By Hilary Franklin
I was 10 years old during DPN. I have vague recollections of “the week the world heard Gallaudet.” I remember knowing that it was something important and something to be proud of, even though I didn’t fully understand what was happening. A deaf university president? Great! That’s a pretty nice “hero” to have when you are 10 and your (mainstream) elementary school teachers are talking about it in class.
It is 19 years later, and instead of feeling pride, I am upset, torn, and depressed. Since learning about the arrests, my emotions have been all in a twist. I am not a Gally student or an alumna. I’m just a member of the Deaf community who hasn’t supported the protests (since May) for one reason:
Because I believe that Jane Kelleher Fernandes is, on paper, qualified for the job.
Now, before you bark at me, I understand that she has caused a lot of unhappiness among many students and former staff members at the Clerc Center. I have read the open letters, the memos, just about everything that has been made publicly available via blogs and other websites, including DeafDC.com. However, the letter that seems to be thrown out a lot is the following one, posted on the GUFSSA website titled, “Letter from Clerc Center Staff“.
The problem I have with this letter is that it’s unsigned. The claims put forth can only be respected if there are people willing to stand behind those claims. Whether or not reprisals occur, the fact that the letter is publicly anonymous lessens its credibility. As a former reporter, and a researcher, I must be skeptical of all anonymous materials.
Back to the presidency. Being a university president is very different than being a provost or other university-level administrator. Presidents are in a political arena, more so than other university administrators, including the Board of Trustees. Presidents are on the front lines when it comes to raising funds and being the “face” of the University. Presidents are involved not only with the day-to-day administration of the campus, but also with the surrounding community. In this case, Gallaudet’s community is not just the streets that border its campus. It is a world-wide community, simply because of its status as the only university for the deaf in the world. President Jordan is, effectively, a visible leader of the entire deaf community, whether or not deaf and hard of hearing individuals attend Gallaudet. Presidents at other universities don’t have that image to deal with in their daily jobs.
Even though Fernandes’ career at Gallaudet has been analyzed, speculated upon, and presented negatively, the fact remains that Fernandes is not the president yet. She is the president-designate. The Board of Trustees conducted a search process. President Jordan has iterated, and reiterated, that he was not involved in the search process. How can we know what Fernandes will do as President? Over the summer, during a BOT retreat, Jane Fernandes outlined a plan, a vision, for her Presidency. If the BOT supports it, how can we not give her a chance?
While I’m on the topic of the Board of Trustees, we need to remember two things: (1) the BOT includes Gallaudet alumni, and (2) the BOT had meetings that were open to the public and strongly encouraged students to attend. These meetings occurred early on in the search process. No students attended. If students don’t make their voices heard early on, why should the BOT listen to them afterward? I certainly understand the BOTs position on that.
With regard to claims that President Jordan “groomed” Fernandes to take over, well…that happens a lot. Historically, presidents have prepared their underlings to prepare them to take over. The problem here is that we have only one Deaf university. Fernandes could only be groomed to take over in one place: Gallaudet University. Provosts, vice-presidents, and other higher education officials at other universities can apply for university leadership positions anywhere. So, if Fernandes resigns, what happens to her? She doesn’t want to lose her job! Back in 1988, during Deaf President Now, President Zinser was hearing – she knew she had other options, and she willingly stepped down. Fernandes doesn’t, so of course she doesn’t want to step down. I actually applaud her stubbornness.
Now, I realize that if another finalist had been selected, these protests might not have happened. However, what is clear is that the Board of Trustees, by selecting Fernandes based on their reasons (which we don’t know), unwittingly caused something to happen: an outcry of students, staff and faculty who simply want to be heard. As soon as the protests started, the BOT and the university administration should have taken them seriously. The issues that were raised — and there are many — should have been addressed immediately. While Jordan and the administration say they have listened to the protestors, they don’t agree with them. They have every right to disagree, but I do think they should be discussing those issues more, and in public.
However, the protestors have done a very poor job in representing themselves maturely and with dignity. They have not respected the other students’ right to an education. By blocking off Hall Memorial Building, they prevented the majority of students on campus from getting an education. With protestors at the various gates around campus, President Jordan feared for the safety of other students, and closed the campus. I’m sure that was an agonizing decision for him to make. Safety, however, is just as important as education.
With regard to the protestors, they are actually a very slim minority of the student population. The university’s enrollment was 1,913 as of last Fall 2005. The number of students arrested last Friday? 133. Even if we allow for a drop in enrollment of 600 students this semester, the percentage of students arrested barely reaches 10 percent. That is a very slim percentage. Blog reports from campus indicate that a steady group of about 150-200 protestors have been manning the front gates. While the support of alumni and other members of the deaf community have increased the number of protestors at the various gates around Gallaudet, the fact remains that only about 10-15 percent of current Gallaudet students are protesting.
And, what exactly are they protesting for? I know what they’re protesting against: Fernandes, claims of audism on campus, lack of diversity in the presidential search process, program cuts that Fernandes and other administrators have made, etc. It’s all negative. I can’t find any reports from protestors that provide suggestions on how to improve the university; only that Fernandes must resign.
Even if Fernandes resigns or is removed by the BOT (neither of which is likely to happen), the issues pertaining to audism, other forms of discrimination, and the program cuts still remain. How should those be dealt with? Tell me, please. Tell me what you want to fight for, not simply fight against.
Now, with all this said, it should be clear that I’m against what the protest is about and how it’s being done. What I do support is the right of students to be heard, listened to, and taken seriously. But infringing on others’ right to an education is not the way to do that. Representing yourselves in a way that makes the majority of people reading or watching about the protest not want to support it is not a way to do that. However, standing up for yourselves and fighting for the right to be heard is great – I applaud you for that.
I urge the protestors to do two things: (1) agree to negotiations with a team of mediators and stick with the negotiations, and (2) figure out what it is you’re fighting for. Simply saying you want “unity for Gallaudet” is not enough. We need to see a plan. We need suggestions from you on how to make that happen. Concrete actions are much louder than words (and signs) said in anger and frustration.
I want to see Gallaudet University become an institution we can all be proud of. Its undergraduate program has a long way to go before it reaches the educational standards of other universities. We need to fight for not only the educational rights of Gallaudet’s students, but those in elementary and secondary schools for the deaf (and mainstreaming programs) all over the United States. It’s time to raise the bar.
Hilary Franklin is a longtime resident of the DC area and a graduate of both the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Columbia University. Her background is in public policy analysis and American Sign Language education, as well as cued American English instruction. She wonders how the protest will end and what its eventual impact on the deaf community will be.
© 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.
Sarcasm, is it… Glenn Anderson speaks: Gallaudet Presidential Search A Beastly Day
119 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Bravo! You bring up some very good points!
I have been on campus and I can tell you that it is NOT 10-15% of the student body that is protesting.
I took a rough count on Friday evening and the number was about 400 before I lost count. I specifically made sure I did not count anyone that looked older than 30 or anyone that did not seem to be a student.
Later on, I met with more students who did not attend the rally.
I roughly estimate about 600-700 students are actively protesting. While about 400-500 others are not actively protesting, but agree with the protest. The rest are silent or against the protest.
Of course, that’s only my opinion and a rough count.
I suggest that you visit campus and talk to people. It is definitely not 10-15% for sure.
Let’s not forget the 82% of faculty that voted to remove Fernandes…
I second the recommendation. Visit Gallaudet and find out for yourself. It’s hard to see what is going on from such a distance.
At this moment I understand your thoughts and feelings, and I see your valid points. However, I fear you are misinformed about/have not considered 1)the number and makeup of protesters (they are not only students!), 2) JK’s ability to lead, 3) the BOT’s ability to make an informed decision, 4) the BOT’s willingness to access information that is not filtered through the President’s Office, 5)students’
“non-participation” in the presidental appointment process (false), 6) JK’s right to a position simply because of a lack of opportunity in other areas, 7) what the students are protesting for (they do have goals and ideas of what a post-JK Gallaudet would be), 8)the ability of the current administration to “raise the bar”, so to speak, 9) the depth of corruption and apathy that has taken root into the current administration.
To one scholar from another- you cannot possibly make a truly informed decision without going down there yourself and finding out what is going on. Have you talked to the protesters themselves? Have you visited Gallaudet? Have you done the background research?
