<p>My reading on the situation is that Stetson did/said something after announcing his retirement, or the university found out something, that caused the school to change "retirement" into fired for cause. </p>
<p>Simply accelerating someone's planned departure is one thing, but the silence instead of praise for the former dean says something else - and says it loud and clear.</p>
<p>My guess is "found out something."</p>
<p>Bethievt, Academic infightings are infamous for their pettiness and rightly deserve no comments. Unless there is a lawsuit involved, the standard policy of any university is not to comment beyond the phrase of "for the best interests" of both parties. In the case of a lawsuit, then the comment would be no comment pending on a resolution of the lwasuit.</p>
<p>Maybe a tell all book if not a scandal. That could ruffle feathers.</p>
<p>well, padad, I think you know more about the legal aspects than I do. I wish Dean Stetson and his University all the best.</p>
<p>We'll find out what's going on if he sues them...</p>
<p>
[quote]
If the admissions process has not been 100% fair and unbiased, then I want my application fee back
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What's the planet where you claim residency? :confused: </p>
<p>No suggestion of collusion or impropriety, but rather that this is art work, not science. Like saying Miss America is 100% pretty. Well, I ALWAYS vote for Miss Congeniality, and she never wins. Maybe she'll get admitted though. Let's hope. Nice beats beautiful all the time.</p>
<p>I would bet that releases and confidentiality agreements were exchanged all around. No one is going to be suing anyone, at least not in public. (Sometimes parties will agree to litigate their dispute privately, before a retired judge or an arbitration panel, to avoid those messy, information-filled public court filings.) If there is some kind of criminal prosecution, then we'll find something out. But that seems really doubtful.</p>
<p>Hey Whistle Pig, let's say for the sake of argument, that someone discovered that hundreds of applications were never even read by any admissions reps. They never got around to them in time for the response deadline. So they just went ahead and rejected all those applicants. Not fair, right??? Wouldn't those applicants at least deserve a fee refund?? </p>
<p>I'm not saying it happened. It's just an unlikely theory. But, there have been so many other unlikely theories proposed here. I thought I'd throw it in. Even Ed Rendell's name has been thrown into the mix. This could be a possible human mistake that the boss would have to take the blame for.</p>
<p>Just another possibility along with all the other outrageous rumors....</p>
<p>Now someone on the DP comment board is saying that President Gutmann wanted additional African-American students admitted to Penn as part of her Penn Compact but that Stetson resisted...</p>
<p>We are seeing on this board why good leadership required handling this abrupt and shocking departure in a more nuanced and public manner. All sorts of wild speculation, about Penn and about Stetson, can now occur and continue among Penn's students, faculty, alumni, donors, applicants, and potential candidates for Dean of Admissions. </p>
<p>This is why I consider the handling of this matter reflects poorly on Gutmann.</p>
<p>Amen ADad!!</p>
<p>"Stetson Departure | Trustees not told reasons for exit"
10/18/07
<a href="http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2007/10/18/News/Stetson.Departure.Trustees.Not.Told.Reasons.For.Exit-3040749.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2007/10/18/News/Stetson.Departure.Trustees.Not.Told.Reasons.For.Exit-3040749.shtml</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
The Board of Trustees is the University's highest governing body, but some trustees are still in the dark about the reasons behind the departure of former Dean of Admissions Lee Stetson.</p>
<p>About half of the trustees who spoke to The Daily Pennsylvanian said they had not been told why Stetson abruptly resigned in late August. Other trustees declined to comment and would not reveal if they knew why Stetson left.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
In interviews with the DP, some trustees have expressed curiosity and anger with the lack of disclosure, saying they should know more about the situation.</p>
<p>"I damn well better get some better information" at the meetings, said one trustee who was granted anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding Stetson's departure.</p>
<p>The trustee added that it is especially disconcerting that, besides not having been told why Stetson left, the Board of Trustees also lack information about current plans for the admissions office moving forward.</p>
<p>"I think we've been kept too much in the dark," the trustee said.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh -- doesn't the administration technically report to the trustees? Or is it like most colleges, where the trustees are just window-dressing??</p>
<p>Administration reports to Trustees. But Penn has a huge board, and giving them all the reason would put it in the paper the next day. I'm sure the board chair knows what is going on.</p>
<p>Somebody had something in the wrong cookie jar.</p>
<p>You might chalk this up to the President simply wishing to have Penn admissions run by a Penn man instead of an admissions consultant. (See Bo Schembechler/Bill Frieder).</p>
<p>However, if that were the case, they would simply have said so. One wonders, (as noted earlier about beginning the consulting business early) if there arose some confusion about to whom data on Penns admissions belonged. Such data would be quite valuable in an admissions consulting business, I would think, if only to refresh ones memory.</p>
<p>And one wonders whether any of the administrators or trustees had exerted "improper" influence over any recent admissions decisions. Certainly if such a thing had happened, it would give Stetson a very strong bargaining position in his exit, and would keep him from being booted for any "cause", whatever the misconduct. </p>
<p>All of those possible scenarios would lead to a closed mouth policy and a termination agreement that might or might not include some monetary settlement.</p>
<p>So your saying they have something on him and he has somthing on them? Therefore, no one is talking....</p>
<p>Obviously we do not know, but to answer your question....I'm saying that is a possible explanation.</p>
<p>It also could be that something that Stetson did came to light that would not only be embarassing for him, but also for the university, (or possibly something that could give rise to some instiutional liability if it were known).</p>
<p>You can see why reporters would have an interest in pursuing this story.</p>
<p>Yes, inquiring minds want to know ;).</p>