It appears that in a massive, self-convulsion starting last May, the deaf community has realized that the I. King Jordan administration was a stepping-stone along the path to a true and full institutional recognition of the “deaf standpoint.” And the community wants a leader with a fully-developed deaf standpoint. A leader who is fully sympathetic to the deaf condition, and who all deaf people can relate to.
THE DEAF STANDPOINT? WHAT’S THAT?
Before I talk about the deaf standpoint, let me define “standpoint.”
Standpoint theory is a method for analyzing discourse between two subjective definitions of reality. Now, that was a mouthful. What it really means is that its a method for looking at how people have perspectives (standpoints) from which they view the world, and how those perspectives interact with others.
According to standpoint theory (Wikipedia):
* A standpoint is a place from which human beings view the world.
* A standpoint influences how the people adopting it socially construct the world.
* Social group membership affects people’s standpoints.
* The inequalities of different social groups create differences in their standpoints.
* All standpoints are partial; so (for example) standpoint feminism does not explain all sides of an issue. Instead, it coexists with other standpoints on a given issue.
ENOUGH WITH THEORY. DEAF STANDPOINT?
The deaf standpoint, according to standpoint theory, is a place from which deaf people view the world. This unique standpoint influences how deaf people socially construct their world. Deaf people see the world through this lens. And it is only theirs.
Since, by definition, being deaf is an inequality (inability to hear to some degree) it creates differences in our standpoint as compared to other standpoints. We have a unique standpoint from which we view the world, different from the black standpoint, the white standpoint, the hearing standpoint, the low-income standpoint.
And I need to emphasize that having a classic (fluent in ASL, etc) deaf standpoint is not solely about your degree of hearing loss. It has everything to do with your worldview — I’ve met many hearing people who have embraced the deaf standpoint and are virtually indistinguishable from a deaf person. It’s possible for non-deaf people to learn and work and obtain a deep understanding of the deaf standpoint. However, I must add that according to the theory they are still distinct and different from deaf people because they don’t experience life as a deaf person.
OK, SO HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE PROTEST?
Standpoint theory was originally derived from the Marxist idea that the socially oppressed class can access knowledge unavailable to the socially privileged. (colorado.edu) In other words, a given standpoint (for example, the deaf standpoint) has unique knowledge that is not available to the privileged (hearing) standpoint. This is an extremely important idea.
Right now, the protest can be viewed as the deaf standpoint finally getting its limelight. Getting its chance to truly be heard. A professor of mine at RIT remarked that the protest may be “standpoint theory brought to its conclusion.”
What does that mean? I think it means that our deaf standpoint — our unique deaf standpoint — is slowly gaining primacy.
Part one was I. King Jordan being chosen to lead Gallaudet University. Deaf people “Can Do It.” But that isn’t the whole story. Fast forward to today, and while we do have a deaf president, the community feels that the deaf standpoint is not pervasive throughout Gallaudet. The issue isn’t whether deaf people can be full and functioning citizens.
Isn’t the deaf standpoint supposed to have ultimate primacy at Gallaudet, when one takes into consideration that Gallaudet is supposed to be the “mecca of the deaf community”?
SO WHAT ABOUT JANE FERNANDES?
Another component of standpoint theory is that if you choose a person at random from a given population, they won’t necessarily have a complete standpoint from that population. Nor will that population accept that person as being truly their representative.
For instance, do Black people in general accept Dr. Condoleezza Rice as one of their own, and sharing their standpoint? If Condi Rice became president, would she advance the good of the black community? Would she fully understand their frustrations, heartaches, and joys? Food for thought — I don’t know either, because I am not black. I must cede the judgment and evaluation of Dr. Rice as a black leader to the black community, because only they will know.
From what I’ve seen, the deaf community feels conflicted about Dr. Jane Kelleher Fernandes. She has been accused of various things, such as “not being deaf enough,” “a bad leader,” and various unflattering things.
The real key here is: does the deaf community accept that she has a fully developed deaf standpoint, and will represent them wholeheartedly? It seems that many do not feel that she has a complete understanding of the knowledge of the oppressed (deaf) class or deaf culture. There have been numerous cited examples of audism from Jane Fernandes. Whether these examples are true or not, the real issue is how the community socially constructs the issues around the protest.
