PSU Faculty Senate Meeting

Penn State faculty members are considering a vote of no-confidence in the university’s board of trustees.

Watch the meeting live here now.

4 months ago smashtheguitar 20 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Didn't the faculty already vote on this once?

Or am I mistaken?

Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose - Janis Joplin

by AriesGD on Jan 24, 2012 2:29 PM EST reply actions

They had discussions

But it was tabled until this date.

by psu87intn on Jan 24, 2012 2:32 PM EST up reply actions

Thanks - please let us know the results.

by dontcallmescooter on Jan 24, 2012 3:04 PM EST reply actions

I'm a little ignorant in the working of the BOT.

What effect will a “no confidence” vote by the faculty senate have?

by blueteeth on Jan 24, 2012 3:17 PM EST reply actions

It'll probably meant that the entire BoT will have to be replaced.

A plateau is a high form of flattery.

by Assorted Fruit on Jan 24, 2012 3:53 PM EST up reply actions

Motion failed

Spineless…yet again.

by iamkatemcg on Jan 24, 2012 4:07 PM EST reply actions

58 to 128, I believe.

The Faculty Senate today rejected a motion for a vote of no confidence in the Board of Trustees, despite a petition presented to them with 2,280 alumni signatures asking them to pass it.

by smashtheguitar on Jan 24, 2012 5:17 PM EST up reply actions

Hopefully it's enough to start a swing for change

Perhaps a complete cleaning of house is too drastic of a measure for such a large place as Penn State.

A plateau is a high form of flattery.

by Assorted Fruit on Jan 24, 2012 8:55 PM EST up reply actions

if I had known, that could have been 2,281

by The JuggerNitt on Jan 24, 2012 10:35 PM EST up reply actions

Clarification was discussed that IF a vote of "no confidence"

was given we would (these are my words/interpretation) be relieving PSU of any authoritative legal body in order to operate = not viable.
I did not get to listen to the entire meeting. I did hear sincere (sometimes passionate) interest concerning PSU ‘tarnished’ image, seeking investigation into ‘if’ PSU has failed in a moral responsibility, researching and understanding the BoT ‘constitution’ (or laws) and bring those into the 21st century and relevant to The Pennsylvania State University of Today. They acknowledged that the BoT had been seeking to work with the Senate in the last week . . . it was even said that the BoT ‘said they wished they had handled things differently’ … (WOW, wouldn’t we ALL like to hear that with our own ears!?!) The Faculty/Senate also acknowledged that they did not want to assign any individuals of the BoT with failures(?) before conducting investigations and research.

When I stand before God at the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and could say, 'I used everything you gave me'.
Erma Bombeck

by ComfortHePuHuTh on Jan 24, 2012 6:29 PM EST up reply actions

It seems so, out of disappointment

but the Penn State governance structure isn’t like ….well, anything else. We should all maybe be a little embarassed how little we understood about how Penn State is run, but if we take off the dragon’s head, leaving the headless beast in place without a new beast to take its’ place, we’re leaving Penn State literally flapping in the breeze. That’s a lot of money to forego. New trustees in old trustee suits don’t fix the problem, even if they are stellar to a man/woman. Don’t have the answer but still think it has to go to the legislature to re-structure university governance before anything worthwhile can happen. And we’re therefore talking years.

In God we trust. Everyone else, keep your hands where I can see them

by PSUMarine78 on Jan 24, 2012 7:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

I've been saying this since early November.

It’s not enough to blame University administration when the BOT and the state legislature are the ones who created the system that failed.

Unrepentant Joe Paterno Apologist®

by leeharvey418 on Jan 24, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions

Thanks for the clarification all!

Still frustrated with the BoT but comments from Comfort, Marine78, and Leeharvey helped.

back to reading stories about Joe

by iamkatemcg on Jan 25, 2012 11:55 AM EST up reply actions

Or…the faculty senate understands what a mistake it would be to try and remove trustees over what is, in the end, a dispute over the football program.

by 1LisHell on Jan 24, 2012 11:25 PM EST up reply actions

Awwww....

Unrepentant Joe Paterno Apologist®

by leeharvey418 on Jan 24, 2012 11:51 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

it may have been slightly more than a "dispute over the football program"

by mjs2103 on Jan 25, 2012 12:00 AM EST up reply actions

Um no

no, it actually has nothing to do with that you piece of trash.

by FB6244 on Jan 25, 2012 8:15 AM EST up reply actions

If they fired one of my beloved professors

not for anything he actually did, but because outside forces believed he didn’t do something, and were standing outside the meeting demanding an answer, and so instead of actually firing them face to face they got fired in the way that Paterno got fired, and then released statements like the BoT did afterwards, then I would be just as outraged.

That of course would never happen, because the media and national public wouldn’t care if a regular old professor only reported the claims of child molestation by a former assistant professor, brought up by a graduate assistant, to the head of the department. Partly because people just don’t care (and hence it is THEM that are making this a “football thing”), and partly because they would say, “hey, that professor did the right thing.” How do I know that? Because that’s how virtually every other instance of child abuse is handled within institutions throughout the rest of the state (if not the rest of the country).

So yes, if the BoT acted like this to anyone else I’d still be just as outraged, though it wouldn’t be as public a spectacle.

by The JuggerNitt on Jan 26, 2012 9:40 AM EST up reply actions

This was just symbolic

The faculty senate does not have any authority. A no confidence vote would be merely symbolic, so all this talk about dissolving the board is nonsense. I imagine that’s why most of the faculty voted against it. No point in creating more antagonism at this point. The faculty want to reform the way the board is structured and how the university is governed. They need the board to collaborate on that. If possible.

by reedjohnmiller on Jan 24, 2012 11:25 PM EST via mobile reply actions

I did hear this during the Faculty Senate meeting:

“The faculty want to reform the way the board is structured and how the university is governed.” It was apparent they want to make an IMPACT for the good of the University. Thank you for correcting me and my statement, and for adding information that everyone needs to hear. Some were frustrated that the Faculty Senate might not care ‘enough’ or had only their interests at heart. The Faculty Senate can still help improve things.

When I stand before God at the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and could say, 'I used everything you gave me'.
Erma Bombeck

by ComfortHePuHuTh on Jan 26, 2012 9:13 AM EST up reply actions