Boren apparently had plenty of $$ and was always asking for more from every direction possible, this situation is going to let us know him and Molly wasted it

Yes, I’m sure I’ll stop being asked for money now!

I do think it’s possible to think both have done a good job. They just have different priorities—all of which can be good for the university. Everyone is so caught up in a political philosophy that they think must be correct, and it skews views about what they think works. There are multiple ways of doing things and none of them have to be poisonous to the university.

I think what Gallogly is reported to have said seems unprofessional and harsh toward Boren. I also think it’s possible that saying something along those lines may have been necessary to get Boren’s attention. Gallogly was going to be doing things differently, and it would be tougher if Boren was going to go public in defense of himself as he typically does. Something terse and direct may be the way to get the message across. On the other hand, without more context, the story about refusing to put the plaque up seems petty and unnecessary. That part worries me a bit more—that decisions are made on the basis of a personal vendetta.

I do think it’s possible to think both have done a good job. They just have different priorities—all of which can be good for the university. Everyone is so caught up in a political philosophy that they think must be correct, and it skews views about what they think works. There are multiple ways of doing things and none of them have to be poisonous to the university.

I think what Gallogly is reported to have said seems unprofessional and harsh toward Boren. I also think it’s possible that saying something along those lines may have been necessary to get Boren’s attention. Gallogly was going to be doing things differently, and it would be tougher if Boren was going to go public in defense of himself as he typically does. Something terse and direct may be the way to get the message across. On the other hand, without more context, the story about refusing to put the plaque up seems petty and unnecessary. That part worries me a bit more—that decisions are made on the basis of a personal vendetta.

Finally some nuance from somebody with the word sooner in their name.

Quote Originally Posted by ultimatesooner View Post
Boren apparently had plenty of $$ and was always asking for more from every direction possible, this situation is going to let us know him and Molly wasted it.

OMG,,,, she had trees, shrubs and grass planted and maintained. What a waste of money. Oh yeah, she threw away money on flowers too. The shame of it.

I am pleased to announce that we continue to make progress filling open executive positions and that I will be presenting several individuals to the Board of Regents for approval at the January Regents meeting.

James Gallogly
President
The University of Oklahoma


Senior Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer
Reports to: James L. Gallogly, President
Candidate: Dr. Jacquelyn Wolf (external candidate)
Start Date: Jan. 7, 2019

Candidate Summary:
Dr. Wolf has more than 35 years of experience in a broad array of human resources specialties and in overseeing human resources functions that supported complex and geographically dispersed operations. Most recently, Dr. Wolf has been an independent executive human resources consultant working for the University of Oklahoma. Prior to that, she served as Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer at Anthem Healthcare. She also served as Senior Vice President and Chief Human Resources Officer for LyondellBasell, one of the largest plastics and refining companies in the world. Dr. Wolf also served as Senior Vice President, Human Resources for Celanese Corporation and as Executive Vice President, Chief Human Resources Officer for Comerica. Prior to these roles, she served in progressively more responsible human resources positions at General Motors, Honeywell International, and General Electric.

Dr. Wolf received her Bachelor of Arts degree in organizational communications from Youngstown State University, a Master of Science, Business Management & Administration from Baker University, a Master of Arts in Human & Organizational Systems, and a Doctorate in Philosophy - Human and Organizational Systems from Fielding Graduate University.


Vice President, Student Affairs and Dean of Students
Reports to: James L. Gallogly, President
Candidate: Dr. David Surratt (external candidate)
Start Date: Feb. 11, 2019

Candidate Summary:
Dr. Surratt has 17 years of higher education experience with several colleges and institutions including the University of Oklahoma, Pennsylvania State University, St. Peter’s University, Rosemont College, and the University of California – Berkeley. He is currently the Assistant Vice Chancellor & Associate Dean of Students at the University of California - Berkeley and has served in various leadership roles there since 2013 including interim Dean of Students and interim Associate Vice Chancellor. In his current role, he is responsible for a broad array of student affairs programs including residential life, LEAD Center (e.g. Greek Life, Student Organization Advising, and Student Leadership Programs), Recreational Sports, New Student Services, and the Student Environmental Resource Center (SERC). Prior to this role, he was the interim Associate Vice Chancellor at UC Berkeley where he managed housing, events and facilities, campus dining, Cal 1 Card Office, and the early childhood education program. He also held positions as dean of students, chief housing officer, and other student affairs roles at the previously mentioned colleges and institutions.