Many in the deaf community have strongly opposed Fernandes. The Board of Trustees and President Jordan have, as they would put it, heard these concerns but not agreed with them. Through the lens of Standpoint Theory, these subopinions are precious. They are stands taken by those who know and live the deaf life.
That leaves us with a few questions that I will leave you to think about. (1) Does Dr. Fernandes have a fully developed deaf standpoint? (2) Does she understand the various ways that deaf people feel oppressed? (3) Is she capable of communicating this standpoint and empathizing with the deaf community? (4) Is she ultimately a good deaf leader?
REFERENCES
Standpoint at Colorado.edu
Wikipedia - Standpoint Theory
Wikipedia - Intersubjectivity
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
Good points, however, I think that there is a fifth implied question that needs to be asked and discussed:
What justification is there for requiring the president of Gallaudet University to represent the “classic Deaf” standpoint, given that the Deaf represent only one group of many among an increasingly diverse body of deaf people?
I am concerned that this question may be our very own white elephant in the room.
Also the quote, “Many in the deaf community have strongly opposed Fernandes.” I have grave question about it. It is mostly the Deaf community that are against JKF, rather than just the deaf community which has a much bigger community that includes deaf and hard of hearing.
Someone recently argued that the use of capital D and lower-case d was divisive. It attempts to delineate clearly between two groups, often even when the line bisects (and at the expense of) a person possessing qualities that can be attributed to either group.
I don’t know how exactly that’s relevant to discussion, but I thought it was important, especially since the cultural segregation of people seems to be the aim of your comment, McConnell.
You are absolutely right, Allison — that’s why I’ve been very careful to use lower case d in my article and comments. A capital D may slip in there once in a while, but I blame that on my habit to formalize words.
Right. And that would seemingly be mostly Deaf people who are against Fernandes (ie Deaf community) rather than say it is the “deaf community” (deaf and hard of hearing communities). The deaf and hard of hearing communities are more likely not have anything to do with Fernandes or even Deaf culture itself. If the Deaf community fought for some 30 years on what “D”eaf means, then why change it to a lower case when it’s really about mostly Deaf people against Fernandes? There are more deaf and hard of hearing people than Deaf people. That’s a fact.
This protest is a Deaf culture issue as well. It always has been.
Your response continues more of the division I noted.
“[I]t’s really mostly Deaf people against Fernandes” not only implies that it is a clear-cut case of one group of people against another entity, it excludes certain people from participating in the views you ascribe to them.
“There are more deaf and hard of hearing people than Deaf people. That’s a fact.” If you mean there are less people who sign and regularly participate in deaf-orientated events, I’d agree with you. But why be so bullheaded about segregation, about divesting the right to opine regardless of self-definition?
There are certainly, in your definition, lower-case d deaf people who wish to see Dr. Fernandes resign. And there are certainly upper-case D deaf people who don’t. Painting the situation as a division between segments in the deaf community excludes these people.
What we see here are mostly Deaf people who are doing the protesting. They are mostly the ones who raised ire against Fernandes. Are you saying this is not case? I am focusing on the Gallaudet community and those associated with the protest (e.g CSUN, NTID, Rochester, Riverside, etc).
Allison, the Deaf community spent 30 years or so in trying to get everybody to accept the definition of “D”eaf to mean those who are culturally deaf whether one is deaf or hard of hearing. They are the ones who wanted and insisted that demarcation. I am not divesting anybody’s right to give their own opinion of self-definition. The fact of the matter at hand is that there ARE two camps. There are those who are Deaf and those who are not. And in each camp their views and perceptions are remarkably much more delineated than it is not. We’re talking some 30 million deaf and hard of hearing people in the United States to that of 900,000 Deaf people in the United States.
Allison, if you want to be intellectually honest here you would need to acknowledge the population differences among those who are deaf and hard of hearing in one segment of society compared to the Deaf segment of society is rather a yawning chasm between the two. Yes, certainly, some of lower case “d” deaf people do want to see Fernandes resign. Then again it could be most likely many more lower case “d” deaf who do or would support Fernandes. However, everybody sees this as a Deaf protest first and nothing more.
“However, everybody sees this as a Deaf protest first and nothing more.”
This is a correct statement. There is a nasty undercurrent, sometimes explicitly stated, that Jane is not Deaf enough.