Sincerely,
A Fellow Scholar
What are those post-JKF goals?
What will happen if she resigns? Who will take over? What will happen if the person taking over is not popular?
I have been asking these questions and have never recieved an answer.
They want the search process to be reopened, that’s I think will happens if she resigns or is brought out…(or the BoT appoints someone?)If the person taking over is not popular…oh boy. Hang on for a Civil War II.
If a Civil War II occurs, as you postulate, because the students object to a replacement for Fernandes, then they will have forfeit any and all sympathy from the outside world because they’ll be seen, rightfully so, as attempting to manipulate the process for “their” candidate.
There is such a thing as picking your battles and I question the wisdom of this particular battle. There are much more serious problems facing Gallaudet than governance.
Like others have said, I agree that it is approximately 300 students who are doing the protesting out of a student body of 1900. This lopsided result makes me view with considerable skepticism any claim that they represent the entire student body, even assuming that there is another 300 or 400 that are silently supporting the protest.
I suspect a lot of people on the outside, including Congressional staffers and representatives from the administration and the Board of Trustees have been doing the same kind of math.
Turning to Fernandes’ qualifications, it seems that there has been some concession that she is “on paper” qualified to run the university.
Turning to the allegations that Fernandes, nevertheless, is not qualified to run the university, I would say, like many neutral people, that the allegations are weak, unsupported, or biased. As others have noted, the “story” about Kitty has been largely unproven or wild supposition for the most part. See this particular thread http://www.deafdc.com/blog/?p=619.
As for the Laurent Clerc letter, I would have more consideration had the authors been brave enough to sign their names instead of insisting on anonymity. Now, it appears that they are largely angry because Fernandes had the temerity to remove tenure from them. My reaction with respect to this, and I think many outsiders share the same reaction, is why on earth should elementary and high school teachers have tenure in the first place? That is a privilege granted to faculty members at colleges and/or universities. Unless I am mistaken, this has not been addressed.
Another issue that has not been addressed is the fact that the protesters, as others have pointed out, do not have a coherent message. At least part of the message rests on the fact that Fernandes is not Deaf enogh. I find that the allegation by Fernandes has largely been supported by comments that I see on Draco Malfoy’s blog plus others cited on the DeafRead threads, plus, of course, the abuse hurled at anybody who has questioned this position. I think that a lot of outsiders share this viewpoint that the “not Deaf enough” argument is, at least part, of the protest, and to pretend otherwise is to refute reality.
Finally, as others have commented, the protesters do not appear to have a coherent vision about what happens if JKF is replaced. JKF appears to have a vision for Gallaudet, one of which appears to be inclusion for EVERYBODY. The BoT appears to be at least groping about for a vision and the protesters have not, to my knowledge, addressed this concern.
I note that no one has even attempted to address your particular points. I wonder why? :rolleyes:
In regards to Hilary’s point about the unsigned letter from Clerc Center, it’s easy to criticize something that you have no affiliation. It is unsigned because the teachers and staff of Clerc Center can face reprisals, such as losing one’s job. However, they needed to speak out as well. And just because it is anonymous doesn’t mean that it is not true. Perhaps this letter could have been vouched by former and retired teachers and staff. By the way, this letter has been vouched by a DeafDC blogger.
In regards to tenureship, I do belive it is unique in Deaf schools. I do know that Alabama School f/t Deaf offers tenureship as one blogger mentioned, some time ago, about getting his tenure.
Thank you for your input about tenureship. I did not know about that.
I have heard the Kitty story and it seems VERY weak. Why was Gallaudet not sued? Any judge would see this as age discrimination and Gally would have to pay up BIG time.
If this story is true, it did not have enough of an affect on Kitty to have her sue or she did something so egregious that she was justifiably let go and anyone would have fired her.
Excellent write-up. I really appreciate the DeafDC.com because it always present both positive and negative sides. Thank you Hillary for taking the time to present your point of view. I totally agree with all your points.
At RidorLive.com web site, I notice Gally aumini made comments and provided positive comments about Jackie Roth’s Open Letter with a link to a different website, but Ridor didn’t like the fact that someone included a link to Jackie Roth’s Open Letter. He deleted the link and stated “Ridor’s Note: Your link to that blog is deleted. I do not regard them as beneficial to the community. ”
It’s sad that some people such as Ridor aren’t willing to open their minds and listen to both sides.
Thank you so much for a well thought out and honest approach to the current situation at Gallaudet.
Excellent points. I absolutely agree that Dr. Fernandes is qualified on paper to be the next President of Gallaudet. And I also absolutely agree that the protest community really needs to be listened to. Your suggestions for a next step are spot on.
Only quibble I have with your points is that I think, from my observations, that while 150-200 students do show up regularly, they are often different from one time to next. So the percentage of students actually involved is probably higher.
As a current student who is on campus every single day and almost all day. I See the rise and fall of this tide called a Protest, I see the number of people guarding tha gates. I talk to my friends who are among those protesting and I can agree that the number might be higher than the 150-200 but not by much.
If you need proof of this, just look at what happened at College Hall this morning, their simply was not enough students to bloackade the floor so they gave up and DPS entered and re-opened the building.
So while the numbers might be higher than 200 hard core protestors its not in the 400-600 level that some are stating. 300 MIGHT be a good estimate and generous at that!
As a testament to the rumor mill nature of this protest, I heard they left College Hall because they did not intend to blockade it all day. Just to flex their muscles a bit.
Ah’ if thats the case they need better leaders for flexing muscles in such a manner is not helpful for the cause at all. It sends too many mixed signals and like you said leaves the rumor mill wide open to crank out any number of theories.
Bobby White, you have so hit the nail on the head with that first sentence… The protest DOES need better leaders. The problem with this protest is too many hands are in the pot, and those hands belong not to the more sensible mature individuals who will act in the best interest of the whole, but instead belong to those who’s passion allowed them to throw out all caution and respect. The protest is entirely valid, the need for Jane Fernandes to resign and for the Board of Trustees to reopen the President search is undeniable after examinine closely. The protest, however, has been a travesty. It’s been the Gallaudet Public Relations Department against juvenile delinquents, or so it appears to the exterior community.
The colder it becomes, the more we will see the attempt or actual takeover of buildings. It will be purely for warmth (read: selfish) reasons
do you think so, Alumna? This seems to me as going against the stated intentions of the protestors to not interfere with students’ ability to go to their classes. It would not gain them much sympathy, and then the administration would have a legal right to remove them for trespassing.
And perhaps the fact that some of them have already been arrested once are rather nervous about getting re-arrested. That probably would mean severe penalties. Yeah, I agree that 300 is a good estimate.
This is a very good and clear post. This situation could have been handled better on both sides. And there needs to be compromise on both sides. Remember - Gallaudet gets $$$ from the federal government. Who approves the budget? The Congress. What are they going to be thinking when they see such tactics on both sides on the local news? What will they think when the time comes to approve the next budget? Think about that.
God bless you, Ms. Franklin. We need more deaf people like you — open-minded, accepting, and willingness to welcome change with open arms. In other words, you’re not desperately clinging onto the past, afraid of what the future may bring. Instead, you look at the future with bright, shining eyes, regardless the consequences, and you carry the torch of hope and teamwork. You seek solutions, not obstacles. Now that’s what I call progress. Gallaudet students, are you taking notes?
Hilary,
I appreciated your blog entry. I now support the protest and at one point I was asking the same exact questions you did above. The infamous, “Not Deaf Enough” issue is still interwoven in this protest, but it is no longer the main issue. This is a complicated protest. Every one of us needs to make informed decisions about this on our own. I respect anybody’s stance on the issue. Still, the bottom line for me is having Dr. J.K. Fernandes resign peacefully for the sake of the larger community is the only way out of this mess. It is the only way the healing process will begin.I am still waiting for somebody to convince me that Dr. Fernandes will clean this mess up if given the chance? I simply cannot see it.
I would disagree to a degree on the “not Deaf enough.” They keep bringing up JKF’s lack of ASL usage, says she’s an “Audist”, and so on. The longer this goes on, the more they keep exposing themselves of the more underlying real issues that peppers around the “not Deaf enough” issue about JKF. It just keeps pointing to that everytime I read another post, comments, conspiracy theories or blogs.