Dr. Surratt has a Bachelor of Arts in English Literature, and a Masters of Arts in Human Relations from the University of Oklahoma, and a Doctorate of Education from George Washington University.

OU dean claims dismissal was retaliation (https://newsok.com/article/5620891/ou-dean-claims-dismissal-was-retaliation)


In a statement posted online, Grillot wrote: "After many months of trying to prevent the new administration from minimizing international education at the university and significantly reducing support for study abroad, global awareness, international student services and multicultural inclusion, President (James) Gallogly and Provost (Kyle) Harper terminated my position as Dean."

She called for his resignation today in front of him at the Rally to Stop Racism in the Ballroom.

https://twitter.com/JerickaHandie/status/1087807493890281475

She called for his resignation today in front of him at the Rally to Stop Racism in the Ballroom.

https://twitter.com/JerickaHandie/status/1087807493890281475

Sounds like another overpaid, disgruntled employee pulling the racism card and trying to make scene.

l wonder how far you have to take being insubordinate before a tenured Prof. can be fired?

Sounds like another overpaid, disgruntled employee pulling the racism card and trying to make scene.
Wasn’t about racism. Sounds like someone attempting to defend against the right’s effort to dismantle internationalism. Gallogly is a right wing anti intellectualism political plant. This is happening all across America with the upswing in nationalism.

Wasn’t about racism. Sounds like someone attempting to defend against the right’s effort to dismantle internationalism. Gallogly is a right wing anti intellectualism political plant. This is happening all across America with the upswing in nationalism.

Or, gee whiz, Gallogy was trying to find ways to cut costs since the schools' in a bit of a crunch. l imagine international campuses and foreign studies programs are a little expensive.

Wasn’t about racism. Sounds like someone attempting to defend against the right’s effort to dismantle internationalism. Gallogly is a right wing anti intellectualism political plant. This is happening all across America with the upswing in nationalism.

Someone should tell her that, because her comments when she called for the resignation sure made it seem like it was in response to this racist incident.

Wow... not a single **** was given. G-G-G-UNIT!! :D

Wow... not a single **** was given. G-G-G-UNIT!! :D

Could you translate this comment into something understandable to the average reader?

Oh man... Campus is wild now...

Man walking around north campus and campus corner in blackface.

https://twitter.com/javiouslyy/status/1088174205412302863

Open Letter on Higher Education in Oklahoma by OU Professor David Deming
https://oklahomataxpayersunite.com/open-letter-on-higher-education-in-oklahoma-ou-professor-david-deming/?fbclid=IwAR0N0YAKAH13SRNMXc6NUnJzR2X3ewGxz8VP8iLr G_nsGuPYNNbKf3FyRgM

While he makes some good points regarding budget and various offices of useless nothings, Oklahoma is part of the US and must compete with other states and institutions for teaching talent so l really don't have a problem with the salary issue unless there are just a few profs making much more than others.

The issue of political correctness and free speech does concern me greatly. A college is a place where all points of view should be heard and shared and unless promoting crime, violence or governmental overthrow should be allowed. Being inclusive and being diverse means allowing virtually all points of view, not just those of the left.

lf OU starts to turn into another Evergreen State University where only students of one political ilk are welcome, if whites are villified, or if the students begin to run the school, my child and my money will go elsewhere.

Open Letter on Higher Education in Oklahoma – OU Professor David Deming

https://oklahomataxpayersunite.com/open-letter-on-higher-education-in-oklahoma-ou-professor-david-deming/?fbclid=IwAR0N0YAKAH13SRNMXc6NUnJzR2X3ewGxz8VP8iLr G_nsGuPYNNbKf3FyRgM

Old White man bothered by young college radicals and their inclusion. A tale as old as time.

Old White man bothered by young college radicals and their inclusion. A tale as old as time.