The real issue is whether Gallaudet is going to be an inclusive environment for all Deaf/deaf individuals or just an enclosed environment for “D” deaf folks only.
Let me ask this hypothetical question. Supposing that there is this historically black school that, until recently, was run by whites although 99 percent of the student population was made up of dark black skinned African Americans. Well, as they say, the students revolted and a light-skinned coffee black man was selected as the president’s school. The student body remained the same. Then now, a light skinned coffee black woman was selected as president and the students rise up in revolt saying that the candidate was not black enough because she wasn’t dark skinned or show other characteristics of black culture.
Is this fair? Is this reasonable? Is this what we want to say to the world — we don’t want any outsiders running our school?
I realize that this is going to be controversial, but I think this is a fair thought experiment and a lot of the answers will reflect their stances on the Fernandes controversy.
I agree with you, Alison and Bobby. I stopped using the “D” a long time ago, and I don’t teach “Deaf Culture”. I teach ABOUT the deaf community.
I place the emphasis on social networks, that deaf people tend to generate towards their own, and most of them explore options. I tell my students that from my experience, a lot of deaf people end up using some kind of manual communication. I tell them many mainstreamed students tend to graviate towards some deaf-serving population such as RIT/NTID, Gallaudet, etc, and develop a stronger sense of who they are through learning ASL and interacting with other deaf people.
I don’t believe in the D/deaf thing. It is divisive and reductive. I avoid using this particular construction in discussions.
You guys are missing the obvious so badly it hurts.
The reason the Deaf community is against Fernandes has nothing to do with the fact that they are Deaf, and everything to do with the fact that they are a community. They’ve shared information for the last ten years and have a pretty good idea about what Fernandes is and represents. Meanwhile, the rest of the Gallaudet population is nowhere near as well informed. Have you ever thought about that? What about all the teachers who HAVE been there for ten years, deaf and Deaf and Hearing, who are opposed to Fernandes’ selection? The faculty seems a lot more reliable a barometer than students who may only have been there long enough to learn to fingerspell.
I traveled to DC over the weekend and spoke with several faculty. I received firsthand stories of their experience with Fernandes. I am seeing the picture more clearly. Indeed, it’s sad and I encourage you to collect FIRSTHAND information before making comments. Faculty represents the university. Faculty’s 82% no confidence is a powerful statement and not good news for Fernandes.
Again, when I read anyone’s comments, I need to think if it’s coming from FIRSTHAND knowledge and if it’s a reliable source of information.
Please think carefully before you say anything and try not to include emotions in it.
My final thought after talking to several Gallaudet University faculty: Fernandes is not ready to become the 9th President.
Wendy A. Dannels
Excuse me, Joseph… I am Deaf, a member of the Deaf community and I do not support the protest. To say that “the Deaf community” is against Fernandes is wrong. I’m not surprised that some Gallaudetians have had bad experiences with JKF. So what? There are two (or more) sides to every story. Bottom line is, the BoT chose JKF, and theirs are the only opinions that count here. I know the protestors think by screaming real loud and having a major tantrum in the store, they will get what they want. Get a clue - this is not how adults take care of business.
The problem with your stand, lady, is that have always avoided to respond and have never faced the real issues of criticism against Fernandes. You always talk about critical thinking, but you don’t have a clue what it means.
You cannot come up with any reason whatsoever, why the deficiencies and inadequacies of Jane Fernandes should not be counted as disqualifying factors for being a good president.
Speaking of bad experiences……
Actually, it doesn’t matter whether it’s “D” or “d”. “Many” as used in the quote mcconnell is objecting to doesn’t specify a range of numbers. In fact, it is often used in non-scientific publications to describe just about any number in any setting or commmunity.
So the quote is “true” in either case.
True enough, and I apologize for the distraction if I offered any. I was reacting specifically to McConnell’s attempt to divide people in the deaf community according to an identity he assigns them.
No apologies necessary. I should be apologizing for not explicitly directing my comment to the other fella.
