Heroism on Both Sides

While I appreciate that we are taking a moment to recognize different
people who have contributed to the recent changes on campus, I do not
feel comfortable with naming names. The fact is, there are just so many
heroes– and on both sides. People who have stood by Jane Fernandes to
offer her support are just as heroic, even if we do not always agree
with their perspective.

This has truly been an organic process, with every single contribution
making a difference. If you take away one strand, the whole picture
changes. Contributions range from writing letters to bringing clothes to
the protestors or taking care of their pets to actually standing up
addressing the crowds to sitting down for open dialogues to challenging
perspectives so that we may better understand the issues to lending a
shoulder to cry on to guarding gates all night to moderating a
discussion forum to interpreting during free time or even taking time
off work to interpret to making vlogs and the list goes on.

While I am certainly thrilled that the opportunity for a transparent,
inclusive, diverse, and equal search process has presented itself– I am
sorry for all of those who have been hurt along the way. This has been
an ugly battle and I don’t think we’ve even begun to see the impact yet
on individuals. While I believe on a deep level that Gallaudet will heal
and become a stronger institute for the cleansing that we are so
painfully going through– I think we must also be accountable for the
many people who are deeply hurt and even doubtful of the possibilities
that lie ahead.

Just as we can passionately fight for what we believe to be best, we can
compassionately hold onto each other – whichever side we stood on- and
accept that whatever our intentions, the results include broken hearts
and scars.

And that is the most heroic thing we can do.

Alison Aubrecht

www.gallynet.org

reprinted with permission by the listserv moderator

email contact: mishkazena@aol.com

PR Spokesperson Plays Deaf Card: FeedBack Needed!

Calm at Gallaudet

After months of protest over the selection of Jane K. Fernandes as president, students and faculty at Gallaudet University are getting back to the business of higher education — with things somewhat resolved since the board on Sunday terminated her contract Sunday night. A mess of tents, banners and tables still decorated the lawn at the campus’s entrance Monday, but at 5:00 p.m. protesters opened the main gate to outside traffic. They expect to have any mess cleaned up by this morning.

Throughout the protest students had always stated two demands: that Fernandes resign and that there be no reprisals against those who protested. The board agreed to both demands but has said that students who vandalized buildings or destroyed property will face disciplinary action.

Diane Morton, professor of counseling, said that today is the last day to drop classes and that student protesters are now working with faculty to figure out how to make up material they missed. “We will know today how many students will drop classes or have to leave the university,” she said.

Still hanging over the university is how to proceed and choose a new president. A Gallaudet spokeswoman, Mercy Coogan, said that she is not sure what will happen in the coming months and that the administration is waiting for the board to make a decision. “Everything is up in the air,” she said.

Meanwhile, a consultant who advises universities during executive searches said that any search will now be much harder since the students and faculty have already rejected one choice by the board.

Gallaudet’s board hired Academic Search Consultation Service to manage the search that led to the decision to offer the job to Fernandes. The lead consultant was Patricia T. van der Vorm, who did not respond to calls or an e-mail seeking comment.

“[Van der Vorm] is a spectacularly good search consultant,” said a consultant with another firm who did not want to be identified. The consultant added that any future search would be extremely difficult because the protesters, by rejecting a well qualified candidate like Fernandes, had made the decision more of a popularity contest. The consultant also speculated that the board would seem to have a poor relationship with the faculty, since the trustees did not seem to understand just how much professors dislike Fernandes. “It will be interesting to see how they deal with this,” added the consultant.

But John Thelin, a professor of educational policy studies at the University of Kentucky, said that “what’s not clear is who the board is listening to.”

“I’m sure students will scrutinize more closely who is on the search committee,” Coogan said. Coogan said that a “subtext” to the opposition against Fernandes was “deaf politics.” Fernandes learned sign language late in life. Protesters have complained that the administration has attempted to play up this issue rather than focus on critics’ real concerns, which were Fernandes’s alleged poor leadership and lack of charisma.

“We weren’t spinning it,” Coogan said. “We were pushing it.” Coogan added that the administration was worried about raising the issue of deaf politics but that reporters kept bringing up the issue in their news reports.

— Paul D. Thacker How can Gallaudet heal if the public relations department continues to play the deaf card? In fact, why isn’t this practice stopped promptly to prevent further damage to the image of Gallaudet University? Here is the comment section, so here is your opportunity to educate the readers. elizabeth

Comments

She’s NOT well qualified !!!