Professor Deming has been an agent provacateur for quite sometime. Nothing new here.

The issue of political correctness and free speech does concern me greatly. A college is a place where all points of view should be heard and shared and unless promoting crime, violence or governmental overthrow should be allowed. Being inclusive and being diverse means allowing virtually all points of view, not just those of the left.

All ideas are accepted and welcome at OU... as long as they're not explicitly bigoted. Even in this case, you usually just face criticism and social pressure. In the cases where penalties have followed bigotry, they came from the top (regents, Boren), not the bottom. OU is in no way different than most universities. Notice, he -- as a White male -- is just complaining about minoritized groups facing bigotry:

- Kirk Humphreys espousing bigotry towards the LGBTQ community (he's entitled, but it's a huge problem for a university community when a regent espouses such views towards a part of the campus community; other regents addressed this one)

- SEA expulsions after espousing bigotry (and violence) against the Black community (the radical university president addressed that situation)

- His own bigotry that there are social events for LGBTQ and Muslim students? Or religious liberty for Muslim students? He provided no explanation for why these are wastes of money except that he... guess what... seems like he disapproves.

We should have all quit reading his call for inclusion when he called those he disagrees with "Hateful and irrational" without literally naming one hateful thing they've done besides oppose instances of bigotry.

Old White man bothered by young college radicals and their inclusion. A tale as old as time.

(Edit: I explain below why these are just the ramblings of an old White guy who doesn't like people of color, LGBTQ students, or Muslim students having influence at his university).

Sounds like a pretty bigoted comment to me on your part. While l dont agree with all he says, when did he ever say anything about people of color? Your response is the type of jump-to-conclusion, personal attack, play the race card type of attack that is exactly what he's talking about.

Sounds like a pretty bigoted comment to me on your part. While l dont agree with all he says, when did he ever say anything about people of color? Your response is the type of jump-to-conclusion, personal attack, play the race card type of attack that is exactly what he's talking about.

I updated my post, but pointing out his race is not bigotry. I am explaining why he seems to be unable to understand the perspectives of others. I am a White man myself, you know. The author of that post is almost exclusively upset that there were actually responses to instances of bigotry perpetrated against minoritized groups. Considering he is not a member of one these groups and is only defending people of his race and sex (see Humphreys, SEA guys) and literally complaining that minorities (see LGBTQ, Muslim) are allowed to also have events on his campus, his race and sex seem to be integral to the way he sees the world, and why he sees others' views as a threat to his identity.

All ideas are accepted and welcome at OU... as long as they're not explicitly bigoted. OU is in no way different than most universities. Notice, he -- as a White male -- is just complaining about minoritized groups facing bigotry:

- Kirk Humphreys espousing bigotry towards the LGBTQ community (he's entitled, but it's a huge problem for a university community when a regent espouses such views towards a part of the campus community; other regents addressed this one)

- SEA expulsions after espousing bigotry (and violence) against the Black community (the radical university president addressed that situation)

- His own bigotry that there are social events for LGBTQ and Muslim students? Or religious liberty for Muslim students? He provided no explanation for why these are wastes of money except that he... guess what... seems like he disapproves.

We should have all quit reading his call for inclusion when he called those he disagrees with "Hateful and irrational" without literally naming one hateful thing they've done besides oppose instances of bigotry.

Are you employed there? Where do you get your insight? Do you know him personally? l know his views on Kirk Humphries which l dont agree with but you're response is just so predictable. Disagree with him so tear him down personally which is the hateful and irrational speech here.

Are you employed there? Where do you get your insight? Do you know him personally? l know his views on Kirk Humphries which l dont agree with but you're response is just so predictable. Disagree with him so tear him down personally which is the hateful and irrational speech here.

I don't know the guy and didn't say anything beyond addressing what was in his own post that he chose to post on the Internet. But, yeah, responding to his own words make him look pretty bad. You don't have to agree with me. What did I say that you disagree with? It's hard for me to know why you think my speech is "hateful and irrational" since you didn't provide any explanation. I am honestly happy to discuss it even if we disagree.