I have am puzzled by the lack of recognization on other people’s part about this… Where are the deaf people saying “she’s not deaf enough” now? I haven’t seen them. No doubt there werea few dumb people who said that, but… The people saying that NOW is the Gallaudet Public Relations Department, and Jane Fernandes herself. Thus the nation’s papers keep printing it. It’s like a few members of the KKK saying the n word about a candidate running for office, then the papers blast it all over the place using it to say this candidate is facing opposition from the white folks, and THEN the candidate uses it as well. The few saying something once, does not make ALL opposition to someone be based on that ONE instance. The people wanting that piece of stupidity repeated over and over, is the one who “supposenly” is being referred to. Where’s the logic there?
Wonderful posting. I agree- it’s better to say what you’re protesting for, not against. It sounded better to say we’re protesting for equality, rather than we’re protesting against Bull Conner or John Doe. This is one main point why the FSSA lost support of several people of color- instead of protesting for “fairness” in the form of independent investigation of the search process, the FSSA demanded for Fernandes to resign and allowed for character assassinations to come in.
Trighap, the not Deaf enough were replete in the now-defunct gallyprez.com, in earlier vlogs via Joey Baer (they have been removed, sorry), in the inital outbursts on the day of the announcement of Fernandes as the 9th President, and then the recent newspaper articles. Someone said Fernandes failed to meet the deaf critieria because she married a hearing man, and then someone said something about her signing being awkward. Fernandes is just using that to her advantage, she didn’t make it up herself, it was there in the open for her to pounce upon. I guess this is one example that proves that loose lips will sink a boat.
You know, after all of this, all the debates and the tendency of other major bloggers to throw more wood onto the fire … I’m begining to get sick of Gallaudet. I don’t think the students, nor the faculty do themselves much pride by being a member nor that they are doing anything about it in a very admirable manner.
Being a deaf person myself, I want nothing to do with Gallaudet. What cause have I when they discriminate, argue bitterly, and when a fascinating topic actually arises (the Deaf Culture Standpoint for example), they have to turn it into a Fernandes issue? At this point, it wouldn’t shock me if an interesting article on Bush’s leadership or an abortion issue point of view debated was turned somehow into a reflection of Fernandes’ character and leadership abilities. Way to go, Gallaudet. Sarcasm very much intended here.
Don’t give up on your education, despite what is going on it is something you can always fall back upon at all times as an individual.
You can put the degree from GU to the wayside, but you hurt yourself by not being a good student.
Just because I’m deaf doesn’t mean I go to Gallaudet. It is not the be-all and all for deaf people. I attend a mainstream DC University for a M.A.
That said, the point of my response was to illustrate that Gallaudet has become useless. It does not inspire anything for any deaf person, whether a member of the University or not. One curious thing about Gallaudet is that members are entirely wrapped up in it and believe it is the only thing that drives every deaf person in the world forward.
And I ardently mock that conclusion, and mock Fernandes making her way into every issue there is out there for a Gallaudet student. They have lost the big picture. They no longer debate far more reaching issues of the world, but only the issues of Gallaudet.
In fact, there was an interesting post a while ago by Bobby Cox. It shared the concept of the deaf cultural standpoint. Now this is a fascinating concept. What is the deaf cultural standpoint? Such a thing even exist? What is the impact of technology upon it? What about the minorities in the deaf community? But no … a Gallaudet member took that theory and turned it into a, guess what, Fernandes issue.
I once had a curiosity to know students from Gallaudet. Now? I rather meet the deaf people abroad in other countries and in other states, far from the reach of Gallaudet.
You appear to have the same viewpoint as Lew Golan, a noted oralist. He wrote an op-ed piece in today’s Washington Post that is rather scathing of the protests and of Gallaudet in general.
I strongly disagree with him and think he’s a pompous jerk, but he has some intellectual firepower and his attitude exemplifies many non-Gallaudet deaf.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01560.html
I just read the article. Thank you for the link, and sharing it. I have not heard of Lew Golan before. I must say that for the most part I agreed with his article, and you are correct, it does exemplify many non-GU members.
That said, there was a time when I did believe that Gallaudet could be a shining example for the deaf Americans (Not the world). A kind of city on the hill for everyone to look to. Do I think it still can? No. I believe that responsibility falls to some other education institute or organization now.
Gallaudet can still be a shining example or a city on a hill if you prefer for the deaf. Unfortunately, it requires a degree of inclusivity that I’m not currently finding in the protests.
Whoa! What’s that I am hearing? That’s right, an echo chamber.. It must be all the singing to the choir here.
Come on, guys, those arguements have been repeated ad nauseum from the very beginning. Many rebuttals have been made by myself and others.
I am really getting the impression that there is a core group of anti-protesters (note: not pro-JK) whom have their own agenda they are pushing. What are your reasons? Why are you so bound and determined to be right? What would you do if the protesters turned out to be right (as in their assessment of the flawed process)?
I remember the naysayers back in May saying it was just a bunch of dumb kids and it would blow over. I also remember people saying it was only ASL militant deafies supporting this protest. I remember people asserting that, indeed, JK was the perfect person for the position. I remember yet others saying (still today) that there are not many FSSA supporters.
There is ample evidence to show that those people were mistaken on all counts. Still, I don’t see you reexaming your preset ideas and deep rooted prejudices (yes, prejudices. I’ve seen a lot of anti-ASL and anti-DOD talk around here).
This protest is really hard on all of this. I have had to go through soul searching many times already, only to reemerge to know that the two demmands (which has always been consistent) need to be satisfied.
So, listen and think. Or we’ll still be here rehashing the same old points when the fat lady signs.
And yes, the “hearing” cliches are intentional.
I will answer for myself. As a hearing DC college student.
First, it was the anger that began against her initially. I wasnt really paying attention then, but it bothered me that she was being attacked when it really didnt seem that serious a problem.
At the start of the semester the protest began again, I support the right to protest but it just seemed very pointless.
THEN it was the takeover of the school building. That set me off. I dont care what people say about being right or just, but never will I ever condone someone being prevented from learning. Education is one of the most important things in life. and I see people throwing it away and blocking those who want to learn.
The human chain at the gates to stop people from coming in was stupid, it was attrocious when I heard from people like RLM that they wanted to blockade the parking decks.
It is the tactics that bother me, it is the fact that you embarress me as liberals to go and squander your education and feel as if you are the ones who can make change occur. You can’t if you dont even respect your opponent, which is very evident at the ceremony for King.
The way the protest has acted has been like a mob, you cannot negotiate with someone when one of your terms is their dismissal.
The entire protest in my mind is for stupid and rather temporary reasons, it may seem valid to those experiencing it now, but in reality it wont matter. She may not be the best person to run the school, but she was chosen by the BOT for some good reason.
To also state, the reason why I am against the protest is because it is a mob. If she resigns what do you think will happen? The mob will take credit and the administartion will know it, they can’t effectively run an instituion if they are afraid of angering a mob. Think about it, any unpopular decision comes up and the mob can blackmail the school to do what it wants.
When she becomes president, you will have to deal with her on a human level. It will be very understandable if she is not reaching your hand to shake, but it will be big of her and neccesary for her as president to do so.
Your prepositon that somehow the process was unfair leads off to conspiracy. For all of the great perks of being a school president it is not an easy job in any way. Academics willfully give up high paying positions to work in academia and help educate others.
My suggestion is that the protest withdraw the key point of her withdrawl and then make your ammends. If she doesnt do so, go through the proper channels as you should have in the beginning and work on changing the system from within.
You lost me at “embarrass me as liberals and go and squander your education”, sorry.
I’ll be around when you are ready to present an arguement that isn’t emotionally laden and full of implied prejudice against the protesters.
One thing I have noticed about the discussion here and elsewhere is that everybody seems to be turning a deaf ear on each other. There is absolutely no communication going on between both sides or even with the same people on the same side. Diversity is all well and good but when everybody has opinions, it gets, well, quite muddled.
I’m not a fan of the protesters because I think that they are not at all inclusive, period. Despite furious backtracking by GUFSSA, the “not Deaf enough” argument has enough resonance that it keeps on getting repeated ad nauseam by everyone who is not a student leader.
