BSU Presidency Shrouded in Mystery

In other words, Iche are a bunch of business men and politicians who have no idea how universities/higher education actually works and how it works best who are demanding that long held principles and protections are thrown out and universities be run like these guys run their businesses and treat their employees. But try to tell these guys how to run their business and manage their employees and look out. Let's put an end to the cherished idea of free thought and seeking the truth. If we don't like your ideas or the information you share we'll just summarily fire you. Let's rule by fear. That always works. It would be especially great at institutions of higher learning. In fact, let's just turn colleges into elementary schools where what is taught and how it's taught is dictated.

Im all for accountability and good management, but the ICHE is overstepping. Which appears to have led the BOT to overstepping. Good luck to our next president, who has no chance if he/she is not a yes man and puppet for Rick hall and the board.

Yeah well when their businesses are funded with tax dollars your comparison will have some validity.  

Halftime, I did consider the tax dollars argument and I get it. I mostly meant you can't demand learning institutions be run like businesses and think only of the bottom line and be that rigid. But I do agree universities should be managed responsibly, especially because tax dollars are involved. But then I also don't think the ICHE should have increasing influence while state funding continues to decrease. We're going to support you less but lean on you more?

Balance should absolutely be the norm and the expectation. Students and professors should be able to voice their views safely and without judgement. If professors are in fact doing that to students, on either side of the fence, then that is shameful and not at all what this is all about.  Open discourse and discussion without fear of retribution (or getting fired) should be how this works. If it is not working that way I'm not happy about it.    Teaching should be based on, ok, what's your opinion on this topic and whatever that opinion is, back it up with facts and well thought out discussion. Not shouting down opposing view points. I hate that. I never had a single professor like that, and I had a few very West Coast liberal style profs in some of my courses. Not once did they berate a student for, well, anything. We had some awesome open ended discussions that really felt like the best of how higher ed was intended.  The bottom line was, have a take, but be prepared to support it and no one was discouraged from voicing things. 

I'm afraid both sides of the spectrum have taken to squashing dissent and that's wrong.   both sides have biases. 

 Cardfan, I suspect you will probably hear a name sometime this afternoon.   Let us know ..............To be fair to Rick Hall he is the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, so the introduction is sort of his job. 

Of course as chairman Rick should introduce the new prez. My point abut Hall being front and center is he doesn't introduce and then get out of the way.....

Lurkin, if you can come up with a solid reason as to why Frank Hancock, who was on the BOT,  would like about the BOT/hall overstepping, please share it.  Perhaps you can provide a rational explanation as to why Hall would show up uninvited to a PRIVATE meeting between Hancock and the Govenor.  Yeah, maybe the Govenor invited Hall, but he didn't include Hancock on that invitation. It was a personal meeting Hancock had requested.  How and why did Hall mysterously show up there unexpectedly?   Perhaps you would like that to happen to you and would be fine with it, but most people wouldn't.  Try to keep your politics out of personal in this case.   

  And finally, and I'm done with this, I know enough well connected people on campus who were privy to things that went on with Hall (and continue to go on)  

To a private meeting? with another member of the BOT, not "BSU." You have issues you want to discuss with someone privately, and you set up a meeting, but then a 3rd party shows up to kill whatever dialogue you may have had and you're ok with that? Again, Frank Hancock was ON THE BOT, not a member of the BSU administration on campus. And if Hancock ostensibly wanted to discuss with Pence Hall overstepping his role then have you just violated whistleblower laws? Have you shut down dissent? Just curious. OR maybe Hancock had other, personal issues he wanted to talk about. Hall should NOT have been there. It was a surprise to Hancock and that is wrong.