UNC should seek definitive answers from this new probe

With incredibly large paychecks on the horizon for attorney Kenneth Wainstein and his staff as they further investigate academic misconduct in the University’s former African and Afro-American Studies Department, administrators need to make sure their probe accomplishes all that it should, or else it will just be another notch on the investigation belt.

This latest inquiry was prompted by new information uncovered by Orange County District Attorney Jim Woodall during his criminal investigation of the scandal.

Wainstein will receive $990 per hour for this investigation, and his staff will also receive hundreds of dollars an hour, but UNC needs to make sure it gets what it’s paying for.

This is a huge sum, especially at a time when budget cuts are already putting a burden on the University. Therefore, this investigation must be so thorough that no stone is left unturned and any future inquiry is satisfied with the information they find. This way, Chancellor Carol Folt and other University leaders can put these academic scandals behind them for good.

But based on information released by administrators so far, little is known about how this investigation will work, when it will be completed, and the specifics of what Wainstein will be reviewing.

All that is known, it seems, is the probe will likely take months to complete and thus cost UNC a great sum in attorney fees.

UNC needs to demand answers during this process, starting immediately.

For example, what new information does Woodall have that former Gov. Jim Martin, who oversaw a similar investigation in 2012, did not?

Will this still only be limited to a narrow search of one department, or will it be expanded?
Why does the public know Wainstein’s name, but not the name of the person conducting an independent review of Mary Willingham’s findings?

And finally, what does athletics have to do with all of this? Martin insisted this was only an academic scandal, but with the proportion of athletes UNC knows were part of these fraudulent courses, and the cultural issues that Willingham’s findings — statistically true or not — suggest, will this really be shut out as a factor again?

It should go without saying, however, that neither side of this debate should stoop to name calling.
Administrators must also demand a definitive starting point as to when Julius Nyang’oro, or others, began engaging in academic misconduct so that the University can be done with uncovering pieces of this scandal, once and for all.

It is of note that Folt and Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost Jim Dean are both new to their positions. Therefore, they must be proactive in ensuring they know enough about the history of UNC’s problems and previous investigations to adeptly review any information Wainstein uncovers.

Putting this work in at the beginning and starting with clear and specific expectations will not only reduce billable hours, but also likely improve upon the quality of the results.

Ideally, progress reports providing updates on the findings of the investigation would be made available to the public as it is the state’s taxes that help fund this University, and those taxpayers have a stake in the discussion.

If thorough enough, this probe is a good step forward.