That said, it does look like Fernandes will have to resign, not because of the protests, but because of the inept way she has handled the protests. She should have been right out there dealing with the protesters in a respectful yet firm manner. Instead, we have interviews with the Washington Post and pressure on the trustees not to cave in. I have yet to see that the administration reaching out to the protesters. It is quite possible to agree to disagree in a civil manner, but both sides are not giving in, much less communicating. I understand that Jordan has ultimate responsibility in running the campus until January 2007, but I would think that Fernandes would at least reach out. I think that failure is stoking the protests at least.
Anyway, my point is, and I will admit I get irritated at the point blank dismissal by you of Johan’s arguments simply by citing his conservative viewpoint as reason enough not to listen to him, that you are equally as guilty as everyone else in shutting people off if they do not agree with your viewpoints.
I admit I am guilty of this, but I sure as heck try to listen in a civil way and rebut point by point.
Any other attitude just drags the civil discourse down to where it is now and everybody is tired of this stand-off.
Enough said.
Johan has every right to disagree with my viewpoint, but I am not interested in hearing him slander an hypoethical “liberal” group of people.
If I started my letter with, “those conservatives…” wouldn’t that turn you off?
Johan has his opinion, and that’s fine, and I am willing to debate it. I just am not interested in strawman attacks on an entire “group”.
It’s like Rush Limbaugh on the radio screaming about “feminazis”. Immediately, his arguement is invalid because it relies on this whole fallacy of a strawman. He’s not talking about a real person. He’s talking about this whole idea he has in his head of the eeeevil feminists.
What I saw John was talking about this whole idea he has in his head of eeevil protesters who are whiny liberals who don’t value their education. He pretty much said so in his post.
Do I have to listen to it? No.
Johan, if you have points to make, feel free to discuss them. Attacking a whole group of people is no way to start.
We have at least one common area of agreement.
Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.
Perhaps Johan wasn’t far off after reading those retorts?? As for speaking of “hypotheticals”, is that what the protesters have been doing all along? Instead of “hypotheticals” they’re conspiracy theories? The thing is here, many people are painting many of the protesters as if none of their actions had any fault of their own. They’re just “innocent” bystanders who just want to protest.
Now, about the DPS thing, that merits some serious looking into is the only thing I may agree upon in terms of communicating properly and clearly.
Like I said, this is everybody’s mess. Nobody is innocent in any of this and everybody’s is guilty to one degree or another in making a fine mess out of everything. Even me.
Keep politics out of it, I was just making a point that I self-identify as a moderate liberal and that this protest is very much radical.
I have made an emotional point that education is the main reason why people are in school and that the protest is a detriment to those trying to learn.
I read this morning the Washpost online talk back thing with Plummer being interviewed. She said that she was incapable of learning in a place where the atmosphere was so constraining. Now that right there is pretty off the wall.
If wildstarryskies thinks that I am just using a few examples and painting the rest like that, well to be honest with you, many of the leaders of the protest are the ones who are engaging in unneccesary actions. They took over a school building, where most of the classrooms are apparently, they football team blocked a gate to keep people from entering, and there was an attempt in RLM’s own words, they wanted to obstruct a parking deck.
The protest has invalidated itself as a leader by committing immoral acts. It has lost the moral high ground that it supposed to hold.
If you think the protest is valid, that is your opinion, but many outsiders are thinking that this is a very big overreaction that has caused more harm to the university than it will ever help.
Could you live with JKF as president? IF people had not protested, would she have been able to govern and lead the school? The obvious answer is yes. Classes would still go on, there would be much less angst, and that the quiet life that people lead would go on (pun unintended).
An Outside Scholar
You are probably right, she will probably have to resign, but unless she has something else for her to do or a monetary settlement is given to her, then she has no reason to do so. The protest will continue unabated even if she gains office, it may just get more vindictive.
I truly pity anyone who becomes the next president of Galladuet.
“F people had not protested, would she have been able to govern and lead the school?”
She hasn’t done an effective job in the past. I don’t see how she can do it now.
That was one of the major issues- that she does not possess the leadership qualities. If there had not been a protest, everything would have continued on the course they were on, which I feel would have been bad for Gallaudet.
I am glad this protest happened. Now people are realizing something’s up. The apathy has been broken. Even if we lose, JK can’t afford to screw up.
I seriously don’t understand what you mean by her not being an effective leader.
How can you quantify that?
I am not an ardent supporter of her at all, but I see this as an overreaction.
I mean, really what has she failed to do?
There is a line I steal from Futurama about God being good. “If you do things right, they wont notice them at all”
Do the research. Start with the Clerc Center letter. It’s at http://www.gufssa.org under “notable letters”.
Whoa! What’s that I am hearing? That’s right, an echo chamber.. It must be all the singing to the choir here.
Come on, guys, those arguements have been repeated ad nauseum from the very beginning. Many rebuttals have been made by myself and others.
I am really getting the impression that there is a core group of anti-protesters (note: not pro-JK) whom have their own agenda they are pushing. What are your reasons? Why are you so bound and determined to be right? What would you do if the protesters turned out to be right (as in their assessment of the flawed process)?
I remember the naysayers back in May saying it was just a bunch of dumb kids and it would blow over. I also remember people saying it was only ASL militant deafies supporting this protest. I remember people asserting that, indeed, JK was the perfect person for the position. I remember yet others saying (still today) that there are not many FSSA supporters.
There is ample evidence to show that those people were mistaken on all counts. Still, I don’t see you reexaming your preset ideas and deep rooted prejudices (yes, prejudices. I’ve seen a lot of anti-ASL and anti-DOD talk around here).
This protest is really hard on all of this. I have had to go through soul searching many times already, only to reemerge to know that the two demmands (which has always been consistent) need to be satisfied.
So, listen and think. Or we’ll still be here rehashing the same old points when the fat lady sings.
And yes, the “hearing” cliches are intentional.
couldn’t have said it better. ;)
Those two demands are, ahem, flawed ones. If anything, should have demanded for an independent and internal review of the process before moving forward with the demands. Had it been shown that’s something amiss, then protesters would then have the needed “meat” to press forward.
And, plenty of anti-ASL and anti-DOD speakums around here? Are they just oozing off the walls as we speak?
Where?
McConnell, Remeber when I said I was finished debating with you? I meant it. If you want the same answers to the same old questions you’ve already asked, you know where to go look for them.
Then don’t reply. Others may jump in to make a point or an argument.
I have a question, does anyone NOT know how to count?
They keep sating 2 demands but maybe my math is poor but it looks like 3 to me.
1. Re-open the search proccess. (3) Fernandes Resign.
2. No reprisals
Now my question, why would they want to re-open a search process that they claim is flawed?
For the search process to be reopened, Fernandes must FIRST resign. You can’t satisfy the first demmand without prior action by Fernandes.
And as for the search process, yes, it must be reopened. The protesters, however, did not say “reopen the same search process” or “use the same search process as before”. It is clear to me that when the search process is reopened, there needs and will be new procedures in place to prevent this from happening again.
Hope that answers your questions.
I still count it as three demands. One is a precondition to the second.
Okay, you’er correct. STOP the whole protest! It’s really three demmands, not two!!! The protesters were lying all the time!!!
:)
Yes, I’m being silly. 2/3. Who cares? I think it’s pretty clear what the demmands (plural) are.
:-)
Well said Hilary!
~ Deaf Pundit
I appreciate the comments — I’ve just gotten online at 11:25pm and I wanted to clarify a couple things.
This post was originally written LAST week (10/18), but due to unforeseen issues, could not be posted by deafdc until today. So the numbers in the blog are *prior* to the increase in numbers of protestors at the front gates (before and after the march). However, I still stand by the fact that even though students are taking turns at the various gates, the numbers still do not reach a majority of the current student population. With alumni helping out, it can be difficult to discern who is a current student and who is an alum, short of asking each person individually.
I have considered, many times, whether I should go on campus and see it for myself. I have chosen, at this time, not to set foot on campus because I am not a student or alumna and not involved with the protest. That is my personal decision.
