Is It Really Identity Politics…Or Is It A Condescending Attitude?
By Chris and Allison Kaftan on Tue 16 May 2006 |
Email This Post
Again and again, we’ve heard arguments why the Gallaudet protests do or don’t have anything to do with Dr. Fernandes’ deaf identity. Bruce White, a professor in the English Department at Gallaudet, wrote this editorial appearing in this morning’s Washington Post (thanks to K.C. for the tip):
What’s Driving the Gallaudet Protests
In an attempt to divert observers and the Gallaudet University community from serious, underlying issues about her selection as the university’s next president, Jane K. Fernandes has endlessly spouted the official line that the protest is about identity politics, signing fluency and her being the wrong “kind” of deaf person [”The School Year Concludes, but the Controversy Does Not; Fernandes to Resign as Provost, Concentrate on Transition,” Metro, May 13].
Nonsense. In 28 years as a faculty member at Gallaudet I have seen which faculty members have earned the students’ respect. Many of them are, of course, deaf or hard of hearing. However, a great number of these respected faculty members are hearing, and many of them are not fluent signers, but it doesn’t matter to the students. What students want most from their teachers is competence, a respectful rapport, and the ability to listen and respond sympathetically to their concerns. Without these qualities no teacher or administrator can ever earn the students’ trust or respect.
Bruce White, University Park
We’d also like to mention as a side note, however irrelevant it may be, that Dr. White is deaf, has previously held elected (!) office in his hometown, and, although he is an entirely competent signer, is famous for sim-comming during his classes. As former students, we have much respect for Dr. White, and, given both his background and communication tendencies, think these lend further credence to the content of his commentary.
Although we have read some accounts of Jane Fernandes telling the media or other people that she understands that there are issues other than her being “not deaf enough,” she nonetheless continues to touch on it. In the May 8 issue of the Examiner, she’s quoted as saying, “I think that’s probably at the heart of this matter. I think the other messages that are being sent out are distractions.”
So, Jane. Protesters are dumb enough to not want a president that shares a similar background as many of them, but they’re smart enough to strategize about such things and send out distracting messages about like, say, her lack of leadership qualities?
But then as late as last Friday, Dr. Fernandes had switched tactics. Responding to increasing clarity in protesters’ claims that the issue was, instead of her level of deafness, her leadership ability, she said faculty members were seeking vengeance and using students as pawns in the protest. New York Times’ Diana Jean Schemo writes, “She accused the dissenting faculty members of encouraging the protests and exploiting students’ naïveté to settle scores with her.”
The students’ naïveté? Okay. So when do students stop being naïve? When they become alumni? Oh, wait. Alumni are protesting too. Besides, last time we checked, students were adults. Students, like any other brand of adults, are capable of making the right decision despite the Board of Trustees’ oversights (proof: DPN, 1988). Students are not stupid.
This brings to mind Dr. Fernandes’ answer to a student at Kendall during an open forum. When the kid asked how she’d improve Kendall, she answered that he’d probably like toys. He answered, “No, I meant education!” (Credit goes to Elisa’s blog.)
Going back to Dr. White’s editorial: Dr. White cites a respectful rapport as one of the qualities necessary to earn trust or respect. Thus far, Dr. Fernandes has been unable to establish this. Her condescension, in our opinion, is her biggest detraction in any effort she might or may have made.
That she even claims the deaf identity issue has anything to do with the protest even after being told it doesn’t also shows her misunderstanding of the community. She is right in saying the future of Gallaudet includes people of varying backgrounds, including those coming to know ASL and Deaf culture late in life. She is wrong, as is Howie Kent, however, in saying that has anything to do with why anyone in their right mind thinks she should or shouldn’t be president of Gallaudet University.
© 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.
32 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
As an impartial observer (never was a Gally student), I have been searching for specific facts as to why J.K. Fernandes is the “wrong choice” or why the search process was flawed from the get go. I have not yet found sufficent evidence to convince me that Fernandes is the wrong choice and that the search process was flawed. I wish someone would do a point-by-point report on her faults/mistakes/bad leadership qualities. Nobody has done that so far. I feel that this is what truly hurts the protest.
On the other hand, over the past two weeks, I have been watching J.K. Fernandes in action for the first time (via Internet/TV/Newspapers) and I have not seen ONE thing that told me that she was the RIGHT CHOICE…other than her application and resume on gallaudet.edu .
