Consortium on Moral Decision-Making
Home
—
Funding Opportunities

Funding Opportunities

Call for EMBER Grants

Flames and object

The Consortium on Moral Decision-Making is seeking proposals for Ember Grants (to fuel exciting ideas in Empathy and Morality BEhavioral Research). These are meant to support up-start interdisciplinary research related to the conceptual and empirical study of human morality and ethical decision-making. How do people decide whether to help or harm others, whom to trust and cooperate with, and how much to assign punishment and blame for transgressions? How do these trade offs play out in light of current events, including the pandemic, human-AI relations, climate change, and the political landscape? Understanding human morality and ethics requires drawing upon insights from a diverse range of disciplines, and the current request for proposals aims to motivate scholars to find such connections in exploring the nature of human morality. The goal of the Consortium, which is funded generously through College of the Liberal Arts, Social Science Research Institute, Rock Ethics Institute, McCourtney Institute for Democracy, the Philosophy Department, and the Psychology Department, is to cultivate new projects that bring together people in projects such as these. The Consortium was also supported through an additional SSRI Level 4 Interdisciplinary Research Initiative grant to facilitate the long-term growth of the network and the training of early career researchers.

This call is open to faculty-led teams at Penn State, with an ideal focus on interdisciplinary teams from within the Consortium’s faculty members. Graduate student collaborators are welcome as part of application teams as well, but there should be a faculty PI. Collaborators from outside Penn State are allowed, but the lead PI should be based at one of the Penn State campuses.

Although the seed grants are ideally suited for applicants who propose to apply empirical study to human morality and ethics (e.g., through data collection, narrative review of data), we also welcome applications for projects that are more conceptual in nature. Interdisciplinary projects are encouraged but not a requirement for applications.

Applicants may request anywhere from $500-$1000, and funds can be put toward participant recruitment, workshops or reading groups, and other support for the research project. We anticipate making ten to twelve awards. Ideally, these awards will support the seeking of external support and/or efforts to publish research. As a condition of funding, all awardees will be expected to attend an in-person half-day conference at the end of spring 2026 in which they will present their in-progress research ideas and/or results to members of the Rock Ethics community. Furthermore, awardees must use these funds during the fiscal year which they are awarded, until Tuesday, June 30, 2026.

Proposals should have the following:

– A one-page summary of the proposed work, outlining the justification, background, and proposed work and use of funds, as well as a clear explanation of the connection to moral decision-making and the fit with the interdisciplinary mission of the Consortium

  • Budget request and justification
  • CV’s for all team members
  • A short three to four sentence abstract that we would use to publicly describe the funded projects.

Send questions and applications through the following Application Link.

The deadline for submissions is by 5:00 p.m. E.S.T. on Friday, February 27, 2026, and a number of proposals will be awarded, based on review by a small team of Consortium members, by the third week of March 2026 (i.e., after spring break).

To learn more about the funded projects from 2024 and 2025, see the slides below. To hear more about these projects, see the archive of the presentations from awardees on the videos widget on the Events page of this website.

Moral and Ethical Reasoning in Community Resistance to AI Infrastructure

Natalie Rae – natalie.rae@psu.edu

Dylan Paré – dpare@psu.edu

This study investigates how Lancaster residents who participated in city council meetings opposing a proposed AI data center formed and explained their ethical objections. Preliminary analysis of Lancaster council meetings shows that residents raised concerns about environmental sustainability, health, transparency in governance, and inequitable distribution of power and benefits. While these public comments reveal what concerns residents expressed, less is known about how individuals formed the moral and ethical dimensions of their participation. This project addresses that gap by interviewing residents, enabling deeper insight into how ethical reasoning shapes civic engagement with emerging AI infrastructure. This qualitative study will use semi-structured interviews with approximately 20 Lancaster residents who spoke during public council meetings or participated in related civic organizing.

Christina Taheri – cjl22@psu.edu

While educational policies have settled the ethical nature of undisclosed generative AI use in academic assessments, the undisclosed use of generative AI in everyday interpersonal communications remains ethically ambiguous. The purpose of this project is to explore moral decision-making around generative AI use in interpersonal communications to develop an adaptive ethical framework.