Also, with regard to the 82% no-confidence faculty vote — please remember that number is the percentage of voting faculty who ATTENDED the voting session. If you “assume” that those faculty who could not/would not attend the voting session voted FOR confidence in JKF, then that number drops to 62%. Also, there are faculty on campus who do not have voting privileges, and their voice should be heard as well. The faculty no-confidence vote is not a reliable measure — it is a good indicator, yes, but it is hardly a reliable measure of the entire faculty membership on campus — tenured, non-tenured, and adjunct. It is a measure of approximately 2/3 of the voting membership.
Again, thank you all for your comments — I look forward to reading more over the next couple days.
Hilary,
There is a reason it’s called FSSA - Faculty, Staff, Students and Alumni. There is widespread support. The students are doing most of the work, yes because they are on campus. The Faculty are bound to their contracts (they can’t walk out, or they’d be fired). The staff has been intimidated in submission. The alumni are the ones mostly running the blogs and sending money.
All of those people are stakeholders in the future of Gallaudet. Just because some of us are not at Gallaudet right now, does not mean that we don’t have some part of our future/past wrapped up in the success of Gallaudet University to become a place with higher standards that has combated audism successfully, with a President we can all look up to and admire.
There *is* support for this protest.
That’s just my take on it. :)
Oh, and yes, I have spoken with people who are both for and against the protest (deaf and hearing). I have spoken with interpreters, students, alumni, protestors, non-protestors. I have discussed this ad nauseam and that is why I decided to finally make my feelings public. :)
I think the real point at this stage of this whole thing is: Let’s say JKF is the best thing since sliced bread….there’s still no way she will ever be able to right the ship of Gallaudet.
Sad to say, but you would be correct.
However, the entire ship may collapse in on itself at the same time. It will not look good either way. If she leaves, people will still be angry and her supporters will feel cheated. As well as the fact that a good number of people outside of the school and community are watching, and I would wager that if the admin gives in it will not bode will for its reputation.
On the other hand, if she stays this entire situation will keep up until something happens. Lawyers and professional mediators need to get there quickly. The protestors have to drop their demand that she resign, it is an intolerable demand.
Bingo!
I agree with DT 100%
At this point in time, how can JKF possibly lead Gallaudet out of this mess?
Good post, but I’m somewhat confused as to your position on the protest. That is, how do you reconcile your post which says to give JKF a chance with a letter which asks JKF to step down that has your name listed: http://news.gufssa.com/2006/10.....academics/
I didn’t realize that letter showed up on the FSSA site. Again, this blog was written *prior* to that letter being sent. I’m against the protest and believe JKF should be given a chance. However, I’m not confident that she will be able to effectively lead a university during a time (or right after such a time) when so many of the protestors are attacking her as an individual.
Also, to the comment up there somewhere about the FSSA — it implies that *all* faculty, staff, students and alumni support the protest. That’s not true. The chair of the sociology department and another student gave an interview to the Washington Post Radio earlier this week and publicly declared their support for JKF. Many of their reasons were the same as I outlined above. They also said that they did not feel the FSSA represented them.
The protest is flawed in many ways. The leadership is flawed. But because of the far-reaching impact of the protest and the “loud voices” screaming against JKF’s appointment, her ability to govern will be lessened. As an academian and researcher, I have to look not only at a person’s qualifications, but also the *stability* of the institution. Right now, Gallaudet is very unstable, and JKF is right in the middle of that. So, to sum up:
I’m against the protest. Have been since May. But I don’t know how Fernandes will govern Gallaudet effectively. Therefore, it may be necessary to select another President to bring the University into a time of progress.
Yes, it looks like Fernandes will not be able to govern effectively.
However, and this is likely to be an unpopular choice, there should be repercussions for the protesters involved. This seems to me the most fair and equitable way to allow the university to regain some equilibrium.
I think the GU Administration should have done a better job handling the result of the protest. The responses from the Administration were often not acceptable at all. Sadly, it’s too late now. Everyone is grieving including me.
Just like Allison Kaftan, it’s gnawing at me on a daily basis. It’s quite frustrating either way. I hear of deaf community related events of being placed on hold just because they’re involved directly or indirectly with the protest. There was a letter somewhere by Patty or Peggy that I could relate (re: raising suspicions of illegal matters with IKJ/JKF because of their lackadaisical attitude/behavior). I’m sick of my obsessive finger clicking on “F5″ to refresh the pages and it’s actually quite refreshing to see http://www.DeafRead.com on a technical hiatus so I can give that finger a break of pressing “F5″. I’m tired of raising suspicions and playing guessing games with my friends. I’d definitely like see this protest end very soon, hopefully with the BoT meeting on Sunday although I’m wary of the BoT meeting outcome.
Anyways – here’s a thought that I’ve discussed with my friends. I do wonder if there would be a protest “against” JKF if it wasn’t for her 11 years of Gallaudet experience? Would they have been more accepting if she had those 11 years of experience elsewhere; coming to Gallaudet as a neutral person? I would say some would because, realistically, on paper, she looked like an ideal candidate to be a president of an university, like what you (Hilary) said. Additionally, I do wonder if there would be ‘noises’ against her because she doesn’t exactly fit in the core of the Deaf-World.
I agree, you do have a good point..
“I do wonder if there would be a protest “against” JKF if it wasn’t for her 11 years of Gallaudet experience? Would they have been more accepting if she had those 11 years of experience elsewhere; coming to Gallaudet as a neutral person? ”
I do think that having her around here for 11 years has made the protesters very familiar with her, and we just do not want to prolong the experience. :)
Oh, and it’s not just “against” Jk. It’s also FOR social justice - in geting a President who is truly qualified, both on paper and off, to lead the University.
Unfortunately, this is where you and I disagree.
I do not believe that “social justice” is part of a university’s central mission. That is best left to NGO’s. By all means, fight for social justice, but outside a university.
Huh? I disagree. Everyone is responsible for their action in providing what is a fair treatment. Let me check wikipedia. Wow, great minds think alike. Here it goes…
Read the very first sentence… “Social justice refers to conceptions of justice applied to an entire society. It is based on the idea of a just society, which gives individuals and groups fair treatment and a just share of the benefits of society.”
Just society has nothing to do with university governance.
I still disagree. Not part of the central mission or university governance, it is part of organizational development. Have you take any organizational behavior related course? It teaches that any corporations, organizations, and institutes must know and understand the group dynamics. I see social justice playing an important role in organizational development. Once it is understood, then it’s more likely the corporations, organizations, and institutes will succeed.
And I still disagree.
But you raise some interesting points. I’ll have to take a look at them.
I still think, nonetheless, that the protesters would be better off dropping the Quixotic quest for social justice. Asking for that detracts from your core mission which is, of course, Fernandes’ resignation and, well, whatever you want to happen after that. To ask for social justice makes the protesters sound like crunchy student granola hippie types and that gets dismissed by society at large with a roll of the eyes.
That’s just a tactical observation. Doesn’t mean that I agree with the protests! :-)
WAD
A problem with Social Justice within Universities is that it is a structure built around competition. Worthwhile goals of acheiving and learning about Social justice outside of the university is acceptable.
However, the notion that this protest is about social justice implies that somehow there are those being denied benefits or that there is an injustice occuring. I fail to see how that is the case. True the protestos are brining up the problem of audism, however that is an attempt to make the protest seem much larger than it is.
I don’t exactly understand what people mean in terms of ‘Social Justice’ regarding Gallaudet’s governance.
As far as I know, all educational institutions, and the majority of businesses are run in a top-down management style. There’s a reason for that.
You need to have specialized knowledge, experience, a solid understanding of business ethics and its culture to run an institution like Gallaudet.
As for those issues, such as audism, the protestors are bringing up, don’t you think it’s time for all of us to start resolving those issues now?
As far I can see, we’re just getting further entrenched in our positions. That’s surely not helping fix the problems that Gallaudet does have.
~ Deaf Pundit
It looks like Move On and Johan are thinking on a different frequency than mine. That is okay. Perhaps the protestors explained social justice the incorrect way.