I’m not sure who is saying Fernandes is “well qualified” — the unnamed consultant or your writer — but she most certainly is NOT well qualified. For goodness sakes, that’s what the whole protest was about — her dismal track record at Gallaudet over the past 11 years and her lack of qualifications for the job. She was hand-picked by the outgoing president and rubber-stamped by an out-of-touch board that was also hand-picked by the outgoing president, a man who was able to amass WAY too much power over the years, even to the point of controlling the Board of Trustees. Are you people EVER going to get it?

Tom Willard, at 1:10 pm EST on October 31, 2006

Tired of this.

I’m an intelligent Deaf, gay male that teaches American Sign Language and English at a community college in Salt Lake City. I have two BAs (including a minor in Journalism), a MA, and am working on my PhD.

I get tired of reading news report after news report that shows only the administrators’ views of the protest at Gallaudet. Why don’t the reporters talk with the protesters or the FSSA (Faculty Staff Student Alumni Coalition) of Gallaudet University and find out the facts?

The protest had nothing to do with “Deaf politics,” but with an improper, suspicious, and fixed presidential search process. It is clear that the search process was not conducted properly.

In addition to this, the former president-designate, Jane Fernandes, had demonstrated time and time again that she was an ineffective leader. This has been documented so many times, it spins my head. This information was kept from the Board of Trustees when they were deliberating on their choice for the next leader of Gallaudet University.

Mercy Coogan, Irving K. Jordan, and Jane Fernandes used a common tactic to gain sympathy and support—playing the “race card,” only in this case, they played the “deaf card.” This was unfair and put Deaf people across the world in a bad light.

Since they pushed the issue, though, deaf politics came into the picture. Nearly 15 thousand people across the world participated directly and/or indirectly in this protest. How can that many people be wrong?

The protest was not about preserving Deaf culture or American Sign Language, it was about unifying the Deaf community and eradicating Audism (akin to racism).

Please, reporters, educate yourselves on ALL sides of the story and write neutral, informative articles. Isn’t that what journalists are supposed to do?

Alan, at 1:15 pm EST on October 31, 2006

Jane Fernandes

I am the Home Region Representative on the Gallaudet University Alumni Association Board of Directors and was very much involved with the protest.

Before I retired two years ago, I was the Director of Media Relations in the Public Relations Office at Gallaudet University.

It was very obvious right from the beginning that the PR Office and Administration was going to play and harp on the “not deaf enough” card. Unfortunately,the media kept picking up on this topic throughout the protest.

The fact is, Dr. Fernandes just doesn’t have the leadership or management savvy to run the university. I would like to point out a few things about Dr. Fernandes lack of leadership and management.

When the Head Librarian left several years ago, Dr. Fernandes took it upon herself to be the Acting Head Librarian.

When the dean of CLAST (College of Liberal Arts, Science and Technology) resigned, Dr. Fernandes took it upon herself to be Acting Dean.

When the 2001 Tower Clock (student’s yearbook) had some “off color photos and comments,” Dr. Fernandes ordered the Department of Personal Safety to padlock the Tower Clock offices to prevent the yearbook from being distributed. This problem actually falls under the domain of the Dean of Student Affairs but once again it was Dr. Fernandes who stepped in and took over.

This led many people on campus to feel that Dr. Fernandes didn’t have any confidence in her subordinates. Of course, Dr. Jordan gave her blanket approval for the above (as well as a few other lesser incidents) which contributed to the speculation that Dr. Jordan was “grooming” Dr. Fernandes to take over his position when he retired.

No my fellow colleagues in the media, “not deaf enough,” or her lack of ASL were not the issues. When 82 percent of the faculty gave her a vote of no confidence, it’s quite obvious that leadership, management, and to some extent, charisma, were the issues.

Mike

Mike Kaika, GUAA Board Member at Gallaudet University, at 2:46 pm EST on October 31, 2006

Jobs, News and Views for All of Higher Education – Inside Higher Ed :: Calm at Gallaudet

email contact: mishkazena@aol.com

An Argument for Term Limits

What I think we need to push for is term limits in all administrative Offices, from the BOT to the Deans.  This is a good idea because it opens up possibilities.  Imagine the following scenario… we installed term limits (terms = five years with the option for re-election, or ten years).  Five years later our PSC narrowed the search to three candidates.  One was hearing but believed deeply in Deaf Culture, had excellent ASL skills, strongly advocated fro Bi-Bi programs, etc, and the other two candidates were deaf, but one was a known tyrant when it came to administrating, and one was strongly against the use of ASL in the classroom.

