RALEIGH, NC — Keely Muscatell used to tell prospective students that they could study anything they wanted at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Now that many diversity programs in the state’s public university system are at risk of being cut, she’s not so sure.
“We’ve had some really, really sad and difficult conversations in my lab,” the UNC psychology professor said. “Can we, in good conscience, continue to try to recruit and advocate for people to go to graduate school here? Particularly people of color?”
The UNC Board of Directors took the important step in May to the withdrawal of a diversity policy across the 17 institutions — meaning roles will be reevaluated and potentially eliminated. Republican leaders in the General Assembly encouraged and subsequently applauded the move. House Speaker Tim Moore previously decried DEI efforts as wasteful spending and “wokeness” aimed at indoctrinating students. “Ultimately, allow students to have the free exchange, but don’t allow for coercion of ideas and don’t allow for people to be marginalized,” he said in April.
The new policy commits the schools to freedom of expression, academic freedom and institutional neutrality — values that UNC System President Peter Hans calls necessary to prevent institutions from taking political positions.
But it’s part of what Muscatell describes as a “systemic effort” to stifle diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, and the overhaul of how public universities handle DEI work plays a large role in her discontent. Previously, mounting pressure to dismantle DEI programs was one of the reasons Muscatell left her role as director of diversity initiatives for the department of psychology and neuroscience in May.
The Associated Press spoke with several UNC-Chapel Hill faculty members who said they felt uninformed about the implementation of the sweeping policy. Many, like Muscatell, said the lack of campus-wide guidance raises concerns about what happens next.
UNC System campuses must submit documents by September 1 describing the eliminated and reclassified positions, program changes, and funding reallocations under the new policy.
North Carolina isn’t alone in rolling back DEI. Conservatives led push back has gained support in particular among the University of Florida and the University of Texaswhich cut diversity offices and jobs, while other universities in Kentucky and Nebraska have their sights set on change.
UNC-CH declined to comment on changes on campus before Sept. 1, but added that “targeted initiatives that welcome and support disadvantaged students” can continue if they adhere to nondiscrimination and neutrality policies.
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, according to her contract.
UNC did not comment on whether Cox’s new appointment was a result of the policy. But administrators did say that the policy change, along with the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2023 decision to ban affirmative action in university admissionsplayed a role in the recent termination of a program aimed at diversifying the university’s workforce.
The Valuing Inclusion to Attain Excellence Hiring Program — VITAE — provided substantial funding for salaries of underrepresented faculty members seeking a permanent foothold at the university. VITAE stopped accepting applications this month, and a new initiative launched last week will support the hiring of faculty members who contribute to the university’s “academic, curricular and intellectual diversity goals,” Provost Christopher Clemens said in an internal email obtained by the AP. Officials said funds already committed through VITAE will be honored.
Kurt Ribisl, chair of the health behavior department, recalled hiring talented faculty through VITAE and said that discontinuing them would be a great loss. Data shows that about half of tenured or tenure-track underrepresented faculty members in 2020 were VITAE participants.
“You want a faculty that represents the makeup of our state, and students want to see people in the classroom who look like them,” Ribisl said.
Several faculty members said major changes in 2023 set the stage for the policy shift. First, the UNC system adopted a forced speech ban that prohibits asking candidates for diversity statements or political beliefs in job decisions. And the Supreme Court’s ban on affirmative action led to drastic changes for scholarships, fellowships and awards based on race.
In Muscatell’s last year as director of diversity initiatives, she felt the impact: Small tasks passed through varying 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 drew the least scrutiny.
Muscatell’s colleague Margaret Sheridan said it felt like management was “looking over our shoulders.”
Ariana Vigil said that before classes started in the fall, several new students asked her how she was doing and whether they could still study women’s and gender studies, according to the department Vigil chairs.
Vigil says she feels generally supported and that her department is not facing any explicit administrative resistance.
She also sees increasing diversity in her classes. From 2016 to 2023, enrollment of black students increased by less than one percentage point to 8.6% of the student population, while the Hispanic and Asian student populations reached 9.1% and 12.9%.
Still, fears about what lies ahead remain, said Vigil, who called the change in campus diversity policies “demoralizing.”
“It’s more of a matter of sitting around and waiting for bad news,” she said.
Before an April UNC faculty meeting to discuss the policy, UNC-CH faculty chair Beth Moracco said she was inundated with enough feedback from faculty to fill 13 single-spaced pages — some supportive and the rest “overwhelmingly concerned.”
Moracco said she has been assured that policy changes should not affect research, a major concern for some health researchers tasked with addressing disparities thanks to federal funding.
The new policy states that research is protected by academic freedom.
Sheridan is less concerned about her research — how structural inequality affects children’s brain development — and more about the research environment overall. She noted that a “less diverse and less open” workplace could lead to some faculty members leaving, sucking away talent and innovation.
“More of us will go, and I honestly feel like we’re not the obvious targets, our own research isn’t being threatened specifically,” Sheridan said. “But if the larger goal was supported at the university, I think it would create a climate where we wanted to stay.”
Muscatell says that’s a factor in her search elsewhere. Despite her love for 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 really feels to me like we’re just, yeah, I don’t know, replaceable,” she said.