Bobby, such intriguing questions you ask! I thought about it and realized I cannot answer for JKF, because I don’t know enough about her background. If the claims of the protestors are anything to go by, it would certainly appear that she is does not have (3) and (4), for sure. We all know JKF was raised oral, BUT she had the advantage of having deaf family members who were also oral. Myself, I was raised oral too, but never met another deaf person until the age of 18. I would have been very happy to know I wasn’t all alone in the world. There’ve been rumors that JKF’s father is a judge. whoa… can you say “high expectations”? Was JKF ever oppressed, and if so, how? I have experienced oppression, but probably not as much as some. I’m a white, college educated, English literate, professional person who can talk. Possibly, those who don’t have my relatively privileged standpoint will have experienced much more oppression. Does it follow that they will make better leaders than me?
If you don’t know her enough, you should listen to those, who know her and her MBI antics too well. They all say that she is unfit for president! I am amazed that you, a staunch supporter of the Fernandes regime, don’t even know her enough to make a sound judgement. So what your standpoint (if you have one? ;) is based on??
you now know that Ryan Commerson was persona non grata.
2005, Former Michigan School for the Deaf substitute teacher Ryan Commerson went on an eight-day hunger strike in a protest over how the school was educating children. Commerson also wanted current Principal Cecelia Winkler (She is hearing and her ASL skill) removed in favor of hiring a deaf principal.
He is persona non grata.
As well as half of the protesters as well who came in as freshmen and sophomores who don’t have a real keen interest in the politics of school would rather focus on sports, frats, sororoties, parties, etc. The same for all the alumni, if not most, do not really know her except through the news and blogs.
Goes both ways, TTT. Really.
There are many many people who do know her and know her well and fully believe that she has the capacity and vision to be the next president of Gallaudet. How dare you suggest that those opinions are any less valid than yours?
We are the overwhelming majority who oppose Fernandes. In democracy, an overwhelming majority has greater weight, than a dwarf minority, those who support her. Sorry, that is how it works!
if i were you, i would worry about my career than how much money fernandes will get..someone mention in an earlier post that we DO NOT have the authority to elected a college president…. its true and it make sense. think about it. An overwhelming number of college students are admitted to college each semester…shall we change our college president every semester for a fair vote among students???
College Student - I understand what you mean. It’s caused me pause more than once myself. Of course, the selection of a president of a university is a duty reserved for those in governance positions, contrary to what Testing_the_truth says. It is NOT a democracy.
However, surely, you can’t expect students to sit quietly by when they believe the Board of Trustees is out of touch with the community (in fact, recent reports have two trustees publicly implying that deaf signers are dumb) and chose a candidate that they believe would continue the same spirit of paternalism.
When people believe injustice has been done, then I wholeheartedly support their right to speak up, regardless of whether they have the power to change that act of injustice. I’d hope you do too.
I did not say the pres. selection is democracy. I said in a democracy the overwhelming majority should be respected.
If a president is selected who is unacceptable for an overwhelming majority, then the selection contradicts democratic principles. If a president is selected who is accepted by the same overwhelming majority, then the selection is harmonizes with democratic principles.
former professor,
And mob rule is against democratic principles as well.
Overwhelming majority are against her? Excuse me, a vocal minority does not a majority make.
Alison,
Don’t bring up unsubstantiated reports as evidence.
Whatever the problems are with the BOT they are not in the interest of destroying Galladuet. That is the last thing they are trying to do. If they are out of touch, well to be honest with you the vast majority of BOT members in the vast majority of college campuses are usually busy dealing with their own work. If you wish to contact them about school related information, you can.
The principle matter of the BOTs are to choose people to run the school for the interest of the school.
Like 82% of faculty?? Is this a minority for you? Bahh. I have to laugh thickly on your denial of seeing the overwhelming fact in the opinion of the overwhelming majority.
Allison..
If the BoT is out of touch with the community, what does that means?? Are you referring to the students or community? BoT supposed to run the school not for the interest of the community… I understand your standpoint of 2 members of BoT implying the “deaf and dumb” comments, we are not alone. Its happens in every society, we have people who oppose in the kind of work they do after they honor the conduct and ethics of their job…If student wants to change BoT, then students must try harder to learn and finish school and run for BoT. Let us prove them wrong. BoT is a bunch of old crap who haven’t had sex in who knows how long! Of course they are out of touch with reality!
Testing the Truth/A former college professor (who are the same person): I agree with you: it’s not a democracy, but all the same, a majority opinion needs to be respected.