I stepped away from my computer for two minutes and remembered why I avoid the political forum. Discussing these types of issues on a message board is difficult and often pointless. The next time I'm in OKC, I'd be happy to buy you, mug of beer, well, a mug of beer and discuss this or other issues. Best.

Throwing out the old,"well, he's just an old white guy who has a problem with people of color and inclusion" is a racist, bigoted statement. How do you know he doesn't like people of color, gays or Muslims? How do you get that from what he said? He may have faith in a 2000 year old religion but if you are going to disparage him for that, you must also disparage Islam which puts LQBTQ people to death, treats women like breeding stock and tolerates slavery of non believers.
You again throw out that he's just a white male complaining about minoritized groips facing bigotry. You say pointing out he's white is not bigotry? lt is when your clear point is to incite race and marginalize he is white, and old (whats your definition of old?) Racist, sexist and ageist all in one swoop.

I don't care if you're white, American Indian or not. Your statement was unnecesssary, demeaning, offensive race mongering and only perpetuates the chasm we have in this country today.

See my previous post. To answer your questions, I provided specific evidence for all my claims. I never once said being a White male is why he's bigoted. I said his bigotry is at least partly explained because he doesn't see beyond his own position as a White male (or Christian, as part of his post clarifies) in the world. There's a big difference. You seem to have misread several parts of my post as you're attributing a lot of things to me that I never said. For example, I am a White male as I stated. I don't know where you got that I am Indigenous. [edit: it seems you changed that part of your post]

Usually when people misread posts it's because they post out of anger. That's what a lot of these conversations turn into. I was doing it earlier, which is why I am going to step away from this discussion.

I guess you are not taking me up on my offer to buy you a beer? That was my olive branch. Either way, no hard feelings.

Yes, l believe we were writing at the same time earlier. Yes, l am still offended by your comments on the letter earlier in the thread. Yes,l stand by my response and deny anything was attributed to you that you didn't say. You yourself stated you edited your original response. Yes, l am angry because incendiary, racially divisive, demeaning comments about angry white guys are just that and need to stop. Character assassination of the author was totally uncalled for. Your response as originally written, and to a lesser extent later, is exactly what the author is talking about. You unwittingly proved some of his points.

Though this will never be as big a deal, your inferences of things the author is, feels and said were the same type of things written about the Ohio teens and the character assassination some of them have endured the last few days with their confrontation in DC last weekend.

People need to stop trolling other people and fabricating things that aren't there or innocent people are going to get killed.

Did you just imply that "innocent people are going to get killed" from something I wrote in this thread? Dude, step away from the keyboard.

This conversation is going nowhere. It almost seems as if online conversations are not the best place to change people's minds. Weird. I'll let else everyone know of my discovery. /s

Wasn’t about racism. Sounds like someone attempting to defend against the right’s effort to dismantle internationalism. Gallogly is a right wing anti intellectualism political plant. This is happening all across America with the upswing in nationalism.

+1 Bingo

All ideas are accepted and welcome at OU... as long as they're not explicitly bigoted. Even in this case, you usually just face criticism and social pressure. In the cases where penalties have followed bigotry, they came from the top (regents, Boren), not the bottom. OU is in no way different than most universities. Notice, he -- as a White male -- is just complaining about minoritized groups facing bigotry:

- Kirk Humphreys espousing bigotry towards the LGBTQ community (he's entitled, but it's a huge problem for a university community when a regent espouses such views towards a part of the campus community; other regents addressed this one)

- SEA expulsions after espousing bigotry (and violence) against the Black community (the radical university president addressed that situation)

- His own bigotry that there are social events for LGBTQ and Muslim students? Or religious liberty for Muslim students? He provided no explanation for why these are wastes of money except that he... guess what... seems like he disapproves.

We should have all quit reading his call for inclusion when he called those he disagrees with "Hateful and irrational" without literally naming one hateful thing they've done besides oppose instances of bigotry.

FYI no one from SAE was expelled for the bus incident. That’s a common misstatement by the media. Boren grandstanded during his press conference and lied about expelling the two students who were most visible in the bus video. Those students had withdrawn voluntarily earlier in the day, prior to the press conference which Boren was fully aware of. The university did not have the power to expel students over what they deemed hate speech as like it or not, it is protected by the first amendment. There are legal issues with expelling students over free speech issues at public universities and SAE hired an attorney who was prepared to sue the university on behalf of any students that Boren tried to expel over that. The situation obviously should never happened, but acting like Boren hauled off and expelled 20 people because of it is not correct.