In short, there HAS to be valid reasons why she is the wrong person for the job and I think the FSSA needs to build up a strong case against her being the right person. Just because she is a ‘bitch’ is not good enough of an explanation, IMO. We need cold hard facts. I wish someone could step up to the plate. Until then, J.K. can play the “Identity politics” card all she wants to, IMO.
Amen. List the facts, people! Wouldn’t the FSSA website be perfect for this?
It’s difficult to “document” somebody’s leadership style. How do you quantify morale? In fact, it’s hard to document anything as I’m sure most records aren’t open to the public.
Nevertheless, I’ll list some of the reasons to be concerned:
-After she implemented some newfangled policies, MSSD’s enrollment shrank from around 350 in mid 1990’s to around 180 early in this decade. Those policies were recently removed. Whether MSSD’ll recover fully from the damage, we shall see.
-As a provost, she never asked the faculty for input before making major decisions. Good leaders always get input from many sources. The more data, the better the decision will be.
-She forced some professors to pass some students who were failing. Apparently, some faculty members confirmed it. I’m afraid I forgot the details.
-The 6-year graduation rate has hovered at around 25% during her 6 years. If she couldn’t solve the problem as a provost, why should we believe that she’d solve it as a president, as she promised?
-Students and faculty members describe her as more alienating than charming…alienating, not a good trait to have as a fundraiser.
I’m done for now. Additions to this list are welcome.
“After she implemented some newfangled policies,…” what policies, exactly?
“MSSD’s enrollment shrank from around 350 in mid 1990’s to around 180 early in this decade.” Many state schools for the deaf experienced declining enrollment, for a variety of reasons. I don’t see the connection between JKF and MSD.
“As a provost, she never asked the faculty for input before making major decisions. Good leaders always get input from many sources.” Judging by the quality of the input from the protesting faculty and their students, maybe she had a more reliable source of data? I’m just guessing here.
“She forced some professors to pass some students who were failing. Apparently, some faculty members confirmed it. I’m afraid I forgot the details.” Really wish someone would start keeping track of those detials. But this allegation was mentioned in FutNut’s blog not long ago. He claimed to have genius IQ and ADHD, got straight F’s through HS, was accepted to Gally, earned straight B’s but never did his homework or studied a lick. I find it hard to believe that this practice of passing failing students was widespread, but come to think of it, I have read that other universities also do this. I’ve forgotten the reason why.
“The 6-year graduation rate has hovered at around 25% during her 6 years.” Does anyone know if that is comparable to other universities, or is it just Gallaudet?
“Students and faculty members describe her as more alienating than charming…alienating, not a good trait to have as a fundraiser.” Apparently, the feeling was mutual. However, the BoT, the ones who really count, felt otherwise. I’m sure fund-raising had a high weight on the criteria matrix.
Still waiting to be convinced.
Curious Eyes,
MSSD is the only school funded by the federal and students come from different part of the United States. If so, then we cannot compare it with other schools. Enrollment is definitely important.
Phat,
I see you made two good points but it needs more data. Other points than these two are weak.
1.) Can you give us the exact enrollment number for each year at MSSD under JKF’s leadership?
2.) Can you have me the graduate rate (%) in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 at Gallaudet?
Here’s another example of data (measurable) to give you an idea of what to look for. Can you give me the student retention rate (%) for first year students in 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 at Gallaudet?
Other thing:
Speaking of the 24 candidates, can you list each candidate’s fundraising skills and how much funds were raise?
“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it” — George Odiorne
Oops! “2.) Can you have me” should be “2.) Can you give me”.
Correct. One of the major weaknesses in the arguments advanced by the protesters was that they failed to list and point out the various errors that Fernandes made over the years. Simply complaining that she was the wrong choice only leads people to believe that the real argument is being made that she wasn’t “D” deaf enough.
Now, like it or not, the selection of Gallaudet’s next president is over.
If the students still have legitimate concerns then they need to address the openings for interim and permanent Provost. They need to work with the process instead of failing to involve themselves until the very last minute. They need to be detailed. Simply saying that someone is unacceptable doesn’t work in the “real world.” You need concrete reasons and examples why someone is fit or why someone is not fit.