Still, you did say, “We are the overwhelming majority who oppose Fernandes. In democracy, an overwhelming majority has greater weight, than a dwarf minority, those who support her. Sorry, that is how it works!” Which seems to say that just because there are a greater number of people who want Dr. Fernandes to resign than those who don’t, the decision should be reversed. I disagree on that point.
College Student: so your solution is for people to wait until they are appointed to the Board of Trustees to change things around? Alright, even as unlikely as that sounds, let’s suppose we take that avenue. What happens in the meantime? (and btw, my use of “community” refers to every person involved with Gallaudet - students, alumni, faculty, staff, parents of Clerc Center students, recent grads with a Gallaudet degree looking for a job).
Yes I am, it is not secret.
I did not say that. Please, resort to statements I made, otherwise you are arguing with yourself. Thanks.
You DID say that. It’s a direct quotation. See comment #26972.
>> because there are a greater number of people who want Dr. Fernandes to resign than those who don’t, the decision should be reversed
I did not say that, it was your own fantasy. So please, do tear apart your own opinion as you wish! But don’t blame me for hurting yourself. ;))))))))))))
Pretty snarky and dishonest for a person to use different aliases in the same forum.
Allison..
We sit and wait. I dont have power to change the BoT. However, we still have the power to freely express our speech to the BoT.
Do the BoT have monthly meeting like a school board to allow public input? They should if Kendall and Mssd is included.
Life isn’t going to be good all the times. And its not going to be bad all the times, either. Some people who did post their comment probably are graduate looking for a job.
Instead of trying to find a completely deaf person to begin their president term, work on requesting better technology. Its not the IKJ or JF fault that the graduate can not get a job. Its the student fault for refusing to accept the technology that would change their world. We should fear nothing!
In the interest of having a fair and factual discussion here: testing-the-truth you should know that the 82% number you are using doesn’t mean all that you think it does.
See there are 222 (plus or minus) faculty with voting rights at Gallaudet. Only those people were allowed at last Monday’s meeting.
Of those voting memebers only 168 attended. A majority to be sure but not all.
Of those 168, 134 voted for JK’s resignation. That is where the 82% comes from (134/168).
82% of the ATTENDING faculty which really only makes up 62% of the entire voting faculty.
And although it is still true that 62% is a majority. It sure doesnt look as impressive as 82% does.
Oh of course, how do I know? I was there.
Also, an interesting note is that 168 participated in the vote . It went down to 126 when they got to Motion F. That represents barely half of the faculty population which is 221.
Out of 221 faculty members, 53 didn’t show up because they couldn’t or wouldn’t want to.
I think the ratio has always been constant around 70:30 (maybe even 60:40 at times) on campus of those who are against JKF.
I would think that given the constant heat and light the pro- and anti-Fernandes posters have generated on this issue, it would have been a prudent idea for a lot of dissatisfied faculty members to abstain from voting by not showing up at all. Probably disgusted with both sides, if I’m correct.
Hmm.. sounds like a recent Presidental Election when only 51% of the 70% or so elected voted for President Bush.
See the result.
I believe it speaks for itself.
So the onus is on the 53 faculty members that couldn’t be bothered to show up?
And there’s the assumption that the president is doing a poor job. Last I checked, about 30 percent still believe that he’s doing a good job.
Exactly. It says a lot.
In America, only people who vote are counted.
If you don’t vote…
I know Gallaudet is not a democracy, but if you’re gonna abide by democratic principles…
Gallaudet isn’t a democracy by any means, so the faculty votes aren’t binding in any way.
“Shared governance” at this point is a fantasy.
“Shared governance” is a fantasy. I agree.
It shouldn’t be a fantasy. THAT is the point.
the point about the stats is that if you want to be seen as playing fair and using truth then you should use the true numbers and not misrepresent as “82% of the faculty” which you know is not true. this damages your credibility.
oh and shared governance does not work for a University. the notion that faculty, staff, alum, and students should have an equal vote in choosing the leadership of the University is simply a silly utopian idea. if you acknowledge that it is a fantasy then lets move on, accept the BOT’s decision and start fixing the problems at Gally instead of destroying the institution from the inside with this prolonged mud slinging campaign. this is what mature adults do. accept things they do not like but can not change and find ways to work to better life for all involved. the adults are doing a real disservice to the students. IMHO
I, too, am a lot like you: was raised oral until I was 18 yrs old and hadn’t met a deaf person at that point all along; I learned sign language after I was 18 because many couldn’t read my lips nor could I understand their sign language before I learned it.