Open Letter on Higher Education in Oklahoma by OU Professor David Deming
https://oklahomataxpayersunite.com/open-letter-on-higher-education-in-oklahoma-ou-professor-david-deming/?fbclid=IwAR0N0YAKAH13SRNMXc6NUnJzR2X3ewGxz8VP8iLr G_nsGuPYNNbKf3FyRgM

OU has over 100 admins and profs that make $200,000 or more? Im guessing ou isnt the only school like this but dang thats crazy!

FYI no one from SAE was expelled for the bus incident. That’s a common misstatement by the media. Boren grandstanded during his press conference and lied about expelling the two students who were most visible in the bus video. Those students had withdrawn voluntarily earlier in the day, prior to the press conference which Boren was fully aware of. The university did not have the power to expel students over what they deemed hate speech as like it or not, it is protected by the first amendment. There are legal issues with expelling students over free speech issues at public universities and SAE hired an attorney who was prepared to sue the university on behalf of any students that Boren tried to expel over that. The situation obviously should never happened, but acting like Boren hauled off and expelled 20 people because of it is not correct.

That's interesting, because a lot of the calls for Gallogly's resignation and a lot of the attacks against him I'm seeing in the past few days on social media, is that he didn't expel those two girls for the blackface video. And then folks blaming him for the idiot yesterday, again because he didn't expel the two girls. Someone needs to tell them this.

That's interesting, because a lot of the calls for Gallogly's resignation and a lot of the attacks against him I'm seeing in the past few days on social media, is that he didn't expel those two girls for the blackface video. And then folks blaming him for the idiot yesterday, again because he didn't expel the two girls. Someone needs to tell them this.
It is interesting. I'd never heard it myself and it's been pretty consistently reported that those two were expelled by Boren, no?

Yes, I gotchya. I honestly couldn't remember if Boren made it clear the SAE students were not welcome back to the university community (which is not a legal expulsion) or actually followed through with some threat... Either way, that wasn't really my point. I also didn't say anything remotely like what you attributed to me that "Boren hauled off and expelled 20 people because of it is not correct." Where did I say that?

My point, regarding the blog post, was simply that the actions regarding the SAE students came from the top of the university. Of course, this case is relevant today because students of color want to know there is a leader on campus who makes it clear that racism is not part of the culture of OU. Condemning hate speech quickly and without apologies sends a strong message to a community about values and justice.

In the shadow of MLK day, this thread reminds me of his quote from Letter from a Birmingham Jail: "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice."

Some people choose to spend all their energy fighting to ensure that the people who espouse racist or exclusionary speech aren't made to feel uncomfortable, but then say nothing about the groups who are made uncomfortable when targeted by that very hate speech. And before I'm misquoted, of course the first amendment allows for hate speech, but it also allows for people to confront it.

That's interesting, because a lot of the calls for Gallogly's resignation and a lot of the attacks against him I'm seeing in the past few days on social media, is that he didn't expel those two girls for the blackface video. And then folks blaming him for the idiot yesterday, again because he didn't expel the two girls. Someone needs to tell them this.

Thats what has been so annoying about this situation and the way everyone is acting like Gallogly isn’t doing enough and is a big old white racist because Boren acted like he was bringing down the hammer for political gain. Boren had no power to expel those students and word for word claimed that he was expelling them after they had withdrawn by choice (without being told to by anyone in the university, the mobs of students running around campus and the idiots harassing their families at their homes were enough to influence their decision). In his speech Gallogly rightly said, as Boren should have, that options were limited regarding the university’s ability to expel students for issues like this. And frankly they shouldn’t have been kicked out of school for protected free speech in a video made off campus in a private setting off campus, whether the public likes what they did or not. Going down that road is a very slippery slope. Punished, sure but not not expelled. Now if this had happened at Tulsa or OCU or any other private school, that would be a different story. They have much more flexibility in their responses to things like this.

