UNC’s administration has a problem with student trust.
A smattering of anti-student moves made by the Roberts administration since his interim appointment in January, especially response to protests at the tail end of last year, has left a bad taste in the mouths of many in the student body.
When it was announced that former chancellor Kevin Guskiewicz would be leaving his position at UNC, many were concerned that The Board of Governors and the chancellor search advisory committee would adhere only to their own wishes, not those of students. Those concerns were exacerbated with the appointment of Lee Roberts as interim chancellor, as Roberts had no previous experience in higher education administration. Then, when the UNC Board of Governors voted to remove diversity, equity and inclusion requirements, students were shunned from the meeting, raising tensions higher. Pro-Palestine student protests sparked the harshest response yet in which the University forcibly shut down demonstrations with police and fenced in the Quad. Not an ideal first semester for a new administration trying to establish itself.
Now, as a fresh class of students enters and the feelings of most others have been somewhat tempered by the summer, the University should have looked to seize this opportunity and find rapport with the student body. Instead, they are removing one of the only student-run Honor Systems in the country. For nearly 120 years, students have held leadership positions in the Honor System. In that time, changes have been made to improve and refine the system.
Now, as we return to campus en masse, the University should have taken the opportunity to try to build some of that lost trust back. In dissolving student Honor Courts, they have only lost more.
Students have been involved with the University’s honor system since UNC’s inception.While the new system will "maintain student roles" according to a formal notice sent out on Friday from University leadership, student leadership will be gone. Having power over a judicial system and allowing us to be governed by a council of our peers fosters trust — not a university controlled system by an indirectly elected administration, especially when that administration finds the ire of students.
The University cites student burnout and struggles managing workload as well as lengthy case resolutions as their main reasons to make a change. However, the Honor System says they were notified less than a day before Provost Chris Clemens and Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Amy Johnson sent an email making the changes known to everyone. If the administration had prioritized student wellness in this change, they would have invited Honor System leaders into conversations to make an informed and fair decision. Instead, they were shut out, echoing the processes behind Roberts’ election and the DEI ban.
This is not to say this cannot be the right decision in the long term. UNC is one of only two colleges in the U.S. that maintains a student-led honor judicial system. There is value in history, but the near-total absence of these systems can indicate their inefficacy. If the industry standard dictates that honor cases are handled by professionals, UNC’s courts could benefit from the change, especially in regards to highly technical and sensitive cases.
Unfortunately, the change comes at a record-low moment for trust in administration. Why should students who justly feel slighted and kept in the dark surrounding university governance see this, the most direct rebuke to student participation in the past few months, in a positive light? Fears that students will be unfairly treated by the school due to this change and other recent choices are rising, and for good reason.