Aside from that, I wonder if JKF was oppressed enough by her parents that made her have a very negative management-style as a lot of folks have pointed out in the blogs.
A side note here: I heard last night that JKF and IJK both are godparents to each other’s children and I cannot help if that is a sign that their working relationship has gotten too cozy right there. Additionally, I heard that Gallaudet administration called MSD (Maryland School for the Deaf) to beg them to take the the football game, etc away from Gallaudet. I was so surprised HOW EAGER Gallaudet was in getting rid of students off of campus for the game. Its their loss.
Interesting post.
I am a student at a different DC university, and on your points about JKF. If you are going to give her the opportunity to lead and proposals were brought to her in office in a respectful manner that followed the steps, then I am absolutely sure she would work on the issue of audism, now that she is being harrassed it will be much harder because of the immense conflict from some radicals.
To answer your point #3, she could have been if it had been a respectful protest but one that accepted the decision and if they didnt like her lodged a complaint from there.
To #4, I cant really answer since I am not deaf, but a great leader is not someone who lives in the shoes of others or follows the expectations of their peers. A leader, leads. Not all leaders are great, many are mediocre and some are bad, and some are good. You cant possibly make any expectations upon people until they are given a chance to prove themselves as a leader, something she is not being given.
I just want to ask some questions for people who are conflicted about the protest and the administration
1. If the protestors get their way, there will have to be an interim president. Who will it be? The current president is stepping down in January.
2. If she resigns and a new president comes in, what will happen if the person is not as qualified and simply suits the desires of people to follow people’s wishes instead of making decisions?
Johan - While Fernandes was provost, a group of students tried to work with her to create and implement a series of audism mandates. Although she agreed to take action, 3 years later nothing has happened. This is an example of how she has already had a chance to lead, but failed.
To answer your questions: two weeks ago, the faculty passed a resolution asking for JKF’s resignation. At the same time, they passed another resolution outlining a specific plan of action to select an interim president. I don’t have the text handy, but it basically calls for a committee of board members, faculty, staff, students, and alumni to select someone appropriate. The interim provost chosen through this method has been doing an excellent job and, indeed, seems a likely candidate for an interim president (though I have no knowledge of whether he would in fact be willing to serve as such).
In answer to question 2, I don’t see this happening. First, we have to consider the issue of “qualifications.” As is often noted, JKF looks good on paper, but the people who work under her do not perceive her as a good leader. I have personally observed how she interacts with faculty and students and she is patronizing, insulting, and divisive (if you want specifics, I’ll give them to you). Fernandes does not know how to rally support for her actions. The Gallaudet community is not stupid. We know hard decisions must sometimes be made and we know that we must confront tough issues about our future. A good leader can, through how she/he interacts with the community, win support for his/her approach. A bad leader can’t.
Second, I know three of the other candidates from last spring. Roz Rosen formerly served as a provost at Gallaudet, as president of the World Federation of the Deaf, and is currently the direction of the deaf center/sub-college at CSUN. Glenn Anderson runs a center at U of Arkansas and served on the Gallaudet Board of Trustees for many years (incidentally, his background is very similar to Fernandes’s in terms of coming late to the deaf community and signing. Anderson was also a finalist for the NTID vice-president position (which is basically the same as the Galludet president position). That position went to the incumbent, Dean Alan Hurwitz. We all know that incumbents have a strong advantage, but does that mean they will do the best job? People with less experience can more than rise to the occasion. Case in point, another candidate from last spring, Ron Stern. Though perhaps on paper the least “qualified” candidate, he has dramatically overhauled the New Mexico School for the Deaf during his time as president. I sincerely doubt that any of these leaders, if chosen as president, would simply follow people’s wishes instead of making good decisions. Finally, as I said, the Gallaudet community contains many highly educated and/or highly intelligent members who would speak out if they saw their president making decisions that hurt Gallaudet’s future, just as they are now.
Yes, I would like specific examples of when she has failed to lead and has been spiteful. I do not want he said/she said cases, that is not evidence. I want documented proof, which as a professor I am sure you could do.
Secondly, how would you select a president without looking at paper? It doesnt mean everything but it does have a lot of value.
