TO THE EDITOR:
In regards to your May 28, 2015, editorial regarding the biennial review of low productivity UNC academic programs, you restated a comment that I made to a reporter for your newspaper in discussing whether the University should review low-demand programs regularly, but your quote did not reflect the context in which the statement was made.
I believe that we should review low-demand programs regularly but did not intend to convey that student demand is the sole factor to consider or that the University should be operated as a profit-making enterprise.
The recent program reviews by UNC campuses, which the Board of Governors approved in full, took into consideration several factors besides student demand, such as whether the programs provide foundation courses for other majors or serve pressing needs in the state.
I believe this is appropriate. The value of academic programs, such as history, literature and the arts, as well as research and service programs at a university, cannot be measured by a mere market analysis of demand, and a university should not be operated using capitalistic guidelines applicable to a profit-making enterprise.
My comments were not intended to be anything more than a statement that the reviews of low-enrollment programs should be continued and that campuses should consider student demand as one factor in evaluating academic programs.
That has been the Board of Governor’s policy for many years.
