-aid funds if they don’t have this silly stamp of approval from a federally approved accreditor. This power play is one more reason to regret that the feds ever began college subsidies.
The right solution is to end federal student aid, but short of that, UNC does have the freedom to dump SACS and go with a less aggressive accrediting body. That’s what Robinson suggests in her conclusion: “Given this record of interference in board governance and the commission’s lack of real authority, UNC’s current board members should feel free to ignore any recommendations that result from its work. They might even consider looking for a new accreditor — one that respects the board’s important role in policymaking and oversight.”