But the picture was complicated last Thursday, when The News & Observer, a Raleigh newspaper, reported that the university’s accreditor, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, would look into statements the university had made to the National Collegiate Athletic Association that seemed to contradict what it had told the accreditor in the past.
We’re sorry, something went wrong.
We are unable to fully display the content of this page.
This is most likely due to a content blocker on your computer or network.
Please allow access to our site and then refresh this page.
You may then be asked to log in, create an account (if you don't already have one),
or subscribe.
If you continue to experience issues, please contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com.
The U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill’s admissions policies are being challenged in federal court.U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
But the picture was complicated last Thursday, when The News & Observer, a Raleigh newspaper, reported that the university’s accreditor, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, would look into statements the university had made to the National Collegiate Athletic Association that seemed to contradict what it had told the accreditor in the past.
Specifically, the newspaper reported, UNC in 2013 disavowed the notorious fake classes as fraudulent. But, according to the NCAA, the university did an about-face in its statements to the association’s Committee on Infractions, and said the classes had satisfied university rules and standards at the time. Observers speculated that the argument had been tailored to meet NCAA rules that allow member colleges to determine what constitutes academic misconduct. In short, the observers reasoned, if UNC had denied that fraud took place, the association was limited in its ability to penalize the university for it.
The comments of Belle S. Wheelan, president of the accreditor’s Commission on Colleges, suggested that the university might face more questions — and possible sanctions — because of how it had changed its tune.
ADVERTISEMENT
But Ms. Wheelan put that concern to rest on Monday, writing in a letter to the university that she had reviewed the NCAA’s report on UNC and concluded that no further investigation was necessary. The letter was published by the university on Tuesday.
‘I’m sorry for any anxiety the article caused,’ the accreditor’s president said.
In the letter she said she had not told the newspaper article’s author, Dan Kane, that the accreditor was reopening its investigation into the university. Mr. Kane, who has reported extensively on the UNC scandal, did not write that the investigation had been reopened, but rather that Ms. Wheelan would examine the university’s statements, which she said in her letter that she had done.
She concluded: “I’m sorry for any anxiety the article caused and look forward to seeing you in Dallas at the SACSCOC Annual Meeting.”