I believe they raised several concrete concerns about her relationship with current faculty and students, her past performance with the evidence of MSSD and the PART report (someone else asked about declining MSSD enrollment; there was indeed a group of 75 parents who removed their children in one year from MSSD to MSD citing Fernandes policies as their motivation.) Only someone not reading what’s been coming out, could ignore the fact that there have been serious and factual claims made. She has responded to these claims. Her responses have been criticised, from her letter in response to the PART report where she said basically “But we have some good files! Why didn’t they look at the GOOD news?” to her response to questions about her work at MSSD and as Provost.
The Faculty issued a report. The FSSA issued a report. They had concrete examples - much more concrete than the ones behind Whitewater and Monicagate, which got Clinton impeached!
The crime is that people swallow the script.
I am deaf and not a Gallaudetian. I want to toss in different thoughts. I am an engineer. At the company I work for, we have the passion for achieving measurable results.
I wonder did the PSC/BoT use a criteria based matrix that helps determine which items are more important than others. It’s like a scoring matrix in used for candidate selection, in which options are assigned scores relative to criteria. Also, was scorecard used to help PSC/BoT rate the candidate’s performance in satisfying their requirements?
If so, then it’s possible that “Fundraising and Financial Management” agenda has a very high score in a matrix/scorecard.
”Gallaudet University has an annual budget of $150 million and an endowment of approximately $165 million.” “The realization of Gallaudet’s plans and ambitious achievements requires a leader who is at once a gifted fundraiser and an experienced manager of the human, physical and financial resources of the University.” http://pr.gallaudet.edu/presidentalsearch/?ID=8140
Did the final three candidates outperform others in fundraising and financial management? I do not have the answer, however it’s something for us to think about.
The answer is yes. Criteria matrix evaluations are commonly used on selection committees in academia. While we will probably never know what the actual PSC criteria were, we can certainly make an educated guess. To get a general idea of the criteria, all one would need to do is look at the position description at the link you posted and change the qualifications to actual criterions.
If so, what of the results of Fernandes’ participation in the government’s PART report which assesses the proficiency of colleges? This report is necessary for Gallaudet’s continued financial support from the government, and the University failed it. When asked why, Fernandes intimated the government performed a “selective reading” of her files. If so, this was probably to find just this kind of result.
one pattern is becoming clear: Fernandes NEVER holds herself accountable for anything.
When MSSD’s enrollment shrank to 1/2 of what it was after she implemented her policies, she blamed the parents. For the causes of the protest, she blamed everything but herself. PART report, blamed the government. For poor relations with students, she claimed that they misunderstood her. For low approval rate from the faculty, she blamed it to vendetta. And so on. Never once heard her say, “My bad, I’ll correct it.”
What next, my dear Janey?
Good point, Ben.
Where’s the proof to back up your allegations? Concrete facts. Links please and don’t use hearsay from other blogs.
As for MSSD, it IS the parent’s fault they were the ones who pulled their kids out.
You have an axe to grind. Get over it, you loser. Jane’s here to stay!
Focus your energies on selecting the Provosts! That’s much more constructive than the hate that you spew.
Again, I’d like to know what “policies” you are referring to. Is the “newfangled policy” the one about restricting students to those in the metro Washington area? Then that was changed, right?
What about high stakes testing and the requirement for students to pass exit exams? was that a factor at MSSD? Some states decided to implement exit exam at schools for the deaf, and I know that some students withdrew to enroll at MSSD instead. I wonder if enrollment actually grew during some years and shrank in other years? Yes, I’d like to see some facts here too. Someone else mentioned that the Faculty wrote a report, and the FSSA wrote a report. Really? Where is it? and who received it, and was supposed to take action on the report? I also would appreciate a link to this PART report that has been mentioned, so I can read it for myself. Thanks!
Perhaps someone can write a book called “Freakeconomics in the Deaf-World”, with research and statistics investigating whether there are interesting correlations between MSSD/KDES/GU performance and JK’s time there. There could very well be other “masked” factors and JK’s being there was a more visible coincedence, we don’t really know for sure.
In a way, this reminds me of a conversation I had with someone who works as a director of deaf programs in schools of Georgia. He showed me some statistics about academic performance (measured by state-wide tests and by high school exit examinations), and said, “Look at this big drop in state test performance and look at the years. What was the difference with the before and the after?”
“NCLB?”
“Exactly. NCLB forced Georgia to require *all* deaf students- no more waivers like in the past- to take *all* tests. The waivers skewed the numbers in the past, ‘oh, my son is deaf, please waive him from taking the writing exam…’, so that it looked like we were doing fine before when we really weren’t. Georgia is becoming more demanding for higher expectations. Many teachers and parents are now caught off guard- they now realize they can’t get away with “baby down” education as before.
