Anarchy and Fernandes

Pat,

The concept of shared governance is a truly interesting one at the
university level.  I am pleased to be in a system that actively pursues
that goal very seriously.  MBI obviously runs contrary to such a goal.
As I understand it the BOT had a study conducted which illuminated the
problem of MBI at Gallaudet.  That the problem has been identified does
not appear to be an issue at all.  Debate over how much of that MBI
problem is a result of the management style of JF is a horse already
beaten dead by both sides and many times over – from what I can see
anyway. I’ll try to navigate around it here.

Unfortunately, I do not see the protestors as having given the BOT any
wiggle room that can bring solution.  Dump JK for what reason?  There is
a long list of reasons, but which of those can provide the BOT a face
saving safety net?

What protestors have accomplished so far is that the work of JF is
surely to be critically evaluated after one year.  That by itself is an
accomplishment that they should be commended for.  That is a major
positive.  If no other goals are reached — that increased scrutiny of
her job performance is progress.

After a year the BOT can tell students, faculty and protestors who was
right and who was not.  Am I suggesting that people wait a year?  NO.  I
am simply stating that the reasons to dump JF have not been articulated
in a manner that has compelled the BOT to dump her.  Have you given the
BOT a compelling reasons to look at her work more closely — yes.  Have
you given the BOT a compelling reason to dump her — unfortunately, no.

On the failure side – no one has been able to intellectually convince JF
that she needs to step down and she has been able to persuade opponents
that she is qualified to remain on board.  It takes an exceptional mind
to enlighten a close minded individual — especially when they take
criticisms on a personal level. 

At the very least, JF has demonstrated that her public relations effort
designed to strengthen her support has been at least as acrimonious as
that of protestors.  However, the protestors have not been selected as
President.  She should be above the name calling.  Her inability to rise
above the “he did it she did it divorce court mentality” raises yet
another question mark about her qualifications to be President of
Gallaudet.  Calling students anarchists (an inaccurate analogy)
demonstrates that JF got emotionally swallowed up in the issues, rather
than act as a role model of rational thinking. 

Unfortunately, I am not optimistic about her capacity to inventory her
own behaviors or the comments, criticisms, or even friendly advice of
others.  Moreover, it is clear she has a vision and direction which she
assumes is the correct one for the Gallaudet and the Deaf community at
large.  I am not saying her vision is well thought out.  Just the
opposite.  Had she offered some of that vision of hers in peer reviewed
articles she would have gotten feedback.  It is even possible that she
would have then given herself numerous reasons why not to apply the job.

I find a more serious flaw than lack of peer reviewed publication is
that JF lacks teaching experience at the University level.  “Dumbing
down” deaf college students is a monumental error of SOME deaf educators
and is an expression of audism at its worst – by those who assume
themselves to be above thinking themselves as above others.  Each member
of the BOT needs to HONESTLY ask themselves whether JF’s work as Provost
has perpetuated an
environment that tolerates and encourages the “dumbing down” of
students.  JF needs to honestly confront herself about that as well.
The problem is that she dumbs down students objecting to be dumbed down
and calls them anarchist and terrorist. 

Dumbing down students by calling them “anarchists” (inaccurately) is an
expression of audism. It is harmful to the self-esteem of students.
“Dumbing down” also runs contrary to educational goals of motivating
students to learn.  JF has provided protestors with a HUMUNGOUS gift by
openly dumbing down students, faculty and alumni when calling them
“anarchists”. 

How so?   She has given the BOT a compelling reason to abandon her.
When dumbing students down by calling them anarchist JF demonstrates
that the issue is not her “being deaf enough” or her being a “woman” or
students being “irrational” as she has so often claimed. On the
contrary, she demonstrates that the problem is with her attitude towards
the students, faculty, staff, and alumni – an attitude underpinned with
audism.

Will the BOT have the courage to dump JF is another matter.  I would
hope so, but I suspect they will wait until contract renewal time.

Richard Eckert

Hat Tip to Jean Boutcher

GALLYNET-L@gallynet.org

republished with permission by the listserv moderator

elizabeth gillespie’s e mail contact: mishkazena@aol.com