Let me post a website that may help you understand what I am trying to say. I took organizational behavior course (Masters level) at RIT and learned a great deal about how a person should lead a company especially dealing with a group of diversity people. I can not sit down and type a long comment explaining the whole concept. Blog readers will fell asleep. ;) You will see the program includes social justice.
http://www.usfca.edu/catalog/cps_ug_ob.html
p.s I grinned when it mentioned “Jesuit values of …” because I live near McQuaid Jesuit High School and it’s the most respected school in Rochester. I can picture that school dealing with social justice way above my expectation. They’re good at it!
No, you are fine with your definition of Social Justice. The problem is that it is a subjective movement.
Social justice can mean equality for all in all cases, or it can mean equality as it should be. Same thing, but difference is in how you force the issue.
I would forsee social justice as it should be since I am a realist and that it is more of an idealistic trend to seek out a perfect goal, rather than force the issue to other people.
wildstarryskies,
if you really cared about social justice, you WOULD HAVE done something when the finalists were announced, instead of telling the COSC group to shut up and wait for the announcement, hoping that mr. (and i mean mister, not doctor) ron stern was selected.
this reeks of hypocrisy and i will never ever take your or the FSSA’s words about social justice.
i truly believe you think that social justice means getting your way all the time.
Woah. I’m not sure that this is appropriate. WS has been more than gracious in sharing her perspective although, of course, I disagree profoundly about the protest itself. It would be a shame if this resulted in a decrease of postings from WS and any other similarly inclined individual.
That said, I see that university governance and social justice are two mutually exclusive things. One has nothing to do with the other — starry idealism notwithstanding (no pun intended, WS).
But, yes, I also see that the protesters are asking for a “do over” selection which is rarely something that is obtained in the real world. Just witness Bush v. Gore in 2000. No matter how much I wished otherwise, people often don’t get second chances in real life.
Thanks, Move On.
As Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “Hitch your wagon to a star”
Starry idealism doesn’t work in reality (yes, I know this), but that shouldn’t stop us from reaching for it. Reaching for our ideals have brought us further than we ever thought we would.
I seem to remember some starry ideals spouted around back in 1776…
Oh yes, that’s right. Some starry idealists sat around and established a new system of governance. What was that you said again about governance and social justice being mutually exclusive?
:)
p.s. I know, it doesn’t work out in reality, but sometimes it does, and ain’t it grand when it does?
Ah, our Founding Fathers weren’t starry-eyed idealists in the first instance. They were profoundly wary of mob rule and the tyranny of the majority. That’s why we have our constitutional checks and balances, which, theoretically, prevents any one party, faction, or branch of government usurpring the authority of the other branches. While they knew that they were undergoing a novel experiment in the New World, they also wanted the rights of Englishmen that the King and Parliament obstinately refused to give them as well as, of course, lower taxation. The gap between their aspirations and reality can perhaps be summed up by the fact that at least a significant portion of them were slaveowners and they agreed that slaves would count as three-fourths of a person. Washington himself only freed slaves at his death and Jefferson, due to large debts, was unable to do so.
If you truly want starry-eyed idealism, look no further than the originators of the French revolution. They tried to create a new society based on liberty, equality, and brotherhood, and look how well THAT turned out.
Um. Isn’t France a democracy now? (Parliament system). Yes, the short-term results were not so good, but in the end…. ?
They were profoundly wary of mob rule and the tyranny of the majority. That’s why we have our constitutional checks and balances, which, theoretically, prevents any one party, faction, or branch of government usurpring the authority of the other branches.”
What happens when the system is out of whack and the minority rules the majority without much forethough to the consequences?
France’s a socialist country, not a democracy. Even the United States is not a democracy. It’s a republic.
Correct, Deaf Pundit. The U.S.A. is a republic.
“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands…”
WS — OK, so you want to ignore the bloodshed that was shed in the French Revolution that made the word “guillotine” such a bad name? Let’s focus on the chaotic instability that followed after the Terror. First, there was the Directory, then there was Napoleon, then there was a French King, then, a liberal French King, and then a second republic which got corrupted by Napoleon III, a second empire, a foreign invasion, the Communards, and then the third republic which lasted until 1940. After that, a fourth and fifth republic. At this point, I confess, I do not know what number the current French Republic stands for.
While we are steadily toodling along with our one constitutional republic that achieved pretty much the same results with much less bloodshed.
I’d prefer a dose of reality in addition to starry-eyed idealism, thankyouverymuch. :-)
It is somewhat deeply disturbed by people who question the validity of Clerc Center teachers and staff letter. Why cannot people see the REASON why it has no names — “The authors’ names are withheld due to fear of reprisals.” Obviously those teachers and staff are revisiting the history of intimidation and fear that the system is still there. Would you think those teachers and staff would make up stories? Of course not, they are finally revealing about the social injustice at Pre-College National Mission Programs (PCNMP) from 1995 to 2000. Even when PCNMP was officially changed to Laurent Clerc National Deaf Center, the practices and policies made by JK are still lingering. If there is an announcement of no reprisals, those teachers and staff may come forward.
We should listen to Clerc Center teachers and staff in order NOT to let history repeat itself.
Could it be that the teachers and staff are simply afraid of being terminated due to incompetence? I have never been impressed with the quality of the workers there and Fernandes is notably impatient with people who are or show themselves to be less than competent.
Agreed. 95% of my MSSD teachers were truly incompetent, deaf or hearing. I say, in absolute truthfulness, that I entered college with a ninth-grade education because I learned nothing at MSSD. And unfortunately, I was too young to know better (in how I should’ve pushed for better standards). This is why I will never ever let any deaf child of mine attend a deaf institute.
The dorm staff weren’t any better. Some of them cared, but seriously lacked the professional training to deal with us imbeciles. :)
And I daresay.. the administration wasn’t at fault here! I actually found myself getting along better with the administrators during my years at MSSD.
Isn’t that telling enough about other deaf residential schools where they had “18 years” to improve their stock before they get accepted into a low standard expectation at Gallaudet University?
Now — whoa…
I think someone here opened a Pandora’s box about deaf education. I am an educator, with a BA in history and secondary education, and a MA in Deaf Education, specializing in multiple disabilities and secondary education, and when I see someone dis deaf education without explaining or knowing the facts, that gets me peeved.
First of all, in response to Hilary, yes, the letter from the Clerc Center teachers and staff is authentic and valid. We all desperately want to show how valid that letter is, but we are afraid of reprisals. Those who are willing to stand up and speak up (like myself) have less to lose than those who have 20+ years of teaching and will lose EVERYTHING they have worked for up to now. Earlier in this post, “LARRY” and “Friend of Gallaudet” both cited the same reasons why we cannot reveal ourselves, because the atmosphere here is tense, and those teachers/staff who worked under JK’s tenure in the 1990s are feeling the same pressures, both emotionally and professionally, to keep quiet (and neutral) about everything. They are afraid.
I can understand Hilary (and everyone else)’s reasoning for wanting to get verification. I can only hope this post will give some people a perspective that this Clerc Center letter is indeed, valid.
Now, to JT’s comments — hey! You know I graduated from MSSD myself, and now I work there. I know no teacher is perfect, as much as I want to be *winks*, but we need to see an improvement in deaf education in America today, and the bottom line is — it has to come from the PARENTS. So many of us educators are frustrated and dismayed when we get pupils that have poor education backgrounds, and that primarily comes from a lack of language development. (Think the Genie case of 1970, if you don’t know about it, check it out on http://www.pbs.com). Deaf students who are delayed in any way are more likely to suffer in the academic field. So, taking your child the opportunity to be in a deaf residential school or deaf program will deprive your child an ability to be educated by teachers who can sign instead of an interpreter, and deprive of social opportunities afforded by peers.
JT — have you visited MSSD since you’ve been here? I challenge you to, since you live nearby, and you are an alum. You can be my guest and see how much my students value their education and take it seriously.
Now, I’m getting off my soapbox, but I welcome constructive comments.
I accept your invitation :) It’s only been 11 years since I left- what if you fall in that 5% of competent teachers?