Johan - I will write specifics tomorrow, but it is late tonight and I am tired from another long and stressful day at Gally. But just to respond to your last point, I didn’t say that we should select a president without looking at paper. Of course we should. But, to flip your comment around, paper does have a lot of value, but it doesn’t mean everything. More soon.
Johan - hope you are still reading. Keep in mind that I said above Fernandes is patronizing, insulting, and divisive, not “spiteful.” Also keep in mind that, as any textbook on argumentation will tell you that “evidence” consists of the following types: facts, statistics, survey, polls, and studies, testimonies, narratives, and interviews. Each has value and, while there is a tendency to see facts and statistics as “hard proof,” numbers can be manipulated and do not always tell the whole story. Certainly, some data suggest JKF’s failure to lead in her six years as provost (declining tests scores of incoming students, stationary graduation rates, and a sharp decline in post-graudation employment rates. As overseer of the academic side of the university, these fall directly under JKF’s responsibilities as provost). However, in this situation, we are concerned more with JKF’s qualities as a leader. And qualities are not easily assessed through qualitative methods.
That being said, here are three points based on my personal experience and observations that I believe exemplify why JKF is unsuitable as a leader.
1. Last year’s Homecoming events were marred by two incidents. First, a large group of students pulled down the football field goalposts to celebrate the team’s undefeated season. Second, approximately 12 students got drunk and out of control at the Hilton hosting the homecoming dance, resulting in substantial financial loss to the hotel. (stopping now due to other committments, to be continued).
I am interested in this. Pray continue.
Yes, Gallyprof made a good point. What kind of evidence do you want to hear? Qualitative, Quantitative, or Both
I’ll pick both. Below is for your additional information
Data Types:
Qualitative vs. Quantitative
Qualitative’s advantage: allows interaction with respondents and for in-depth probing of issues and yields great detail in response
Qualitative’s disadvantage: unreliable predictors of the population and should not be used to identify the best of the possibilities
Quantitative’s advantage: results are statistically reliable and projectable to the target market segment
Quantitative’s disadvantage: issues are only measured if they are known prior the beginning of the survey
Sorry I can’t figure out how to edit and add to my previous post. Ok, continuing on for 10 minutes before class. After the homecoming incidents, JKF took several steps. One was to call a town meeting with students that was billed as an opportunity to dialogue about what happened. Unfortunately, she opened the town hall with a fifteen minute lecture about the boorish behavior of the students, essentially taking the entire community to task for what happened. Many students walked out in the middle of her speech because they were offended by her attitude. Rather than being a postitive dialogue focused on how to respond to the actions of a small group of students, the meeting became an angry argument between JK and the larger student community.
J’s second action was to punish the entire football team wtih community service. Not only students, but many faculty felt this was an unfair response, since there was no evidence that each member of the football team was involved. A group of faculty, myself included, expressed our concerns to JK but never received any response.
Gotta run to class now.
Ok.
And this is a problem how…….?
I mean, sure it is annoying for someone to give a lecture to people, but she had a right to be angry. Replacing a goal post is an expensive and unneccesary action, you have a bunch of roudy kids who need to be talked to like kids if that is how they are going to act.
Secondly, she made the football team do community service. Stop the presses! She actively punished a group for something they may have been responsible for! Oh god why!?
All you can prove is that she acted as a responsible administrator to deal with university problems.
And all it proves is that self-entitled students at Gallaudet are protesting because she isnt a friendly face to everyone.
Actually, I think it is a problem to punish a group of people for something that it can’t be proved they were responsible for. Just a little thing called innocent until proven guilty. And lecturing the entire student community about the actions of a smaller group is not an effective way to encourage students to act like adults (I might add that the university had previously announced the goal posts would be replaced in the spring).
My second example comes from last spring semester. A group of faculty (myself included) was asked to review the university’s response to the 2005 MSA report on Gallaudet and to report our recommendations to JKF. One of the harshest criticisms in the MSA report was the lack of funding for the library (this had been an issue in the 2001 MSA report as well). MSA strongly recommended a substantial increase to the library budget, and the faculty committee pushed very hard for JKF to accept the MSA recommendation. Our library resources are terrible and the building itself has holes in the roof. When it rains, the archives are damaged. The library needs a huge infusion of money, but JKF refused to authorize despite the strong recommendation of the faculty. This is just one of MANY examples of how JKF ignores faculty input. Universities are structured on the principle of shared governance, which means faculty and administrators should make key decisions together. To ignore faculty recommendations produces resentment on the part of the faculty.