Yes, I gotchya. I honestly couldn't remember if Boren made it clear the SAE students were not welcome back to the university community (which is not a legal expulsion) or actually followed through with some threat... Either way, that wasn't really my point. I also didn't say anything remotely like what you attributed to me that "Boren hauled off and expelled 20 people because of it is not correct." Where did I say that?

My point, regarding the blog post, was simply that the actions regarding the SAE students came from the top of the university. Of course, this case is relevant today because students of color want to know their is a leader on campus who makes it clear that racism is not part of the culture of OU. Condemning hate speech quickly and without apologies sends a strong message to a community about values and justice.

In the shadow of MLK day, this thread reminds me of his quote from Letter from a Birmingham Jail: "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice."

Some people choose to spend all their energy fighting to ensure that the people who espouse racist or exclusionary speech aren't made to feel uncomfortable, but then say nothing about the groups who are made uncomfortable when targeted by that very hate speech. And before I'm misquoted, of course the first amendment allows for hate speech, but it also allows for people to confront it.

You didn’t say it, that has been how the media has portrayed the SAE situation over the last few days. And no, Boren said verbatim that they were expelled which was a blatant lie and an attempt to grandstand because they had already withdrawn. He also claimed to have kicked the fraternity of campus and that the university owned the house and could do what they want with it...all of which were also untrue as the national fraternity closed the chapter a day earlier...so Boren really didn’t have anything to do with that...and the SAE housing corporation owns the house...which is why it is likley that they will return to campus at some point, though admittedly if people keep doing stupid crap like the two girls last week, that date will keep being pushed back.

I don't understand why the SAE incident is being brought up here. We're talking about two completely dissimilar incidents, where the only connecting thread is that both incidents involved stupid privileged children. The respective Greek organizations quickly handled their respective situations internally, except, I think that in SAE's case, I do wish the chapter had simply conducted a membership review and continued operations.

Knowing a little (a very little) about SAE's internal struggles, it may have been more that OU's chapter was still continuing traditions like pledging that SAE's HQ has taken a somewhat controversial stance against and that this was an opportunity for them to shutter operations, and reboot as a Balanced Man chapter. Again, wild speculation on my part. I would expect to see SAE returning this year or next as a 4 year suspension is pretty standard.

Tri Delt handled this as they should. They expelled the offending member and they moved on as a chapter.

There are people on campus who demand "justice" for offensive speech. Unfortunately, there's just no one left to be mad at.

You can interpret these events as isolated incidents or simply as products of their organizational cultures. In the case of the SAEs, reporting later showed that these incidents were not at all isolated. Members learned a violently racist song from fellow members and no one did anything about it. That's why these incidents require reflection on values, which is difficult but healthy.

In most cases, the justice most students on campus are asking for is a change in institutional culture. This can't be accomplished by waiting for negative incidents and then responding. It happens through building a healthy, inclusive, and anti-bigotry institutional culture that not only responds to events, but works to change the cultures which give rise to them. For an outside example, Baylor had a rape culture throughout the university and firing/arresting people responsible wasn't enough to change that culture, it required complete institutional change (which I don't think they've achieved still).

You can interpret these events as isolated incidents or simply as products of their organizational cultures. In the case of the SAEs, reporting later showed that these incidents were not at all isolated. Members learned a violently racist song from fellow members and no one did anything about it. That's why these incidents require reflection on values, which is difficult but healthy.

Right, or you can interpret it as 4 19-20 year old kids who did dumb things which cost them dearly. I'll bet there'll be another incident because as long as you have 19-20 year old kids not being supervised, occasionally, someone will do something stupid. People have to choose to be offended.

People have to choose to be offended.

Ah, blaming the victim. The real problem here is that black people are offended by racist acts. Got it.

Oh that's just ridiculous. Now people are "victims" because someone posted something on Insta? That's, again, absurd. See, I am offended by these people's actions because I choose to be. I take responsibility for how I feel and how I behave. It would also be a choice to march, to hand the President of the University some ridiculous resignation letter in a stunt. It would be a choice to burn down a fraternity house to register my disdain. Some expectation is reasonable that community reaction be commensurate with the harm done. A 19-20 year old kid posted something stupid on Insta. She was removed from her sorority and withdrew from school. What other pound of flesh is necessary?

