Since the university was founded more than 150 years ago, this institution has seen its fair share of scandal — most notably the drug overdose of basketball legend Len Bias, which resulted in the resignation of the athletic director and men’s basketball coach at the time. Indeed, our history is anything but spotless.
The university has been fortunate to largely stay out of national headlines this year, but other institutions haven’t been so lucky — particularly Penn State, for its child sex abuse scandal. Several administrators are charged with not reporting allegations that former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky molested 10 boys both on and off the campus.
The truth rocked the Penn State campus to its core. Penn State President Graham Spanier resigned, along with Senior Vice President Gary Shultz. Athletic Director Tim Curley was placed on administrative leave and, most importantly, beloved football coach Joe Paterno was fired, much to the outrage of the student body.
The State College campus may be almost 200 miles away, but even this university felt the magnitude of the scandal. In fact, it hit a little too close to home. According to former Athletic Director Andy Geiger, Sandusky was contacted by this university’s athletics department in 1991 and 1996 for job openings. In an interview with The Washington Times, Geiger said he was “sitting in his living room shaking,” thinking of what could have been had Sandusky joined this university.
But instead of just watching the news and thinking, “Thank God that didn’t happen here,” the university acted swiftly to ensure such that lack of reporting never occurs on this campus. In November, university President Wallace Loh drafted a six-page policy outlining the legal requirement to report such abuse to University Police Chief David Mitchell. Under the plan, Mitchell then immediately assigns a detective to investigate a claim; if it occurred off the campus, authorities in the proper jurisdiction will be notified.
This new system is all about accountability. As the truth about Penn State began to unravel, it became increasingly difficult to follow the pattern of events. The buck just kept getting passed; no one wanted to take responsibility for not reporting the alleged incidents to the proper authorities. But this university’s new policy accomplishes two things: It requires accountability from both the person with knowledge of the crime of and the police — two things Penn State completely lacked.
If it comes out 10 years down the road that information regarding child abuse was withheld, someone will be prosecuted — but the hope is we’ll never get that far. With this new policy, the university is encouraging people to come forward and, so far, it’s working: In just one month since the policy was drafted, seven reports of alleged child abuse have been made to Mitchell. In all instances, the reported incident occurred off the campus.
But Penn State isn’t the only institution officials have been watching. On Nov. 18, Occupy protesters at the University of California, Davis clashed with university police officers, who pepper sprayed the students while they were sitting with their arms linked. The outraged community demanded Chancellor Linda Katehi’s resignation (she refused), but once again this university reacted: The University Senate drafted a formal statement protecting students’ right to protest on the campus.
While such action is surely a step in the right direction, the senate’s motion seems to lack the teeth of the sexual abuse policy. It’s important for the university to reaffirm its commitment to protecting free speech, but what happens if police clash with protesters at this university? After all, police brutality is something students are familiar with, thanks to the actions of Prince George’s County Police during the 2010 riot. The senate would accomplish more if, like the child abuse policy, it outlined specific steps to be taken by the university.
Nonetheless, it’s encouraging to see officials reacting to national collegiate scandals and adapting university policies accordingly. Now, if we could just stop talking about the $7.2 million president’s “mansion,” we could all get on with our lives.