If people picked the hearing person for president, what message would that send?  I’m not trying to make any kind of argument toward the “not deaf enough” stance.  Rather I’m trying to say that “popularity,” which is what the Post editorial today sneeringly claimed is what won out in this protest, is not all that it’s cracked up to be.  I can easily visualize a scenario in which people will be forced to choose between unalterable features that come with the person (deaf or hearing) and the person’s beliefs… plus his/her track record of pursuing those beliefs.

There is growth in choice, in other words, and I think that by installing term limits we would offset the need for revolt, because if we truly could not live with someone or something that person believed, we’d only have to put up with that person for five years… ten years tops.  I think it would be the perfect balance between getting what we want and compromising with what we don’t want.

It’s these “reigns” that fuel so much rage here, the sense of imperialism emnating from those in power, the sense that you can’t communicate with them not because they don’t or won’t listen, but because they can’t.  In fact anti-colonial writer Frantz Fanon argued exactly that… in the Master-Slave Dialectic, only the Slave can evolve… not the Master.  The Master’s very sense of self is entirely dependent upon the Slave remaining the Slave.  The Slave, on the other hand, has no such dependency… and thus is the only party in that relationship who is truly free to grow.

Get rid of these grossly one-sided, sick, destructive power dynamics, and I’m willing to put money on it–never again will the students of Gallaudet block the gates in order to overthrow their own administrators.

Chris Heuer

Reprinted with permission by the author

email addy: mishkazena@aol.com

Mistake From Post-DPN BoT

Arthur,

You made a perfect analogy in comparing bad post-war policy and 1988 DPN. Two weeks ago, I mentioned in my posting that one of the biggest mistakes from the 1988 DPN was 51 percent of the BOT members must be deaf because it did not mean they must beGally alumni. Now we have learned this mistake from this year’s U4G and it is time for 2/3 of the Gally BOT members are to be Gally Alumni with strong connections with Deaf communities and University. In addition, the permanent and interim chairperson must be Gally Alumni. Also, I prefer to see our future Gallaudet University Presidents to be Alumni because of strong connections with the University. Many members of the current Gallaudet BOT clearly have shown no real strong connections with the University.

The practices of MBI and heavy hands management against students, staff and faculty members must be stopped and removed as soon as possible. These practices clearly brought negative and depressive atmosphere in on the Kendall Green campus. That is not healthy for everybody on the campus!

We must put fair and positive guidelines and policies in order to avoid further protests. 

We must put a permanent open and fair President Search Guideline in place as soon as the stakeholders agree it. No one from the Office of President must be involved in the Preisdent Search Process and Committee.

The BOT must appoint their own liasion to faciliate between them and faculty, staff and students without any influence and interference from the Office of President.

The Office of Public Relations must be closed at once and their budget can be moved into academic departments and other services with good purposes. They did alot of disservice and damages to Gallaudet University. There was no Office of Public Relations before 1988 DPN.

Much more to come…

Darryl Hackett

A L <aslville@yahoo.com> wrote:

World War 2 escalated because of bad post-war policy
resulting from the first world war: the failure of the
treaty of versailles both in realistic policy and
enforcement/implementation. German disarmament was not
strongly reinforced, economic sanctions were not
upheld, and MOST importantly, England, France, and the
US could never agree or unify completely on post-war
policy.

DPN 2006 happened in part, because of DPN 1988. I
think in light of recent events, that the immediate
aftermath of 1988 has to be a subject of great
interest and study. What did we do wrong?

I recommend that we try to unify on proposing a
post-protest agenda, and try to implement this with
all the collective power and influence that this
listserv has.