See my last post. It's not just about these two incidents. Then again, what do I know? My points are "ridiculous" and "absurd."

Ah, blaming the victim. The real problem here is that black people are offended by racist acts. Got it.

People have a right to be offended and upset, but to call anyone who chose to watch that video on their own accord a “victim” is a little absurd.

They made a stupid decision and are being punished for it. The ridiculous part of it are the people that keep holding rallies and making the situation a bigger deal than it is, and those pushing for Gallogly to be fired over it. Some of the people overreacting to this, like the disgruntled former dean who looked like she was having a seizure while while calling for Gallogly’s resignation, are nearly as stupid as the girls who made the video in the first place.

Some of the people overreacting to this, like the disgruntled former dean who looked like she was having a seizure while while calling for Gallogly’s resignation, are nearly as stupid as the girls who made the video in the first place.

"who looked like she was having a seizure" did you seriously just post this?

so... back to the debt and Gallogly...

People have a right to be offended and upset, but to call anyone who chose to watch that video on their own accord a “victim” is a little absurd.

Again, if you listen to the students on campus it's not just about these two incidents. They are, and have been, expressing that these are symptoms of larger problems. Do you know how many instances of racism don't make the news? You don't have to agree with them, but at least hear them out. Everyone is so quick to dismiss the perspectives of OU's students of color.

"who looked like she was having a seizure" did you seriously just post this?

No, I fake posted it. Have you watched the video? She looks unhinged and like she’s having a seizure. I wish that were an exaggeration.

This is nothing more than turning into an opportunity to try to get Gallogly fired. He can’t control what people post on social media and can only handle consequences.

Calling everyone and their brother a racist is getting old. There is a profitable market for making sure race relations are as bad as possible.

In my opinion from my everyday life is no issue with race relations. I work with numerous races and backgrounds and we get along fine with no issues. They only time I see issues with race relations is when the media makes it seem like everyone and their brother is a racist. I understand there are isolated incidents, but this is the exception and not the norm.

No, I fake posted it. Have you watched the video? She looks unhinged and like she’s having a seizure. I wish that were an exaggeration.

I watched it several times and it looks nothing like that.

Whatever point you are trying to make would be well served by leaving out comments that make you look like a terrible human being.

Actually, let me be more specific. When you are already in a situation where you are fighting back against accusations of bigotry at OU and related entities, employing the "crazy woman" stereotype does not help.

Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but Words will Never Hurt Me.

Again, if you listen to the students on campus it's not just about these two incidents. They are, and have been, expressing that these are symptoms of larger problems. Do you know how many instances of racism don't make the news? You don't have to agree with them, but at least hear them out. Everyone is so quick to dismiss the perspectives of OU's students of color.

Thank You

Actually, let me be more specific. When you are already in a situation where you are fighting back against accusations of bigotry at OU and related entities, employing the "crazy woman" stereotype does not help.

I guess we watched different videos. There’s no stereotype needed and no where did i reference her gender or say she was being a “crazy woman.” If a man had been been acting similarly and making the same comments, i would’ve had the same opinion of him (that windbag that tried to claim that his firing was “a high-tech lynching” would be a good example). Though it is 2019, so i guess immediately assuming that i made that comment because I’m bigoted against women should’ve been the response i expected from you. Yes She looks and sounds like a crazy or at best emotionally unstable person that’s disgruntled over her position and program being cut. Yes, going out and literally screaming to the public that the president of the university should resign because you’re upset that your program was cut and because two girls did something stupid off campus that he had no control over is a bit crazy or at minimum a stupid logical leap for a sane, emotionally stable person to make.

You’ve been probably been one of the most outspoken critics against Gallogly here though so I would expect you to side with her and not think she looks like the crazed, emotionally unstable person that some of us do. It’s all a matter of perspective.

Actually, let me be more specific. When you are already in a situation where you are fighting back against accusations of bigotry at OU and related entities, employing the "crazy woman" stereotype does not help.