Tiffany Petricini – tzr106@psu.edu
Sarah Zipf –  stz2@psu.edu

This project extends an ongoing research program examining how students reason about generative AI use in higher education. Building on prior interview-based “confessions” research, this study will recruit additional students to deepen and refine the AI-Use Ethics Matrix, a framework that maps moral reasoning across dimensions of intention, effort, and institutional guidance. Through structured interviews and grounded theory analysis, the project explores how students assign responsibility, evaluate fairness, and navigate fear of accusation in AI-mediated learning environments. Findings will advance interdisciplinary scholarship on moral decision-making while informing more supportive, student-centered approaches to academic integrity in the age of AI.

Timonthy (Elmo) Kwiatek – kwiatek@psu.edu
Tim Feiten – feiten@psu.edu
Wiktoria Pedryc – wmp5172@psu.edu

The Praise and AI Research (PAIR) Group will run a series of studies to compliment theoretical work also undertaken by members of our group. We aim to empirically explore four issues about praise and blame between LLMs and users. We’re interested in: (1) the perceived accuracy of patterns of judgments of praise- and blameworthiness, (2) the comparative perception of force and quality of expressions of praise and blame provided by people and by LLMs, (3) the ways that users seek (im)partiality in judgments and expressions of praise from LLMs compared with the way they seek out impartiality in expressions of blame from online forums like reddit’s AITAH, and (4) the extent to which extended interaction with LLM praise influences and distorts users own patterns of praising.

Ben Jones – btj7@psu.edu
Nick Goldrosen – ncg5252@psu.edu

Calls to defund the police have sparked controversy ever since gaining prominence during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests. Yet some measures that decrease police budgets—like disbanding a town’s police department and contracting for police services at a lower cost—typically don’t get framed as defunding the police and are less controversial. Why? We hypothesize that “defund the police” carries an illocutionary meaning to punish police, which we plan to test through two survey experiments involving different budget scenarios as well as terminology (e.g., defund the police versus more innocuous terms like budget reductions).

Sean Laurent – slaurent@psu.edu
Becca Ruger – becca@psu.edu
Wiktoria Pedryc – wmp5172@psu.edu

The awarding of this grant will enable two consortium members to present research on morality conducted at Penn State (PI: Dr. Sean Laurent) to an international audience composed of interdisciplinary morality researchers at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Society for Philosophy and Psychology in Baltimore, Maryland. Wiktoria M. Pedryc (graduate student, department of psychology and social data analytics) will present research on the influence of transgressors’ upbringing on moral and legal evaluations of their criminal transgressions and prosocial acts. Becca Ruger (graduate student, departments of psychology and social data analytics) will present research on the role of socioeconomic status on moral judgments. Attending the conference will enable the students to share work conducted by Consortium members at Penn State, foster potential collaborations with interdisciplinary researchers, and have their work evaluated and improved through an international perspective.

Faruk Yalcin – fty5005@psu.edu

The Theory of Dyadic Morality (TDM) proposes that moral judgment is driven by perceived harm, yet it also defines harm as an intentional agent causing damage to a patient. In prior work, we found that subjective harm and TDM-defined harm converge for highly dyadic violations but sharply diverge for minimally dyadic violations: many scenarios were judged immoral despite low subjective harm and near-floor TDM-harm ratings. This project will investigate what people mean when they judge actions as immoral but not harmful by collecting brief explanations when participants’ immorality, subjective harm, and TDM-harm ratings diverge. We will develop a coding framework, use LLM-assisted content analysis, and map the reasoning patterns underlying judgments that are “immoral without harm” and “subjectively harmful but not harmful in the TDM sense.”

Brian Xu – brianxu@psu.edu
Reg Adams – rba10@psu.edu

Past research showed that idiosyncratic models (as opposed to group level aggregation) are much better at predicting individual’s attractiveness perception. Prior research on the “what is moral is beautiful” effect has shown relatively small, but statistically significant, differences in ratings of facial attractiveness. We aim to magnify this divergence in attractiveness ratings using person-specific moral values as manipulation. We hope to find further support for halo effect and to extend the boundaries of idiosyncratic models to moral judgements.

Ronnie Riley – rjr6147@psu.edu
Reg Adams – rba10@psu.edu

The perception of expression authenticity is intertwined with the concept of honesty. People who are considered morally good are also assumed to be honest (Jackson et al., 2023). It is possible that, like honesty, authenticity is subject to moral generalizing such that people’s perceived moral character can affect the perceived authenticity in their emotional expressions. This work seeks to investigate the relationship between moral character, authenticity, and expression perception.