Arthur

— Mary wrote:

> This is true. I attended many sign classes where
> employees went only because they were compelled.
> They went through the motions–it meant nothing to
> them. They will use what little they learn
> sporadically or not at all. They will have only rare
> occasion to use sign and so, lacking reinforcement,
> their skills, paid for by the campus, will lapse
> into obscurity.
>
> There has to be a better way to do this, and I
> wonder why we don’t apply funds used to provide sign
> instruction to indifferent employees to a more
> worthy cause. How about English support for deaf
> faculty? How about hiring more deaf groundskeepers,
> DPS and PPD staff?
>
>
>
> Mike Yared wrote:
> 1. Let IKJ decide what to do – research at
> Gallaudet,
> teaching at Gallaudet or retire.
>
> 2. The new interim president need to be careful.
> He/she might be the future President of Gallaudet
> University. But no one or few or many will not
> accept
> whoever is pick to be the President of Gallaudet
> University.
>
> 3. repreisals involve a lot of legal issues which
> cost
> money.
>
> 4. Even since I’ve been at Gallaudet since 1987, no
> one can expect DPS and PPD employees to fully sign.
> Beside the majority of DPS/PDD employees are blacks.
> Distrust will happen.
>
> 5. healing start by talking (signing) about
> controverial issues, hot issues, and still no one
> will
> be satisfied.
>
> Mike Yared
>
> wrote:
> > Issues that still need to be addressed are:
> >
> > 1. What to do with IKJ?
> >
> > 2. Who will be the interim president until a
> > permanent one is found?
> >
> > 3. Will the protesters still suffer reprisals in
> > spite of the assurance
> > that some would simply do community services? What
> > about their arrest
> > records? What about reprisals against staff and
> > faculty members?
> >
> > 4. What to do with the DPS management to regain
> the
> > shattered trust of
> > the student body?
> >
> > 5. How can the Gallaudet community begin the
> healing
> > process?
> >
> > The protest seems to be over now, but the debate
> on
> > the future of
> > Gallaudet continues.
> >

 GALLYNET-L@gallynet.org

reprinted with permission by the listserv. moderator

email addy: mishkazena@aol.com

For The Next President, We Need

Hi, In response to many discussions about who we want for the next president, I am sure we all want specific people, but we all agree on the same qualifications that we want. We want a person who can lead Gallaudet and the world. When DPN happened, more and more people learned about deaf people. More and more people’s attitude are better than it was before. With technology today, we need a president who can lead a university. Since Gallaudet is an unique university, we need a president who can lead Gallaudet and build bridges to deaf schools, deaf programs, and anything related to deafness. The president must understand how IMPORTANT Gallaudet is to deaf people all over the world. It doesn’t matter if it is which sex, which height, which size, which race, which religion.  

I am going to expand a bit more here. Computers, pagers, video phones and many other technologies make our world a better place to live. Cochlear Implants comes in the picture now. Some people are worried about how we will include them at Gallaudet. We have always included people who are Deaf, deaf, Oral, hard of hearing and many more. I do not think we will have any problem with people who have CIs. The president will HAVE to make adjustments for ALL kinds of people. So, it doesn’t matter if he or she is deaf/Deaf or even HEARING. The important thing is his/her attitude.

Delanne

reprinted with permission by the author

email addy: mishkazena@aol.com

NYTimes: Protesters Press Broader Demands

October 31, 2006
At University for Deaf, Protesters Press Broader Demands
By DIANA JEAN SCHEMO

[Photo caption:] Noah Beckman, president of student government at
Gallaudet University in Washington, packed up belongings after campus
protests ended.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 – The day after protesters at Gallaudet
University, the world’s premier university for the deaf, prevailed in
their battle to oust the incoming president, they pressed forward with
their broader demands, saying that students must have a greater say in
the search for a new president, and that the next choice should be a
more forceful advocate for deaf culture and a strong deaf identity.

“We are looking for a person who’s sensitive enough, who has
respect for all cultures and for American Sign Language,” Noah
Beckman, president of the student government, signed through an
interpreter. He said the new search process would have to demonstrate
“inclusion, transparency and equality.”

On a sunny, spring-like afternoon, Mr. Beckman and other students
packed up tents and sleeping bags that had filled the front lawns in
recent weeks. Gone were the signs deriding Dr. Jane K. Fernandes, the
former provost who had been named to take over as president on Jan. 1,
and I. King Jordan, the outgoing president who had supported her.

Dr. Fernandes’s detractors said she lacked leadership ability and did
not embrace the primacy of American Sign Language at Gallaudet and in
deaf culture. And even though the panel that selected her included
students and members of the faculty, many complained that their
opinions had been overlooked, and that the process was biased in her
favor.

The university has never agreed that the process was not open.

In an e-mail message, the chairman of the Gallaudet board, Brenda Joe
Brueggemann, said the board had taken many factors into account in
deciding to revoke Dr. Fernandes’ contract.

“We had to think about safety on the Gallaudet campus,” she wrote.

