Opinion: Interdisciplinary research is crucial to UNC's success

T he 26 research centers and institutes on the Board of Governors’ chopping block must be protected.

A lack of uniform policies has allowed extraneous, non-degree-related research centers to emerge in the UNC system that need to be shaved or cut entirely — or so says the N.C. General Assembly. Looming budget cuts now have these centers and institutes scrambling to prove their value to the Board of Governors.

Among the dozens of research institutes on the list are the Morehead Planetarium, the Ackland Art Museum and the Carolina Women’s Center. The Board of Governors will target institutes with either a budget of around $50,000, a low economic return ratio, or funding of more than $100,000 in non-monetary support. Some were placed on the list for multiple reasons.

The Board of Governor’s cutting process, which ends this year and will culminate in a final report, was in response to the N.C. General Assembly’s mandate for the board to shave $15 million and redistribute the funds to other UNC-system priorities such as endowed professorships or the general administration’s five-year strategic plan to raise teacher salaries.

These are worthy goals, but cutting from one worthy venture to fund another is unproductive and forces educational structures to compete with each other rather than acting in concert.

The budget constraints the UNC system is facing are largely self-created problems stemming from an illogical tax code from the N.C. legislature.

But these programs have long been measured by the metrics appropriate for the value they generate — their research focus. In order for this cutting process to progress fairly, it is important to honor the research centers’ evaluative process and give the centers the ability to qualify, as well as quantify, their impact early in the decision-making process.

The centers and institutes being reviewed focus on non-degree-related research. However, this represents a clear dissonance between the Board of Governors’ priorities and the centers’ approach to learning and research.

These research centers, which have long drawn the best and brightest faculty members to the University, are already emaciated. There is no fat left to cut when it comes to these centers and institutes. In an interview with The Daily Tar Heel in August, Barbara Entwisle, the vice chancellor for research who oversees 15 research centers at UNC, said the institutes have already seen their budgets cuts by 35 percent since June 2008. Their situation is so sad it’s laughable. With diminished budgets, these institutes are still expected to produce high level research.

The University has a responsibility to cultivate interdisciplinary research. To take that away is to take away an essential piece of the school’s purpose.

Take the Carolina Women’s Center as an example. The Women’s Center cannot be considered “degree-related” because the very issue it combats — sexual assault on college campuses— is exacerbated by the conventional university setting. If the University has any hopes of making real progress in reforming its policies regarding its handling of sexual assault, it must do so with the help of a fully-staffed and operating Women’s Center.

The Morehead Planetarium draws more than 150,000 visitors to the largest fulldome planetarium in the southeastern United States each year. Students in astronomy and physics classes can spend afternoons exploring the intricacies of the final frontier.

The Ackland Art Museum holds one of the best art collections in the southeast and helps to attract a vibrant artistic community to Chapel Hill.

It is strange to see these centers which, by nature, were created to defy the boundaries of conventional learning, are now being scrutinized for that very reason.