Well, if we're all obligated to play by Social Justice Warrior rules, then sure. For the rest of us, the recently demoted dean marching up to Gallogly, interrupting the assembly, strutting around accusing the President of the University of racist acts when no one can point to a single thing he's done wrong in that regard and throwing that prop at him detracted from any point these students were trying to make. And that's largely where these students are going to lose public support. If this is about more than a racist Instagram video whose creators are no longer students at OU, lots of us are completely lost at what exactly these students are upset about--and saying something like "your privilege is showing," while I'm sure it's cathartic, does not advance your cause.

I watched it several times and it looks nothing like that.

Whatever point you are trying to make would be well served by leaving out comments that make you look like a terrible human being.

If me saying that someone who is acting like a complete idioit looks like she’s having a seizure makes me a terrible person, than so be it.

Actually, let me be more specific. When you are already in a situation where you are fighting back against accusations of bigotry at OU and related entities, employing the "crazy woman" stereotype does not help.

I agree David.

If me saying that someone who is acting like a complete idioit looks like she’s having a seizure makes me a terrible person, than so be it.

Incidentally, what initially set me off was the link you made between complete idiot and seizure which you are now doubling down on. Maybe stop digging?

Here is a pretty good summary (https://www.chronicle.com/article/Hired-to-Fix-Finances/245549?key=lUtmf4EyiX3iIy8Gt541ov4eenPaNTAOaZJq8QD G2E7zc5kbdIkgVZ3gArYzwgF5VkctMDIxbVhYQ3VkQUZIbmxHM G9rdW5ocDlXUnNUaVp2VVB1aHBaRGgxWQ) of where things are for Gallogly and the campus community from the Chronicles of Higher Ed, the most influential and read higher ed outlet.

A couple thoughts on the article:

1. I don't criticize Gallogly for ensuring that programs are not wasteful. I really don't think anyone would. However, the primary problem here is that he was hired secretly (e.g., universities have democratic governance), his tone has been antagonistic and dismissive with those with whom he disagrees (e.g., Boren, Grillot; numerous public fights), and he has done a poor job of communicating his aims with the university community and seeking feedback (e.g., making drastic cuts without any deliberation). The obvious problem is that running a university is NOT like running a company. Either his lack of experience in higher ed and/or his disposition have been really detrimental. Even when people disagree with you on a university campus, you can earn their respect if, well, you treat them with respect by being inclusive and transparent.

I was at Wichita State University when a new president took over. He wanted huge changes. So he started by embarking on a listening tour with all faculty in the university. He didn't talk, he listened. He then integrated faculty ideas into his mission for change. Guess what? He had a lot of support on the campus even on less popular issues. That's leadership. Guess what? That's how someone who has worked in higher education approaches change. Gallogly doesn't seem to understand this.

2. It seems like Gallogly's picture of OU's financial situation was wrong and Boren was right. OU is not in a dire situation, but one that is comparable to peer universities just as Boren retorted to Gallogly's claims. It doesn't mean you can't improve the financial situation, but his message undercuts his credibility in the only area where he's supposed to be an expert.

What's the path forward? You have to have support to be a university president. Can Gallogly learn and change? Or, should the regents admit their mistake and seek a replacement? However, the regents deserve a lot of criticism and scrutiny for their handling of this process. Can this group of regents be expected to get the next process and decision right either? There's a lot of questions and bad press for OU, which makes me appreciate Boren's tenure more.

Here is a pretty good summary (https://www.chronicle.com/article/Hired-to-Fix-Finances/245549?key=lUtmf4EyiX3iIy8Gt541ov4eenPaNTAOaZJq8QD G2E7zc5kbdIkgVZ3gArYzwgF5VkctMDIxbVhYQ3VkQUZIbmxHM G9rdW5ocDlXUnNUaVp2VVB1aHBaRGgxWQ) of where things are

I'm glad this article was posted. This is the first literature I've read which is not skewed through some local media lens.

I hate the title of this Thread. I sincerely hope everyone reads this factual account of the situation. OU's "debt" is normal and was weaponized by Clay to boot Boren. Gallogly's hiring process should have people raising pitchforks.

OU is better than this.