“We had to think of Gallaudet’s unique role as an institution of
higher education but also as a ‘center’ for the deaf community,
nationally and even worldwide,” the message continued. “We had to
think about the way that the situation clearly was not getting any
better. We had to think about the financial and moral impact of the
protests, especially as they continued, on the university and its
constituents.”

Ms. Brueggemann said the board had not yet set any parameters for the
new search.

The board’s decision to drop its original candidate would complicate
its next search, said Michael A. Baer, a partner at Isaacson, Miller,
an executive search firm for colleges, universities and other public
interest nonprofits. “There are a limited number of people available
for them to consider, and it’s going to send a cautionary note to
individuals who could be candidates,” Mr. Baer said.

Any future candidates would have to be attuned to the issues emerging
in deaf culture, and the sensitivities involved, Mr. Baer continued. In
addition, the prolonged protest brought to the fore the latent
discontent over a number of issues on campus, from the failure of many
professors to use American Sign Language – the most accessible means
of communication for many deaf people – to dissatisfaction that
Gallaudet has not played more of an advocacy role for deaf rights in
every area of life.

“The search committee and board’s awareness that they need to
communicate with the entire campus community, in the long run, may
strengthen the campus community,” Mr. Baer said.

Veterans of presidential searches at colleges and universities around
the country, said that in view of Dr. Fernandes’ ouster, the new
search would have to give even greater weight to the views of faculty
and students. In recent weeks, 82 percent of the faculty voted for Dr.
Fernandes to resign or be removed.

Claire Van Ummersen, vice president in charge of the Center for
Effective Leadership, at the American Council on Education, which
represents more than 1,800 colleges, universities and organizations
involved in higher education, predicted that Gallaudet would not have
trouble finding new candidates for the job.

The university, she said, is in a class by itself, as the world’s
only liberal arts university for the deaf, and is highly prestigious.

In interviews on campus today, protesters said their victory had
reinvigorated the struggle for deaf rights, pointing out that this was
the second time deaf students had demanded, and won, a say in
determining who would lead their university. Eighteen years ago,
students forced the board to abandon its first choice of president, and
to name Dr. Jordan as Gallaudet’s first deaf president in more than
100 years.

David Reynolds, an alumnus whose family is deaf three generations back,
had driven in from Indianapolis with his 21-year-old twin sons,
Jonathan and Justin, to join the protest. A teacher at the Indiana
School for the Deaf, Mr. Reynolds said the new search must allow all
groups to weigh in.

“We need the right visionary person,” Mr. Reynolds signed. “The
whole thing here is don’t rush the process. That was the mistake the
last time.”

Justin Reynolds, a Gallaudet student who was taking a semester off,
said this weekend’s victory for the protesters signaled the ascent of
deaf power. “From here on out, the world wants to know what we’ll
do next,” Mr. Reynolds said. “With this unity, what are we capable
of?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/education/31gallaudet.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin

 e-mail addy: Mishkazena@aol.com

Higher Education: The Real Issues at Gallaudet

The Real Issues at Gallaudet

By Lennard J. Davis

As the smoke settles over the Gallaudet University campus, there’s still a lot of steam rising. Now that the Board of Trustees has decided to conduct a new search for a president of that institution, there are still heated emotions and fuming misunderstandings that surround this event that captured the attention of the media and the nation. Given the sturm und drang of the past weeks, it’s possible to make a few observations.

      

First, and most amazingly to me, the internal events at a small educational institution for the deaf have become a major media event. When I was a small boy with two deaf parents growing up in the Bronx in the 1950’s, I never imagined that the issue of deafness and the problems at a deaf university would ever end up on the front page of The New York Times. But the fact is that deafness and disability in general have gone from a marginal and marginalized experience to one that is central to the fabric of this country. Whether we are arguing about Terri Schiavo’s right to live, the fate of prenatal genetic screening, or sign language at Gallaudet, we are still, in effect, saying that disability and deafness are front and center in our sense of what it means to be human. Whereas in the past to be disabled or deaf was to be abnormal or somewhat inhuman, now we are beginning to define our humanity in a dialogue with our disability.

So the events at Gallaudet were momentous not just because a little university had an internal disagreement but because the issues raised around identity resonated with the general public. One issue that surfaced early was that Jane Fernandes, the candidate chosen by the trustees to be president, was not a “native signer.” What this means is that although Fernandes was born hearing impaired, she didn’t learn sign language until graduate school. Reportedly her signing isn’t fluid and natural — she in effect speaks sign language with a heavy accent and in a way that most deaf users of ASL would feel was inadequate.

