The Report

The North Central Association, responsible for the accreditation of UIUC as well as colleges and universities in 19 states, has issued a report sharply critical of the University of Illinois. The NCA Higher Learning Commission team visited Champaign-Urbana on April 26-27 "to assess the effectiveness of the Board of Trustees' efforts to address the educational and governance issues surrounding the athletic symbol, Chief Illiniwek."

The result of the NCA/HLC visit was a "Report of a Focused Visit (Commission Mandate)," released August 5th. In addition, the team provided a "Consultation for Focused Visit," representing advice to the institution. The HLC team consisted of the Chair of the Dept. of English, University of Washington; the Chancellor from the University System of Maryland; and the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs from the University of Arkansas.

The report comments that UIUC preparation for the visit was "not as extensive as the team would have expected, given the complexity and seriousness of the issue."

While stating the Chief is not considered "an accreditation issue," the team noted that -

• "The institution should address the educational impact of the continued use of the Chief"
• "The institution should resolve what appear .. to be inconsistencies between its exemplary diversity policies and practices, and its policies regarding The Chief" and "articulate the rationale for its policies, especially when they are in apparent contradiction with each other."
• "[UIUC] is too good an institution to let this issue impede its continuing strength and development and the respect for the institution felt by peers and colleagues."

Other key points in the report:

• harm to "educational effectiveness in .. leadership, governance, educational integrity, and campus climate"
• "the institution's symbol is an embarrassment to many of its most distinguished constituents"
• "the Board chooses to ignore the damaging effects of both the controversy and the Chief symbol"
• the Board has shown "considerable disdain ... for its best source of guidance ... the faculty and administration."
• [deciding the controversy based on votes] "does not constitute a positive example of dispute resolution nor one that is educationally sound."
• the team expressed concern that the search for a new President and Chancellor will be adversely affected
• the Chief is "anachronistic and divisive," and the team recommends "a process of respectful retirement of the Chief"
• "the institution will find it increasingly difficult to attract outstanding faculty .. and the most highly-qualified individuals for leadership positions."

The Response

• "The NCA ... has confirmed that the Chief is not in itself an accreditation issue ... the campus will comply with the next [NCA] visit and will seek faculty input on the issue of educational effectiveness within the context of a commitment by the Board of Trustees to a consensus resolution of the Chief matter" - UIUC news release.
• "It's outrageous what was kept from the site visit team" - Prof. Stephen Kaufman, quoted in the Chicago Tribune.
• "They huffed and they puffed but they didn't blow the house down" - Roger Huddleston, president of the Honor the Chief Society, quoted in the Mercury News.
• "They've raised real concerns about our educational integrity" - the organization ActNow, quoted in the Mercury News.

The media

• "Accreditation team criticizes UI's handling of Illiniwek dispute" -
  (San Jose) Mercury News (AP)
• "Report: Chief Illiniwek 'an embarrassment'" - The
  Washington Times (UPI)
• "Report urges Illiniwek decision" - Chicago Tribune (Tribune reporter, 8/26)

Resources:
Final Team Report; Consultation for Focused Visit (advice from the Commission); UIUC response.

Discussion

The report has been siezed upon by all sides. The Board is holding to its stated intention to arrive at a "consensus conclusion," and the UIUC news release and Chief proponents point to the NCA report statement that the Chief is not, per se, an accreditation issue. Chief opponents note the repeated criticisms and concerns stated in the report, including adverse impacts by the Chief's presence and controversy on campus climate, UIUC diversity goals, and educational effectiveness.

While the report is based on the team's April visit to campus, it contains "an important footnote" regarding the Board of Trustees' call for a consensus conclusion. The team "urges timely resolution" of the controversy, and "wishes to underscore the point that consensus resolution of the issue must have positive impact upon the University of Illinois' educational programs and public presence locally and nationally."

Opinion: Selected points from the NCA conclusions have been held up as evidence that the Chief controversy is not serious. However, a cursory reading of the North Central Association report shows that they are very concerned for the University's "educational mission," reputation, and "selection process ... [to fill] the institution's highest positions." While the Consultation calls for the Board to "find some dignified way to 'retire' the Chief," even those favoring the Chief must surely acknowledge the seriousness of the NCA report's findings, particularly the oft-stated breakdown in governance, as manifested in open disagreement and apparent "disdain ... [for guidance from] the faculty and administration."

Do we need more dialogue?

The Board of Trustees is calling for a consensus conclusion to the Chief issue. Key questions include whether such a consensus is possible, and the lack of clearly articulated steps toward such a conclusion. "[BOT Chairman Eppley] said progress is being made toward developing guidelines for reaching a solution agreeable to all sides, but he had no timetable for the discussions." (Mercury News). Are we moving forward?

Since an outright decision by the Board on the Chief issue is not forthcoming, achieving a consensus conclusion will presumably require new debate or discussion. But do we really need more dialogue on this matter? The NCA report makes several references to the UIUC 2000 "enhanced dialogue" on the Chief, in which some 18,000 comments were received, and the Garipo and Plummer reports followed. The Dialogue on the Chief cost $300,000.

RetireTheChief believes much, and enough, has been said; it seems highly doubtful that a consensus is possible.

"It's the same issue that was here 20 years ago ... I don't know what else can be said ... we've said it all before. How many times do we have to say it? How many different ways can we say it?" - Christine Redcloud, 2004 (QT, MP3).

We now look back to some of the comments made in the Spring of 2000, statements which have since disappeared into files, or CD-ROMs "available for purchase".

Consensus will not be easy to come by.

Christine Redcloud, 2000 Dialogue QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Vanessa Casillas (follows R.J.Smith) QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Debbie Reese QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Jayne Blacker QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Michael Haney QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Some strong views:

Joseph Peralez QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Charlene Teters QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Bruce Two Eagles QT: sml, med, big; MP3

Isn't it time to retire the Chief? •

"The list of institutions which have dealt successfully with similar issues is long ... the list of those institutions still attempting to defer or avoid the obvious solution is very short." - NCA report

Remember?      March 15, 2004      Native Americans protest at the University of Illinois

Ten Reasons to Retire The Chief

1. Diversity. We do want a diverse, inclusive atmosphere welcoming of all cultures. 2. Stereotypes. The Chief perpetuates harmful, insulting stereotypes of Native people in a big way. 3. Publicity. The presence of the Chief has brought national disapproval to an outstanding University. 4. Racism. It was not the intention, and no one likes the "R" word, but Native Americans are very upset by the presence of Chief Illiniwek. 5. Children. Powerful stereotypes are particularly harmful to children - their self esteem and school performance.

6. Accuracy. Let's be honest - the Chief isn't the real thing. The dance is part of half-time entertainment. 7. Honor. Native Americans are not honored. Quite the contrary, they have made it clear they are offended by the Chief. 8. NCAA. In case you missed it, the NCAA has made it clear they are unhappy with American Indian mascots. 9. Choices. Potential faculty and students have chosen not to teach or attend the University because of the Chief. 10. Image. Call the Chief a symbol or a mascot - he is a public figure that harms the University's image.