Peter Forster – pkf1@psu.edu

This project investigates the intersection of nihilism and the use of “unchained”, “unrestricted” or offline Large Language Models (LLMs) in the radicalization lifecycle. By exploring how vulnerable individuals—particularly in university settings—interact with and are exploited by AI during the radicalization process and “attack planning” phases, we aim to identify “off-ramps” that redirect individuals toward prosocial moral frameworks. The study combines conceptual analysis of nihilistic moral decay with empirical inquiry into the role of restricted vs. unrestricted AI in motivating, preparing, and mobilizing individuals in to commit harmful acts, ultimately fostering a larger collaboration with the National Counterterrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center (NCITE).

Mary Katherine Shenk – mks74@psu.edu
Sojung Beck – sjbaek1871@psu.edu

In patrilocal societies, where women disperse from natal kin and must establish support within affinal communities, forming durable, trust-based relationships is critical for social and reproductive success. This project examines empathy as a key social mechanism through which women build social capital, measured by support networks, life satisfaction, and belonging, using mixed-method longitudinal data from rural Bangladesh. A second wave data collection integrates wireless proximity sensors to capture real-time empathic interactions, enabling fine-grained behavioral observation of how everyday empathic interactions sustains cooperation and promote the maintenance of social capital in male-centric social systems.

Josh Wenger – jdw6278@psu.edu
Daryl Cameron – cdc49@psu.edu

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly used for emotional support. Previous work even suggests that AI empathy is often rated as more empathetic than human empathy. In the present research, we explore people’s forecasts—how they expect human versus AI empathy to make them feel—contrasted with how these sources of empathy actually make them feel.

Jolie Kretzschmar – jak7209@psu.edu
Daryl Cameron – cdc49@psu.edu

Schadenfreude refers to the joy a person may feel in response to the suffering of another. We will apply a framework of motivated emotion regulation to build upon the understanding of the costs and benefits one may weigh in the decision to express schadenfreude in a given context. Topics and themes within participants’ descriptions of a time they felt schadenfreude, and their perceived motivation for expressing schadenfreude if done so, will be identified utilizing both BERTopic Modeling and Thematic Analysis.

Ian Rowe-Nicholls – irn5036@psu.edu
Gary Adler – gja13@psu.edu 

Individuals with the lowest incomes donate a percentage of their income far higher than the population average. Using longitudinal panel survey data and an empirically-calibrated agent-based model, we examine whether local socioeconomic segregation helps produce this pattern by unequally distributing exposure to visible material hardship across income groups. We show that increases in neighborhood poverty predict higher charitable giving over time and that these exposure effects are strong enough to reproduce the “philanthropic poor” pattern as an emergent outcome of U.S. levels of income segregation. The findings suggest that the same socioeconomic sorting processes that help sustain wealth inequality also suppress the generosity of those positioned to alleviate it.

Louisa Holmes – lmholmes@psu.edu
Emily Rosenman – ekr5260@psu.edu

Thabo Sebobi

“The ability to enjoy the experience of JUUL throughout daily life seamlessly with fewer restrictions and social concerns”: How e-cigarette marketing strategies leverage moral judgement and personal guilt

For this project, we propose to investigate how JUUL Labs Inc., creator of the most profitable pod-based electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS), used moral cues and social manipulation in their marketing campaigns to leverage tobacco smokers’ personal guilt around using cigarettes and the stigma attached to smoking. JUUL painted their vapes as a socially, morally, and legally acceptable alternative to cigarette smoking and, in direct contrast to cigarettes, emphasized how well vapes fit into peoples’ lives, no matter the setting. We ask: How did JUUL use moral cues and social-emotional manipulation strategies to sell its products and become the fastest-growing e-cigarette company? And what health policy lessons can we learn to reverse engineer these strategies in ways designed to mitigate and prevent future harm from e-cigarette use?