For non-deaf people, this issue was perhaps the hardest thing to understand. Why would anyone reject a president for not being “deaf enough” when the person was in fact unable to hear since birth? The difficulty might be easier to understand if you imagined deciding to elect a president of the United States who spoke with a heavy accent and whose command of English was less than perfect. Add to this the fact that one of the new definitions of being deaf isn’t that your ears don’t work — it’s that you belong to a linguistic community the way that Hispanics or the French do. Your community has a literature, a culture, a history, and a language — but the leader of your community doesn’t share fully this cultural palette. Wouldn’t you want someone who was fully of your identity?

This argument, made early on in the anti-Fernandes campaign, was quickly shot down within Gallaudet for a number of reasons — although the press continued to mention it as a factor in the demonstrations. The logic behind the “not Deaf enough” argument was flawed because the “deaf community” or DEAFWORLD, as the ASL sign indicates, is broad enough to include a range of people from hard-of-hearing to profoundly deaf, from those whose parents insisted on oral education to those who attended exclusive schools for the deaf that only used ASL or other sign languages. There are deaf people who use real-time captioning and don’t know any sign language. And of course there are the children of deaf adults (CODA’s) who are native signers but may be hearing. Do we really want to say that some of these people aren’t “deaf enough?” Would we want to exclude various people of color because they weren’t “black enough?”

The argument at Gallaudet quickly moved on from this starting point to other issues around Fernandes. Here the argument stopped being a national issue and became a local one. Many on campus didn’t like the selection process, felt it wasn’t open enough to student and faculty input, and felt that some candidates of color were passed over. Other folks on campus felt Fernandes, who had been in the administration of Gallaudet for a long time, wasn’t a “people person” and had made some unpopular decisions. Now the issue becomes one of bottom-up student/faculty governance versus top-down administrative decision-making. The by-laws of Gallaudet specify that the job of picking the president is solely that of the Board of Trustees, but any institution can only work if the consent of the governed is factored in. What happened at Gallaudet was that there was a loss of confidence in the administration and in Fernandes. And, in turn, both the administration and Fernandes seemed singularly inept in being able to slow down the protests and bringing rational discourse and process to Gallaudet. Instead, they chose, until Sunday, to “stay the course.” Even The Washington Post wrote an editorial in which it advised the Trustees to hold fast.

But “stay the course,” as we’ve learned the hard way, isn’t a particularly good strategy, especially if the course is a disastrous one. There is something to be said for the groundswell democratic process that happens from time to time on campuses and elsewhere. When people take to the streets, when teach-ins and public discussions transform a body of people so that they are united against a particular policy or person, then a kind of muscular democracy is taking shape. Of course, there is always the danger that this kind of improvisational democracy can become mob rule. But the flip side of this is that decisions by the appointed few can become tyranny. Those of us who recall issues from the past like civil rights, the Vietnam War, apartheid, sweat shops, and the World Bank will also remember how effective and important campus protests were.

As it turns out, the trustees were able to read the visible signs of discontent on the part of the students and faculty at Gallaudet, voting to restart the selection process. The good that will come out of this is that this new selection process will have to be more open, sensitive to the issues, and mindful of issues around deaf culture, affirmative action, and democracy in general.

But Gallaudet itself will have to learn from these trying times. First and foremost, I’d advise, as someone interested in the subject but as a non-Gallaudet person, that the issue of “not deaf enough” isn’t going to go away, although it may have dropped out of the Fernandes discussion. New calls for Gallaudet to become an ASL-only campus (now courses are taught in a variety of ways, including orally) smack of a kind of new deaf elitism. While it is more than legitimate to expect students to learn ASL (as it would be for students attending the Lycée Français in the United States to learn French), there must be ways to insure that people whose ASL isn’t up to snuff don’t get snuffed out in the education process. After all, identity is a complex and fragile thing. When you try to make it ironclad and rigid, you end up enforcing the kind of identitarianism that created discriminatory behaviors in the first place. Imagine the case of a person whose parents chose cochlear implants for them at a very early age, but now wants to come to Gallaudet and explore what it means to be deaf. Would there be room for such a person in an ASL-only environment?

