Nona Gerard was fired for creating a "hostile environment" for her colleagues at Penn State Altoona. She created this alleged hostile environment by frankly criticizing some of them--the example most often quoted in the papers is that of an email in which Gerard described a junior colleague as "talentless" and "cold as a fish." Gerard made this comment, it should be noted, in a private email sent to one individual. That individual--who happened to be an administrator--then forwarded the email onto a listserv, where it became public and was seen by numerous people. I'm not big on "hostile environment" claims, but if one were to credit this particular charge, one would have to admit that it was not Gerard who created the hostile environment with her private comment, but the administrator who forwarded the comment on to those who were subsequently wounded by it.

Be that as it may, it's worth noting the double standards Penn State appears to have in place regarding student and faculty speech. I received an email today from Patrick Gibbons, a 2003 PSU grad who has a story to tell. Here's his letter:

Nona Gerard, a former professor at Penn State Altoona, has good cause to sue Penn State for gender discrimination and violating her first amendment rights.

Gerard has been fired for "grave misconduct" and "failure to perform." These stem from "hostile" and "unprofessional" remarks and emails she made. In them she criticized the IA program and faculty with name calling like "Talentless" and "as cold as a dead fish." This name calling was deemed unprofessional and hostile and so she was fired.

But what many Penn Staters do not know is the arbitrary decisions the Administration makes in who they fire and who they defend the freedom of speech with.

Last year a University Park Instructor for Higher Education used curse words while name calling a student via email (I was the student who received the hostile and unprofessional email). Complaints were brought and then ignored. The Administration would later acknowledge the comments but refuse to apologize or take action, thus condoning this behavior.

Penn State sets a dangerous precedent in several areas. 1) You cannot criticize faculty and the University, only students. 2) Curse words are not unprofessional or hostile but "talentless" is. 3) Male teachers do not get in trouble because the administration ignores the events while females get fired.

ThatÌs right, the instructor was a male; he used curse words to describe a student who disagreed and nothing was done; the complaints of unprofessional conduct were ignored!

The Penn State administration must be held accountable for their arbitrary and inconsistent decisions as to what is unprofessional and hostile to warrant discipline and or termination of employment.

Gibbons reported the instructor's remarks to several different authorities at PSU, but got nowhere.

I'm not convinced, on the basis of two examples, that gender is a decisive factor in PSU's behavior. But I do think that the contrast between how PSU admins gave Gibbons' interlocutor a free pass while they fired Gerard for her comparatively mild expression suggests that, at the very least, the people at Penn State have a big problem with consistency--one that is ripe for becoming a huge public relations disaster.

UPDATE: The public relations disaster has begun.