I agree with you, Ron. I recall reading something on the GU web site that there were specific criteria that the PSC was looking for, and there was a point system of some kind that they used to rank the candidates. Also, remember that GU used a professional search firm that had helped to hire over 30 university presidents. I would bet that personality and relationships with students were not significant factors. Others on this blog have commented that many CEOs and leaders of various kinds have not necessarily been nice people. Unfortunately, that seems to apply to JKF. The BoT chose her on basis of her ability to do the job, not because she had the charisma of a rock star. I do believe the BoT when they say they followed the process. It seems to me that the Gallaudet community put a premium on the social aspect of the presidency, rather than ability. Should the provost search, or the president search after JKF, follow a different plan?
Yes, it is wrong to evaluate the candidate’s personality, and not particular skills and experience. The BoT can not change the criteria in the middle of the process because it will upset the candidates. Let’s improve the criteria in the next search process.
I’ve been reading comments, however contrasting but I do welcome various viewpoints. I find them instructive and enlightening. I wouldn’t argue against the comments that students/fssa lack concrete evidence or that they were acting on emotions. Would this help to understand, that it may be “natural” people respond to issues emotionally first before with logic? I think they need time to shift from emotions to logic and come up with something more concrete.
No, if you want to be taken seriously, you need to set aside emotions and start arguing facts.
to be taken seriously, one needs to find a good blend of fact and emotion. we are human beings; we use both; therefore it is illogical to choose one at the expense of another, as if one needed to choose between hands and feet.
Thats the problem with you Big D people. You don’t realize that your emotions don’t exist independent of your body. Your emotions are not floating around out there in the world for other people to care about. Facts do, however, exist in the world. Facts are out there for everyone to see and read for themselves. Your emotions are your emotions. Nothing wrong with feeling emotions, but don’t let them blind you. Let it flow and let it go, to quote the peaceful warrior. Focus on your emotions and you lose credibility. Focus on the facts and you will bring attention to the issue.
Well, this situation is rather unique because I keep asking myself this question: would this protest ever happened if DPN never happened in the first place? DPN was so inspirational for deaf people across the world - enabling them to fight for their recognition. When the BoT announced that Fernandes would succeed Jordan, their first reaction was emotional and of course they would think of DPN. So, it spread like wildfire - and it was too easy for the protestors to forget about logic in the beginning. That was their mistake and Fernandes was clever enough to take advantage of it. A lesson learned for the next time, eh?
I agree. DPN was planned well beforehand, so they were emotionally ready for anything and knew what they wanted to say. This one was pure spontaneity and emotion-based, despite having received several blinking warning neon signs. I was wondering if they were scrambling to grab the DPN playbook as a “guidebook” to action. Even I couldn’t help but suspecting if certain student leaders were trying to be a 21st century mirror image of the 4 DPN student leaders. Thank God FSSA took over soon thereafter.
Never mind Howie Kent. He was abrasive, rude and condescending to many. Which is why he was criticized by many. Nothing to do with his ASL/SEE thing that he claimed it to be.
But good article, Kaftan. I agreed 100%.
R-
Has anybody asked Jane Fernandes (or IKJ) if she reads the Kaftans’ blogs? If not, somebody should.
ahahahahahahah!!!!!! That’s like asking 43 if he reads the newspapers.
Actually, just the other week, I believe he did admit to at least glancing at the headlines.. that good enough for you?
This is a wonderful article, Kaftans. I wished this was written before commencement and that the media got a glimpse of it. The points / arguments found in this artilce practically destroys Jane’s “I wasn’t deaf enough” defense and the audience would then get an immediate idea of the kind of person she is. Only then they might realize the core reason of the protest. The protest was a leadership test and Jane skirted the real issues at hand. Is that a trait of a good leader?
Great job Kaftans.
Fernandes is said to be committed to dialogue with the student protesters and dissident faculty.
http://www.nbc4.com/news/9231343/detail.html
zzzzzzz…
[…] Gallaudet remained a dominant topic for DeafDC.com visitors as Julie brought up the now-apparent splits in the deaf community and the racial conflicts surrounding the presidential selection process. The blogpower team of Chris and Allison Kaftan discussed Dr. Fernandes’s attitude towards her constituents and the media’s declaration that the protest was over. […]