Intergenerational Empathic Effort

Daryl Cameron, associate professor of psychology, Penn State; and Stylianos Syropoulous, assistant professor, and Kyle Law, postdoctoral scholar, Global Futures School of Sustainability, University of Arizona

This study will use an adapted empathy selection task to examine whether anticipated effort predicts empathy selection, how empathy influences moral obligation, and whether interventions can increase intergenerational concern by virtue of increasing empathy expressed towards future people and decreasing empathy avoidance. 

Xun Cao, professor of political science and public policy, Penn State

By exploring individual and collective decision-making processes in the context of global climate change, this project would generate important policy implications to provide better solutions to mediate the negative impacts of climate change and help to achieve ethical distribution of resources to prevent future harm. 

Gary Adler, associate professor, and Ian Rowe-Nicholls, doctoral student, sociology and criminology, Penn State

The researchers theorize that visible markers of poverty and affluence in one local community affect perceptions of broader societal hardship and resource disparity, as well as socioeconomic privilege and personal sense of moral obligation to give. As a result, they hypothesize that income diversity in one local community affects individuals’ propensity to give differently based on their own socioeconomic status, but mixed-income communities provide more money to charity overall than more socioeconomically segregated communities.

Emily Rosenman, assistant professor, and Louisa Holmes, associate professor, geography, Penn State

This project will examine internal corporate documents made public through state and federal lawsuits against Juul Labs, the producer of a leading nicotine e-cigarette product in the U.S. Building on previous work analyzing corporate strategies in the opioid industry, this research aims to understand the development of Juul’s educational programs, the specific groups they aimed to influence, and the broader implications for public health interventions.

Courtney Karmelita, executive director of ethical research and outreach; Jennifer Nicholas, director of the office of postdoctoral affairs; Jennifer McCormick, associate professor; Leah Hollis, associate dean, access equity and inclusion; and Moriah Szpara, professor of biology, Penn State – This pilot study aims to explore the ethical decision-making process that leads trainees to report misconduct, identify what unethical behaviors they are witnessing, and understand how they evaluate such actions. The findings will inform interventions to promote ethical decision-making and address integrity issues in research.

Timothy Kwiatek, assistant teaching professor, and Tim Elmo Feiten, assistant teaching professor, philosophy, Penn State – The main aim of the project will be to consider different models for thinking about blame and especially praise (far less researched) and consider them in relation to internet mediated communication and especially large language models (LLMs.)

Sean Laurent, assistant professor; Becca Ruger, graduate student; and WIktoria Pedryc, graduate student, psychology, Penn State

This grant will enable two graduate student consortium members to travel to present their work on moral decision-making at an international, interdisciplinary conference on morality. Attending the conference will allow the students to highlight consortium-supported work and the moral psychology hub at Penn State, while also allowing them to make connections that will foster collaborations with interdisciplinary researchers from other countries.

Faruk Yalcin, graduate student, psychology, Penn State

This project investigates whether experiencing moral outrage can motivate people to seek out information that challenges their views on moral issues. Findings from this study could offer us insights as to whether experiencing moral outrage on social media has the potential to bridge moral divisions.

Joshua Wenger, graduate student, psychology, Penn State

Grounded in modern machine learning techniques and psychometrics, the present work proposes a novel methodology for exploring general human conceptions of the moral domain, and how this understanding of morality aligns with AI. Findings contribute to the broader ethical debate of AI morality, and moral psychological debate surrounding the use of AI as an experimental participant.

New Research in Moral Psychology with Applications to Technology Ethics

Tim Elmo Feiten and Timothy Kwiatek, Department of Philosophy

We are requesting a seed grant to start an interdisciplinary research group to investigate the intersection between moral psychology and technology ethics, especially concerning human- LLM interactions. Our aim is to produce both conceptual papers and new empirical research. The seed grant will help us fund the first phase in which we read David Shoemaker’s 2024 book The Architecture of Praise and Blame: An Interdisciplinary Investigation with an interdisciplinary group of scholars from across Penn State, in particular from the Departments of Philosophy, Psychology, and Economics (all of which the book draws on). Based on our critical discussion of the book, we will start writing a conceptual research paper as well as a grant application for an empirical study. The precise details of the study will be informed by our conceptual analysis of the Shoemaker book and our current plan is to investigate how humans and LLMs assign praise and blame to other humans and LLMs. We feel that our project closely matches the research mission and interdisciplinary spirit of the consortium and would be very grateful for seed funding to support our plan.