The second area to develop at Gallaudet is a more democratic process for decision-making. Most people don’t realize that Gallaudet is one ofa small number of universities (the military academies and Howard University being among the others) that receive substantial operating support from the federal government. The reason for this status is complicated, but at base initially was for Gallaudet a kind of paternalism on the part of the nation toward deaf people. While this notion that the nation had to protect and educate deaf people turned out to have great benefits, the legacy of paternalism remains. Perhaps the by-laws of the university reflect this stance, and it would seem a logical and progressive goal to increase the democratic processes at Gallaudet so that the legacy of paternalism can be erased forever.

Finally, it would be only right and just for all sides to bury the hatchet and look toward the future. There is no question that Jane Fernandes was on paper a very viable and possible choice to be president of Gallaudet University — only real events in the real world changed all that. The trustees did their best, the students and faculty did their best, and in the end a solution was reached. There are no bad guys in this story, only passionate positions and a struggle for justice.

Lennard J. Davis is professor of disability and human development at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the author of Enforcing Normalcy: Disability, Deafness and the Body (Verso) and the newly re-edited second edition of The Disability Studies Reader (Routledge).

Hat tip to Denny

email contact: mishkazena@aol.com

Fernandes Suicide Hoax

This article is too suspicious: no name of the reporter, unknown reporting entity, significant mistakes. So I called the anne anrudel police station and was informed that they didn’t have anyone listed on the computer.  

 A friend called the coroner and was told that there is nobody with that name on the list:

“all the suicides and suspicious deaths are investigated by the coroner for the whole state of maryland-

I called them and they say absolutely that her name is NOT in the computer

if she did commit suicide, then it would definitelly be in the computer

all the “Unknown” deaths yesterday in the whole state of maryland were males

that means this is a hoax”

There you are. A very cruel hoax.  Why was this made up and sent out in the first place?

elizabeth

>>>> The coEWSLINE ALERT:  October 30, 2006 (Annapolis, MD)   Anne 
>>>> Arundel County Police were called to the home of former  Gallaudet
>>>> University President-designate Jane Fernandes late  this afternoon. 
>>>> Police were met by owner James Fernandes, who  told them that his
>>>> wife had committed suicide in the bathroom of  their home this evening.
>>>>
>>>> The county coroner estimated that by the time police arrived on  the
>>>> scene, she had been dead for several hours.  She apparently 
>>>> overdosed on sleeping pills.  Autopsy results are pending.
>>>>
>>>> Yesterday the Gallaudet University board voted to rescind its  offer
>>>> of the school presidency after a month of student protests  opposing
>>>> her appointment.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> (c)2006. ARP News Network, Inc.   All Rights Reserved.

~forwarded to me by countless readers from all over the country.

e-mail contact: mishkazena@aol.com

Response to ‘It’s Half Over’

I agree! We haven’t completed the job yet! The removal of
Kelleher from the position is only a first step toward reforming
Gallaudet  University. The Agents of Colonization and their
Byzantine power structure of fear and intimidation must be
uprooted next. Otherwise they will grow back on our heads
blocking any further progress.

The Board respectfully asked the students to continue with
‘cleaning up’. So why not do that?! are there any residues from
the Kelleher years that should be taken care of? Naturally. If
we stop now, we may waste the tremendous efforts and ruin
the great successes of the protest movement. The Board itself
declared that the best interest of the school was the removal
of the designate. Therefore whoever worked for the designate,
often by using undignified methods, worked against Gallaudet
interest! It is the Board’s assessment, folks. Therefore,
consequences are expected to take place.

We have every reason to celebrate, but we need to keep in
mind: the empowerment of the Deaf community at Gallaudet is
not yet complete until reforms — based on self-determination
and cultural autonomy — are not worked out and are not
implemented.

These reforms will give back the dignity of Gallaudet academics,
raise the standards back to normal and make Gallaudet University
a coveted place of higher education again. These reforms will 
restore the value of a Gallaudet degree in the job market. These
reforms will build a model of shared governance that serves the
constituency in an exemplary way among small private universities
throughout the whole United States. These reforms will re-create
the community of scholars that any university should be. These
reforms will make sure that our cultural values are respected
and protected. These reforms will guarantee that the university
remains a safe place for the Deaf without any threat of a
technological takeover by any ‘new order’ or utopian ideology.

Only the success of these reforms can crown our efforts
with a sense of genuine achievement.

testing_the_truth

Reprinted with permission by the author

contact e-mail: mishkazena@aol.com

The Last Stand of Fernandes

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/8076/3961/1600/JaneLastStand.jpg