Any deaf child living in the DC area need not be deprived of social opportunities, no matter which school he/she attends. And I don’t know about you, but personally I find it very difficult to understand mathematics through ASL. Ditto for social studies and other subjects. I NEED to see it in written English to fully understand- and this also stands true for my current on-the-job training. Not all Deaf people need teachers who sign; some of them, like me, may simply need different accommodations. If my child was deaf, and there was huge evidence indicating that the only way she could learn is through sign language, then I’d definitely reconsider my decision. But if she shows good or above average strides in development through cueing or oralism, then I’d go there first. Just a matter of personal choice- for the educational setting. But, of course, ASL would be *the* language at home. I absolutely agree with you on how PARENTS make the difference. I think about the deaf people living in my hometown, how seriously undereducated they are, and how their parents just don’t seem to.. have faith in their own children. So they give up before even starting.
As long we on the tack about education, has anyone ever seen California’s STAR report for deaf residential schools? For example, Riverside or even Fremont?
http://star.cde.ca.gov/star200.....TestType=C
It’s not just English. It’s math, social science, history, science, etc… The majority of them ranked in the “Below BAsic” and “Far Below Basic”.
Should Gallaudet take the lead on raising education standards as well as entrance requirements?
BTW, the STAR link, it’s scores are defaulted on Livermore High. You’ll have to select the county, school name, etc. to find it.
CK, would you think that the best indicator of a school’s success is whether their teachers send their kids to that school, where they teach? Just wondering.
Just wondering:
No — that’s not the best indicator. But what would be? In my own opinion, a few factors: graduation rates, rates of seniors going on to college, and rates of seniors getting jobs after college. I know MSSD has an excellent transition program. I cannot remember off the top of my head, but above 90% are able to continue to college or get a job after high school.
We all know that deaf students vary in abilities. I’ve had my share of students who read at a low level, and these students, lacked language growing up, mostly international students, or had hearing parents who did not communicate with them. I know of one student at Kendall who is 8 years old and his parents don’t communicate with him, and he can’t read!
So upward to 10% of the students are considered as dropouts? Or is the number only indicative of those who have graduated from MSSD?
If it’s the 2nd point, Ouch. That’s large.
It’s a system-wide failure on our own deaf children’s future if parents are not taught loud and clear that language is important from the start, it being ASL, English, or whatever. The rest will follow.
As to the other poster saying that his/her deaf child will be taught in oral, not ASL, I beg you — allow your child to learn BOTH. Bilingualism may be a dirty word among radicals at Gallaudet, but it is a perfectly valid method for a child to be involved with both worlds.
I am one of them. I have had a wonderful time chatting with my deaf peers at a Halloween party tonight. I also have had fun hanging with my hearing co-workers this past week. But we all know that since we’re deaf, it’s extremely hard to keep up with the hearing folks. That’s why I deeply treasure my times with my deaf peers — it’s a wonderful way of just not concentrating on what the hearing folks are saying, and just enjoying the time together.
Please, Total Communication, Tender Loving Care. :-)
I am a 1992 graduate of MSSD.
Their education level back then was definitely the best in the country for deaf education and also on par with hearing high schools (I know because I went to both…long story).
Of course, there were some ‘general requirement’ classes that lacked some substance due to the fact that they had to combine students of all levels into one class. As for their AP classes, I was sufficently challenged to do my homework. I remember b!tching and moaning about it.
CK — wish I could comment directly from your comment but I’m on my pager….I never said the letter wasn’t valid. I said because it’s anonymous, as a former reporter (journalist) and researcher, I can’t put as much credibility on it. I know there’s a huge fear, and that’s a shame, but we researchers like documented evidence that someone stands by. I know that you understand that. If even half the claims in that letter are true, then there are major issues that need to be dealt with.
Also, CK is right about the parent issue in deaf ed. That’s an entirely separate blog, though. I could go on a soapbox for hours talking about how too many parents are willing to just let the schools handle their child’s education, rather than getting involved and fighting for their kids’ right to the best, and most appropriate, education possible. My parents fought for me. You’re fighting for your daughter. Other friends are dealing with the system, too. A helluva lot needs to change within deaf ed — but if parents want their kids to go to a good university, then they need to focus on that.
I’m curious what the education levels (literacy, math, etc) of incoming Gallaudet students are as compared to those attending other universities, as well as *why* those students chose not to attend Gallaudet. I’m also curious, CK, if you had not attended MSSD, would you have attended Gally or gone to a SUNY school or other college in NY? Or elsewhere? :)
Hilary,
I am a journalist as well. I know all about credibility. I once again asked my colleagues today if they were willing to release any kind of demographics — and their answer was “NO, and DO NOT ask us again.” They are scared. I cannot imagine what they went through in the 1990s to make them feel this way.
Your educational levels question is intriguing. Unfortunately, I don’t think anyone or any agency/organization has this kind of information. Gallaudet’s numbers are quite low this year, I heard — because of the protest. Gallaudet had to scrape the bottom of the barrel, so to speak. I hope you all get the drift here.
Would I have gone to another college? I applied to GWU, Northeastern, Boston University, and Hartwick College (Oneonta, NY) and got accepted to all. I *almost* went to Northeastern, but I decided to try Gallaudet for a few years, and I became hooked. I *loved* my program (history and education) and my teachers were the best. That’s what made me stay there. That, plus being the student newspaper editor in chief, the SBG president, and meeting my future wife. Gallaudet’s vines kept me latched and I ain’t complaining!
Isn’t it SOP to have numbers relating to SAT scores, and what “entry-level” courses students took? Also, since all deaf students need IEPs regardless of where they attended school, then wouldn’t state testing information be available that way? Just trying to figure out how we can really determine what the prior educational background is of Gally students.
CK, I know you loved (and still love) Gally…remember the day we first met? ;-) If every other student were like you — of the same intelligence and caliber, then Gallaudet would be an amazing institution. But (correct me if I’m wrong, please), it *seems* like you and your wife are in the minority.
I wish I had a simple solution for how we can all make Gally a top-notch university and use that to lead deaf education into a time of progress, rather than stagnancy. It’s been more than 60 years since deaf kids were tested… why haven’t the literacy rates changed? Why haven’t the educational expectations changed?
Gaaaahhhhh. I’m just frustrated, like everyone else.
“Why haven’t the literacy rates changed?”
If you start school already language delayed, it’s much harder to catch up. As the years go by, if the gap is not narrowed, it will just get wider and wider- that’s called the Matthew effect. Good readers become better readers, poor readers become stuck. Too many people don’t understand that school is *not* the place where language acquistion should start- it should start at home, with the caretakers *conversational* and clear communicating with the child from birth to age 5-7. Therein lies the problem- if the parents cannot communicate along the deaf child’s preferred pathway (auditory, visual, or both, whatever works for the child), and there’s no early intervention, well…
If I had not attended MSSD, I don’t see myself going to Gally, and I would have always regretted it. MSSD opened me up to possiblities. It was at MSSD I first encountered the idea that I wasn’t ‘deficient” in any sense of the word. Now, that’s just my personal experience, but being a kid mainstreamed her whole life, alone, with only a terp for company…. and tons of hearing people around who either ignored her and gawked at her..
That’s just my personal experience.. Yes, some of the teachers sucked, but the others didn’t. I did see how they had problems with the mix of students.
I also do remember that there were some entrenched teachers who had been there for years, who really never bothered to learn ASL or improve their style of teaching. I remember one of them showing up drunk frequently in class.
Yes, the governance system needed to be improved. I completely agree. There are a lot of issues that need to be addressed. Hmm, who better than the President of Gallaudet? Oh wait, you mean the one who messed up Clerc Center? No thanks. :)
But they are all right- its the PARENTS. My parents were involved and they fought like crazy for me to get what I needed, and I benefitted from their attention and care.
I know this is OTP, but reminds me of when I heard about DPN. I was 12 years old. Someone told me about Gallaudet- the first I had heard of it. My first thought? “What do THEY have to do with me?”.
I was so completely disconnected from deaf people. I thought that all deaf people who went to deaf school were stupid and I didn’t want to sign dumb like they did, because it was really bad English. (My local deaf school was REALLY BAD).
I thought I was better than THEM because I had better English and I was completely determined to grow up in the hearing world and have hearing friends only. I had a goal- I wanted to become an interpreter. (For real. What other role model did I have? I really believed for a while there if I worked hard enough on my speech and lipreading… yes, I know you’re laughing at me right now. ;) )
I shrugged it off and didn’t give it a second thought.