The main aim of our group will be to consider different models for thinking about blame and especially praise (far less researched) and consider them in relation to internet mediated communication and especially LLMs. This inquiry can be fruitful in either direction: philosophy can help draw conceptual distinctions and generate hypotheses, while empirical research can help both refine and test philosophical concepts. Our reading of the Shoemaker book in an interdisciplinary group and subsequent writing of a research paper and grant proposal have the potential to show how concepts of praise and blame can help us understand human interactions in and with emerging technologies, and also show how these technologies themselves can help us gain a better understanding of praise and blame more generally.

Catherine Wanner, Professor of History, Anthropology and Religious Studies, College of the Liberal Arts;
Lena Suzkho-Harned, Associate Teaching Professor of Political Science and Associate Director of the Public Policy Initiative, Penn State Behrend

What constitutes a war crime and which war crimes have been committed in Ukraine after Russia’s invasion in 2022? This research examines the moral implications of reacting to atrocities committed during war. Specifically, we analyze how understandings are formed as to who has a responsibility to respond to the restoration and healing of a traumatized population and a ravaged country, and how understandings might come to differ as to where that responsibility begins and where it ends.

Daryl Cameron, Associate Professor of Psychology
Joshua Wenger, Ph.D. student in Social Psychology

This study will examine whether individuals prefer to receive empathy from human versus AI interaction partners. Participants will be presented with vignettes in which they will imagine themselves as the central actor in empathy-evoking scenarios. Participants will then have the choice to receive either empathy or a neutral description of the scenario from human or AI sources. Studies will also explore a possible differential preference in receiving compassion versus experience sharing.

David Puts, Professor of Anthropology; Mark Shriver, Professor of Anthropology; Nancy Williams, Professor and Head of Kinesiology
Laura Weyrich, Associate Professor of Anthropology
Sojung Baek, graduate student in Anthropology

Social behavior is modulated by ovarian steroid hormones in nonhuman primates, but evidence for such associations in humans are mixed, and relevant studies are few. This study investigates the roles of ovarian steroids measured from metabolites of estradiol and progesterone, individual characteristics, and their interactions in predicting empathic behaviors across the ovulatory cycle. Hormones and behavioral data will be collected daily for at least an entire ovulatory cycle, a dense sampling schedule that is likely to generate the measurement precision necessary for revealing existing behavioral patterns.

Evan Bradley, Associate Professor of Psychology and Linguistics

This mixed-methods project investigates individual and contextual factors affecting the adoption of nonbinary pronouns in educational settings, through a fun and interactive experimental paradigm. By analyzing participants’ interactions in real-time, and connecting them to offline measures, we plan to identify strategies for accelerating pronoun fluency, thereby fostering a safer environment for gender diversity.

Emily Rosenman, Assistant Professor of Geography and Affiliate Faculty Member, Consortium on Moral Decision Making;
Louisa Holmes, Assistant Professor of Geography and Associate Faculty, Consortium on Substance Use and Addiction (CSUA); Social Science Research Institute (SSRI co-funded)

This project investigates how the pharmaceutical industry has targeted vulnerable populations for aggressive opioid marketing, seeking novel supply-side understandings of the uneven landscapes of opioid use disorder, opioid deaths, and other types of community harm. Given ongoing distribution to US counties of settlement funds from lawsuits against the opioid industry, our findings relate to equitable and ethical distribution of resources to ameliorate and prevent future harm. In this the study brings moral decision-making squarely to the center to inform key actionable strategies of regulation, policy, and public health interventions to help groups that were targeted by pharmaceutical company marketing.

Huaiyuan Zhang, dual-degree Ph.D. student in Philosophy and Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies

This proposal bridges classical studies with contemporary philosophy through both conceptual research and an interdisciplinary workshop. To facilitate the genesis of Levinasian ethics as being good to the Other, it theorizes the requisite subjectivity for ethical responsiveness. It argues that our capacity for ethical action stems from a fundamental susceptibility to perceive the needs of strangers as objects of desire, not hatred, intertwined with self acceptance and openness to alterity. Addressing contemporary challenges of cross-cultural understanding, it elaborates on Levinas’ new return to Plato by examining how love contributes to ethical self-formation.

