A recent report, published by The National Academies Press detailed the depth with which the Penn State College of Medicine experiences sexual and gender based harassment. The report claims that nearly half of women in the College of Medicine experience gender-based hostility from faculty or staff during their time at Penn State.

​

Alongside the University of Texas, Penn State University offered to supply information to the report in an effort to gain a larger comprehension of the issue. An in depth study of the rates of harassment within the college revealed that women in the field experience sexist hostility from their staff and faculty at 235% the amount that non-STEM majors. This trend was similar at the University of Texas.

​

While Penn State has stated that they participated in this study as a means to bring this inequality to an end, they have received criticism from some members of the University community. The report was published nearly two months ago; however, there seems to have been little action following up on this new information.

​

Criticism has followed the University since the report’s publication, however. At a meeting of the University-Faculty Senate (UFS)--a group of university staff members and students committed to discussing and addressing the problems faced by the university--held shortly after the publication of the report, several members of the College of Medicine questions the administration about the report.

​

“Considering that we are one of the two institutions that are mentioned by name [in the report], I was wondering if there’s any sort of plan at the leadership level to respond to this and address this issue?” asked Spencer Katz, a UFS Student Senator from the College of Medicine. Regina Vasilatos-Younken, Vice Provost for Graduate Education and Dean of the Graduate School, offered an explanation for the numbers in the report.

​

“[The researchers] misunderstood how the data was shared with them. That doesn’t, certainly, minimize the significance of it. But, I do say that because there is a significant national conversation around medical education and even female physicians and female medical students,” stated Vasilatos-Younken. Several justifications were offered for the high numbers in the report, most hinging on the researchers including students outside of the College of Medicine, while maintaining that the numbers were high enough, throughout the university, to warrant action. However, members of the UFS did not seem content with this explanation.

​

“I don’t think that’s really the answer to the question, because the fact is...I don’t care which students they are. That number is ridiculously high. And there has to be a plan to deal with it,” said Ira Ropson, a UFS faculty senator, also from the College of Medicine. The senate, as a whole, began to applaud this response, according to the minutes from the UFS meeting.

​

Other individuals have been reluctant to accept this response as well. Constantinus Van Der Wegen and Ninive Robles-Flores, two UFS student senators, stated that they were displeased with the justification. Van Der Wegen referred to President Barron’s response specifically, or the perceived lack thereof, while discussing the administration’s response.

​

“The people that are [harassing students] need to be held responsible for their actions. In other words, I expected President Barron to denounce these people, who have not been identified yet, however nothing. Nothing. Silence. So I was disappointed, severely disappointed, along with other, most, faculty members there,” said Van Der Wegen.

​

“Of course, as a student, specifically female, this was alarming as I do not want to hear that we were mentioned because we provided information, but rather how the university and the board will mobilize itself to attend to this issue. I would have appreciated a more direct and transparent approach to the discussion,” Robles-Flores said, “Hopefully, this will not go overlooked and can continue to be a topic of discussion as it is urgent we revise these high rates of gender-based harassment.”

​

“It does grip me, something like this, because we all have a lot of school pride. We are Penn State, right? Then something like this, it hurts your pride. It cuts deep,” Van Der Wegen said. “Penn State is not a university without a track record on certain issues...with that in mind, I feel like we should actively attack these issues and solve them. This is not something that should be allowed, especially with our history, to exist within this university.”

​

In response to the high rates of sexual misconduct, and the perceived lack of  action by the administration, the University offered a statement regarding new policies put in place to help reduce harassment. The University also claimed that the survey--which was the source of the numbers in the report--was “key to understanding challenges, formulating new policies and solutions, and tracking progress.” The survey will be repeated eventually in the hopes of tracking the effectiveness of the new policies.

​

“The Sexual Misconduct Climate Survey was undertaken as one of 18 recommendations by Penn State’s Task Force on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment, which was convened more than three years ago. President Eric Barron endorsed all 18 recommendations, which are aimed at fighting sexual assault and misconduct on all Penn State campuses,” said the University in an email.

​

As such, the effects of those policies are yet to be determined. However, as they have been endorsed for as long as three years, it is still questionable what impact they have had on the prevalence of harassment in the College.