Two years later, oh boy, I was like, “maybe I need to second-guess my thinking there..” I do have Dr. Frank Turk to thank for that. He pretty much forced me to see that there were other choices..
I’ve come a long way, eh? :)
Smiling
Thank you for explaining yourself to everyone here. I think I now better understand where you are coming from. Our reactions to the protest, for better or worse, are molded by our respective experiences.
Very true…perspective has so much to do with past experience, education, and whom we talk with.
Um, I’m not really sure how to take that. Is this a “better” or “worse” thing?
Neither.
It just is.
So many thoughts and emotions go into this. Since it’s late I’ll just add my two cents to the pile…
1) Hilary- Great entry! Thank you.
2) I think WAD’s comment is dead on: (made at 2006-10-26 09:32:11) “Everyone is grieving including me.” At this point, I don’t even care any more about if Jane should or shouldn’t be president. I fear that this whole protest is doing more damage and separation to an already increasingly divided deaf community. At this point we need one big long mediating session, and like others have said, this is a complex issue. I’d like to “get to the root of it.” Easier said then done of course. But at this time, I’d like to “stop the finger pointing” and create a speace for unified disscussion.
I didn’t go to Gallaudet. Went to NTID then a hearing college. But I’m really glad I had my time at NTID… Like another blogger said, during the protests I wanted to go the opposite direction. But something inside makes me keep reading the blogs and talking with Gallaudet friends about the protests. Gallaudet is too important to let this whole protest keep eating us up. And this is what I’m afraid is happening.
I say, Bravo to everyone who is speaking out, and also agreeing or disagreeing in a more dignified and respectful manner. Now, can we take this out of the internet and talk in person? Just a thought.
Okay, there’s so much to respond to here… I’m a gallaudet alumna, and I currently attend a DC area university in pursuit of my master’s degree. I am a full supporter of the protest. I believe that the issues regarding Fernandes’ leadership, how she got to where she was, her actions since the protest started, the state in which Gallaudet is in now, shows that she really needs to resign so that we can get someone who truly understands and will work on resolving the issues that have plagued gallaudet for years and years. That’s not to say the new person would change everything overnight, but I believe that it would be the right step in healing the community. I have a friend who supports Fernandes and we have barely talked since this protest started. We try to discuss other things but invariably it comes back to the protest so we’ve agreed to keep our chats to a minimum until this is resolved. I can only imagine what it’s like at gallaudet on a daily basis where the majority of teachers who voted no confidence have to deal with the minority, I’m sure it makes for a very emotionally charged environment. That’s precisely why this has to stop. I am praying that the BOT meeting this weekend will bring a satisfactory outcome. As for the numbers that Hilary posted, my response is, did you see the march to the capitol? I was in that march, and there were 4,000 people. You can say what you want about the protest’s daily numbers, but THAT day when “Homecoming” WAS supposed to take place, we showed that this protest is stronger than just those at Gallaudet. It’s those in all the tent cities in the nation and the world, which, last I heard, was over 60 different tent cities. Fernandes and Jordan have led a culture of oppression and lies for many many years and they are using those tactics in this protest, by using their PR office to spread lies, and calling the protesters “terrorists”. Now, when I think of Terrorists, I think of those 19 hijackers that did the 9/11 attacks, and I really do not appreciate the administration making that unfounded and inappropriate characterization, and I know many other people feel the same way. As for Chris’ rebuttal that many people at the Clerc Center are scared, I KNOW that’s true, you can see it at Gallaudet when you talk to the faculty, some of them are very nervous, but very bravely coming forward and participating. I can only imagine the ones that CAN’T participate due to their fears. As for deaf education, whoa, yes, the pandora box was opened there. Deaf education is not an issue that can ever be resolved, because different things work for everyone. I grew up with Cued Speech and learned ASL while a teenager, and I decided to go to Gallaudet and fell in love with it, in spite of all its flaws. Would I do it again? You bet. As for the deaf schools, yes, the education is lacking at a majority of them, but this can’t be all blamed on the schools themselves, like some people have said. The parents have to be involved. I’m very lucky my parents were, and I’m very lucky that they fought for my needs while I grew up in mainstreamed schools. Gallaudet does need to raise their standards. That should be one of the many goals for the NEW president to address- not Jane Kelleher Fernandes. (Disclaimer: Yes, I know Hilary and Chris, and I have the utmost respect for both as friends and people.)
Hilary–
Excuse me, aren’t you the same person that signed the open letter to the Board of Trustees, Dr. Jordan, and Dr. Fernandes that was posted GUFSSA’s website stating that Jane Fernandes should resign. http://news.gufssa.com/category/general/page/8/
If so, then why in your blog are you supporting the fact that she’s the right person for the job? You stated “Because I believe that Jane Kelleher Fernandes is, on paper, qualified for the job.” — yet in the open letter on GUFSSA website you signed the letter effectually agreeing with many other academicians that Dr. Fernandes should resign her position.
Why the two conflicting views here?
Although I am a friend of yours, your double stance here concerns me. Are you for her or against her? Why say in one place that she’s qualified–yet in another letter, you say she should resign.
You cannot have it both ways. Care to explain?
For the record, I don’t care whichever way this protests goes because I am not a Gallaudet Alumnus nor will the protest outcome really affect me personally.
Oh and one more thing: The GUFSSA letter came LONG before your blog did! I know because I read that letter two to three weeks ago before your deafdc blog came out a few days ago!
Care to explain?
I would suggest that you read the responses. She replied to another person’s inquiry about this 2 days before your post here.
Btw, thanks, whoever you are. :)
oh, I MUST read the responses RIGHT after the author’s blog? Who says that I must read through the copious amounts of responses BEFORE I write my own thoughts and opinions, etc.? Is it your rule of law or what?
Oy. That letter was sent to the FSSA either last Thursday or Friday. This blog — the first draft — was written last weekend and revised before that DeafAcademics letter was created. I attached my name to it because, as I clearly stated above somewhere in the comments, that BECAUSE of the nature of the protests, I didn’t think JKF would be able to be an effective president. And now the BOT has agreed with that.
Btw….if you’re a friend of mine, why are you hiding? I have no idea who you are.
Because revealing oneself can RUIN friendships if one is against the other. Haven’t you ever thought of that? I have seen friendships fallen apart over the protest! Food for thought, Hilary. :)
By the way, I have heard some Gallaudet academians who are against Fernandes say they would NEVER ever be friends or want to work closely with those that supported her at all. That’s why those with tenure are able to sign open letters; but those who don’t have tenure do sign letters anonymously to protect themselves rightfully.
Lastly, this forum/board/blog allows people to post anonymously for a good reason. I would surmise that you are able to figure out why its a good reason to do so at times. I chose to never post my name publicly so that way I can be very honest and blunt without people slamming me in public later for my comments and it allows me to keep my friendships without reprisals.
One last comment for the night — why the switch, Hilary? Why did you, in the beginning, say that she should “resign”–then in the second letter, you said she was qualified to be a leader. Your comment from your blog above: “Because I believe that Jane Kelleher Fernandes is, on paper, qualified for the job.”
Additionally, let me point out what you said in the blog about whether the BOT would remove Jane: “Even if Fernandes resigns or is removed by the BOT (neither of which is likely to happen),…” Well, the BOT did remove Jane in contrary to your belief–ostensibly because you BELIEVED she was the right candidate for the job and that she would likely not be removed by the BOT.
I still DON’T understand why you switched your mind about JKF….you still have NOT explained why adequately for the switch. I’m surmising here that some of your colleagues who signed the first letter probably felt dismayed by your switch. Did you talk it out with them before going against the grain of the letter that was posted on GUFSSA?
Just wondering here–not personally attacking you here but just wondering at the switch.
Me think outsiders like Hilary without a concrete/precise view of the uprising, especially those with hearing loss, are, IMHO, afraid of how they will be viewed/perceived at work or with their hearing colleagues. I had such an argy-bargy with a friend working in the “hearing world” in a high tech company some few days ago. Even though he is an Alumni (he has been outside for over 15 years), educating him about the reasons for the uprising was like hiting a brick wall. I suspect because he is successful and comfortable in his environment, this uprising might in some way disturb that comfort he has been used to since leaving Gallaudet!