Another JKF’s weak leadership skills comes from a faculty forum a few weeks ago. At some point, JKF was asked to talk about what she has done since last May to build a better relationship with the student community. She began be explaining how SBG refused to work with her and, according to her, threatened to fire any SBG representative who agreed to serve on her advisory committee. She spent about 5 minutes on that. Now, it was common knowledge that SBG refused to recognize her selection as president by sending a representative, and it was simply bad politics to start responding to the question that way. It made her look as if she was blaming SBG for the fact that she has not accomplished anything. Why be negative and divisive? We wanted to hear what she had done, so why not say something positive.
Lest you think that this is a small and insignificant thing, let me again emphasize that we are talking about leadership qualities. And with JKF, we are talking about a pattern of small incidents that add up to an intense feeling on the part of students AND faculty that she is patronizing and dismissive. A leader knows how to bring people together, not push them away and apart.
My third and final example. Since last May, JKF has not made any effort to reach out to faculty and ask for support. She has never called a faculty or student forum on her own initiative. In the past three weeks, she has spoken exclusively to the press. She has called the protestors terrorists and anarchists. Her choice of inflammatory rhetoric and her lack of effort to speak to the university community through anything but hostile memos is what convinced me that she cannot lead this university. I stayed out of the protest and kept an open mind about JKF for a long time. Though I saw problems, I felt that it was my responsibility to support the university by accepting the BOT’s decision. But after the past two weeks, my mind is made up. We need a leader who is proactive and can calm this situation down, not one who escalates it. And if you’re not convinced, Johan, well, you don’t work at Gallaudet. Walk a mile in our shoes before you call us self-entitled.
Ok, there ya go. You have two examples. Why did you go with meaningless ones first? When you could have made a point much earlier.
About the library. Bad if true, for the sake of my ignorance at this moment I will claim that as a point against JKF. I will look into it and see what is there.
The other point is that of her use of language, yes she should not have used such language. It is divisive and inflammatory. I am not interested in the security of JKF in the least, if she is innefective then she should be gone BUT I am against the protest for its actions.
IF you are a professor, what did you do while the selection was going on? You have a voice in your department meetings, was nothing said?
What I mean by self-entitled stands, not many private universities recieve 70% of its revenue from the government and the notion that football players of all people cant be brought down a peg is pathetic.
You are right, Bobby! DPN 18 years ago was an important FIRST step toward what’s happening now. THIS is real thing now in 2006: an awesome step and substantial development toward more self-determination, more autonomy and more social justice!
Whenever we fight for social change we need to overcome the usual reactionary forces, who claim they are the only leaders who can lead, and their way is the only way to do things. But we will show them that their time is over!! We will show that our standpoint (yes, a major standpoint for that!) is to be respected by everyone.
Reactionary forces will be proven wrong with their reactionary ideas of their insipid ‘new order’, and in the end they will be ridiculed by their own claims. We will show them the way out of the present forever into the panoptic of Ancient historical artifacts, that were part of history that happened long-long time ago!
They will be forgotten as insignificant roadblocks on our march forward in making a new chapter of Deaf history. Nobody should shred one drop of tear for them. In the end what matters is the great brightness we brought about and the tremendous progress we achieved.
Yes Comrade snowball, all hail the proletariat.
Pfff, do you make this stuff up or is it forcefed to you by peers who are sky high dreamers because they are young?
We will make history who have positive ideas about the future. You guys, who resort to mockery, you only mock yourselves, showing yourselves incapable to open your mind to progressive thinking. I am truly sorry for you.
(psst, I am using an alternative name, just like you *wink*)
Progressive? Excuse me? Progressive does not mean you rise up with every pretend injustice to push those who disagree with you to the side.
You don’t threaten to overwhelm them and call them “reactionary forces” or “insignificant roadblocks”.
You are a radical, not a progressive. Get your definitions in order.
Every time Zoltan posts, why do I get this vivid picture of a balding guy with a goatee? A deaf Leninist is so passe. Get over it.