PSU Trustees grandstanding

HawkeyesWin

HawkeyesWin

Well-Known Member
Either the trustees are grandstanding. or haven't figured out the NCAA could reverse course if the consent decree is overturned and wind up with the death penalty for 4 years and a ton of residual carnage.

http://us.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=26048&content=77013134&pageNum=-1
 
WTH is wrong with people out there? If they really push this issue, I hope the NCAA completely shuts down the football program for good. There are too many sick fu*ks out there.
 
If they challenge this, it ain't the death penalty they should be worried about, being voted out of the ncaa altogether IS.

John Infante is an expert on ncaa rules & that is what he believes would happen.
 
Trustees, Regents, Boards, whatever you want to call them, they are the problem with public education. I saw it first hand with the Iowa Regents running off David Skorton and I see it with my current institution and we see it with PSU.

Whoever thought it was a good idea to put people who have no place in Higher Education in charge of entire systems was an idiot as was everyone who followed suit.

For instance, our board has come up with the brilliant idea to tie funding to success rate, with the only measurement of success being graduation rates. Seriously. Sends a clear message that passing is more important than learning.

I mean seriously, what business does this? I use a computer, so should I tell Bill Gates how to run Microsoft?
 
CAARHawk said:
Trustees, Regents, Boards, whatever you want to call them, they are the problem with public education. I saw it first hand with the Iowa Regents running off David Skorton and I see it with my current institution and we see it with PSU.

Whoever thought it was a good idea to put people who have no place in Higher Education in charge of entire systems was an idiot as was everyone who followed suit.

For instance, our board has come up with the brilliant idea to tie funding to success rate, with the only measurement of success being graduation rates. Seriously. Sends a clear message that passing is more important than learning.

I mean seriously, what business does this? I use a computer, so should I tell Bill Gates how to run Microsoft?
Click to expand...

This might be taking it a little far. There has to be a balance. The Board has to be there to serve as check and balance on the President of an organization and to help set big picture strategic direction. Would you rather have a President like Graham Spanier in charge with absolute control and no accountability to a Board?
 
The problem with boards of regents & trustees in education/public sector is exactly the same as the problem with corporate boards of directors, only corporate boards are even more corrupt, and their members belong there even less.
 
KCRC said:
This might be taking it a little far. There has to be a balance. The Board has to be there to serve as check and balance on the President of an organization and to help set big picture strategic direction. Would you rather have a President like Graham Spanier in charge with absolute control and no accountability to a Board?
Click to expand...

The problem is that boards aren't made up of people who are experts in higher education. They are political appointments. Just because they went to college doesn't mean they understand how to run a university.

Seriously, did Michael Gartner's background indicate the necessary experience to run a university?
 
How are corporate boards more corrupt?

PhoenixHawk said:
The problem with boards of regents & trustees in education/public sector is exactly the same as the problem with corporate boards of directors, only corporate boards are even more corrupt, and their members belong there even less.
Click to expand...

They are voted on and approved by sharedholders. Their salaries and terms on the board have to be approved on a regular basis by the shareholders.

I'd say they are no more or less susceptible to corruption than Board of Regents for universities.
 
I could argue that having people....

CAARHawk said:
The problem is that boards aren't made up of people who are experts in higher education. They are political appointments. Just because they went to college doesn't mean they understand how to run a university.

Seriously, did Michael Gartner's background indicate the necessary experience to run a university?
Click to expand...

who aren't "experts" in higher education can be viewed as a positive. Not saying folks like Gartner are good board members, as he seems to have his own separate agenda that makes sense to no one.

The purpose of the BOR is to help set/approve the long-term direction of the university. They do have a necessary role, as they are there to represent the people of Iowa, especially when that is in contradiction with what the university president and administration want.
 
PhoenixHawk said:
The problem with boards of regents & trustees in education/public sector is exactly the same as the problem with corporate boards of directors, only corporate boards are even more corrupt, and their members belong there even less.
Click to expand...

And you know this by how? Please provide supporting evidence to your comments...
 
Re: How are corporate boards more corrupt?

DodgerHawki said:
They are voted on and approved by sharedholders. Their salaries and terms on the board have to be approved on a regular basis by the shareholders.

I'd say they are no more or less susceptible to corruption than Board of Regents for universities.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the major shareholders are investment and insurance companies that hold huge amounts of stock and control the voting rights. I could go out and buy 20 shares of JP Morgan but it doesn't mean I could do anything about removing anybody on the board.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page





Top