Kelly Sweeney, Doctoral Candidate and Graduate Assistant, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences;
Andrew High, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences

Drawing from the Communication Interdependence Perspective (CIP), this project investigates how college roommates manage supportive conversations across various communication channels. Understanding communication interdependence as a moral question involves recognizing the interconnectedness of roommates’ lives and its impact on their well-being and moral values. By examining communication patterns among roommates, this study sheds light on how they foster support, morality, and well-being through diverse communication channels, expanding upon CIP dynamics within non-romantic relationships. Through an interdisciplinary approach, this research contributes to understanding how roommates utilize communication to cultivate connections, support, and moral values, ultimately enriching our knowledge of interpersonal dynamics in mixed-media relationships.

Minghui Sun, Ph.D. Candidate in Applied Linguistics, College of the Liberal Arts;
Robert Schrauf, Professor in Applied Linguistics, College of the Liberal Arts

This project is designed to explore the moral and ethical aspects of shared decision-making processes among older adults living in Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs), and to unravel the intricacies of interpersonal relationships forming and community building at the last stage of psychosocial development, namely old age (Erikson, 1950). Specifically, the project adopts the linguistic ethnography approach to examine the shared decision-making processes related to the Garage/Yard Sale, a community-wide event organized entirely by current residents of a CCRC in the northeastern US. Throughout the entire preparation and organization process, older adults engage in multiple rounds of discussions concerning the nomination, evaluation, and recruitment of fellow residents to contribute to the Garage Sale’s successful execution. By exploring these individual and collective decision-making processes, the project illuminates how personal agency and moral accountability intertwine within the dynamics of group decisions, shedding light on the nuanced interplay between language, signs, and societal decision-making processes

Sean Laurent, Assistant Professor of Psychology
Becca Ruger, Second Year Graduate Student in Psychology
Iris (Sooyun) Chung, First Year Graduate Student in Psychology.

The study of “moral” decision-making implies the study of both moral and immoral behavior, but a disproportionate number of studies about “moral judgment” mostly study bad behavior. This single word also implies that moral character judgments might be unidimensional, ranging from “very immoral” to “very moral,” but little is known about how bad behavior might only sometimes prompt inferences about moral character and how prosocial behavior might only sometimes prompt inferences about immoral character. The work I am proposing will support ongoing empirical and theoretical efforts to reconcile this gap in our understanding, ultimately aiming to show when and why judgments of moral and immoral character are sometimes part of a single dimension, and at other times might be considered as two distinct areas of social judgment.

Sophia A. McClennen, Professor of International Affairs and Comparative Literature
Reginald Adams, Professor of Psychology
Janet Swim, Professor of Psychology
Joseph Wright Professor of Political Science

This project compares the efficacy of different forms of nonviolent activism – conventional tactics and comedic dilemma tactics – in the context of environmental activism in order to measure if comedic dilemma tactics can potentially counter negative stereotypes people hold about environmental activist groups and negative impressions of their tactics, and if using such tactics increases willingness to support such groups. This issue is paramount to moral decision-making because, while the general public tends to worry about the environment, they are disinterested in engaging in climate advocacy. Building on findings that creative activism is more effective than conventional activism and that dilemma actions that force negative outcomes for targets are associated with increased success for nonviolent campaigns, we test how distinct types of activism influence perceptions of activist groups and their sense that their support for an activist group will be worthwhile. We examine these perceptions and effects across a wide variety of cultural contexts in the Global North and the Global South. Further, we assess these perceptions both within the activist community and among different groups of citizens.

David Puts, Professor of Anthropology; Mary Shenk, Associate Professor of Anthropology;
Sojung Baek, Graduate Student in Anthropology

Throughout evolutionary history, human females have faced ecological pressures, such as exogamous marriage, that may have selected for specialized psychobehavioral tendencies that promote same-sex dyadic relations, which provide social support. Empathic response has the potential to enable subtle social strategies among women, whose use and acquisition of social status and power may be limited in male-centric societies. Motivated by signaling theory, we seek to understand the signal value of empathic response and whether the value is associated with the formation and maintenance of the signaler’s social network, and thus her access to social capital.

Consortium on Moral Decision-Making
Copyright ©2026 The Pennsylvania State University | Privacy and Legal Statements | Accessibility Statement | Website Designed by Office of Strategic Communications 
Login