More On Leave JKF Alone
Sweeping Jane Fernandes under the rug will result in a large lump that everyone has to tiptoe around. We need to examine how this situation arose and establish guidelines so that it does not happen again.
JKF was not an innocent party, and neither was the current president nor the Board of Trustees. They all came together at exactly the right time under the right (wrong) circumstances to kick off a massive damaging protest.
How, why, and what occured bears analysis so we can rebuild a fairer and saner system as well as prevent it happening again. It has twice. It appears to have mixed results the first time; now we have a second chance that we cannot afford to screw up. A mistake of the first time was the protest going away once a new President was in place and leaving it at that.
Does the current system encourage people adopting a management by intimidation style? Is this how JKF was developed? Is there a way to develop future leaders in a more people-friendly manner?
Does the system have its roots in historic paternalism and old-boys politics networking?
If this was the case, how to uproot it and eliminate it from Gallaudet forever?
If not the case, how was this situation created?
Do we have good management people models on campus and how can we tap into them?
Do we have working models of good management that are being used in other campuses?
Do we need an independent review of the Board of Trustees’ relationship with the administration to ensure a fairer, more professional and open atmosphere at Gallaudet?
DPG
reprinted with permission by the listserv moderator
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
What is Audism? The Definition of Audism
By Znuage 
Nov 02 2006 11:36AM 
The word ‘audism’ first showed up in print back in 1992, written by Harlan Lane, however she credits the invention of the term to Tom Humphries’ unpublished 1977 doctoral dissertation. Despite the term being created in 1977, it did not start being used until Lane used it in her work. Nowadays, it is increasingly being used among the deaf culture, by hearing and deaf people alike.What is audism? The scope of the word includes group institutional and group attitudes, practices, and oppression of deaf people. Going deeper, it is the concept that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear, and that deaf people should attempt to be like the hearing people as much as it is possible to be. Basically in the deaf culture, audism is similar as to racism or sexism, except instead of being judged because of your race or sexual preference, you are judged on your ability to hear.
What are Audists? Simply put, audists are people who practice audism. Audists, hearing or deaf, tend to shun Deaf culture and the use of sign language, especially American Sign Language as it is different from spoken and written English. Audists may refuse to use sign language in the presence of a person who depends on sign language in order to communicate. Audists tend to have misconceptions about Deaf people, such as they all cannot write well because English is not their first language, that the ones who can speak well are smarter than the ones who can’t, that life must be terrible if one cannot hear and one should do everything and anything to help their hearing such as hearing aids or cochlear implants.
Myself, I have experienced various examples of audism. Such as when I used to work at a shop along with my ex husband. Many times, customers would ask my ex husband about me and say how wonderful he was to hire someone like me. He would reply with “Um. She’s my wife.” They then would say “Oh! What a kind person you are to marry a deaf person.” I also relied on writing on paper to communicate with my customers who could not sign and had experiences with certain customers who refused to write to me and demanded that I somehow, magically, understand them vocally? When they realize I just simply couldn’t, they would end up getting angry at me! Or when my mother, friends, lovers tell their friends and relatives that I am deaf, more often than not, the reaction is “Oh, I’m very sorry to hear that!” Why be sorry? What is the point in saying that? Some of these people even have the guts to say that to me “I’m so very sorry, it must be so terrible to not hear music!” How can it be so terrible for me to not be able to hear music, when I have never experienced hearing it in the first place? That is your misconception, that is your assumption. These are only a few of the many experiences I have lived through. If you have ever had the misconception that deaf people were to be pitied or to be thought as lesser in any way, you need to sit down and reexamine your thoughts. How would you feel if you were in our shoes? Being perfectly able to read, to understand, to communicate in our language, and yet have to face discrimination due to people’s misconceptions of what means to be deaf. We are simply deaf, and should only be treated in one way, as a human being who just happens to be a deaf individual, and is perfectly capable of surviving in this world.
Kelby Brick’s Sun article
First step in Gallaudet revolution?
Originally published November 2, 2006
To many at Gallaudet University, the removal of Jane Fernandes as incoming president represented merely the first step in reforming a repressive system that excluded stakeholders from the governing process.The Deaf President Now protests in 1988 installed a deaf person as president, but they did not reform this almost 150-year-old entrenched bureaucracy of paternalism.
|
|
Gallaudet’s governing system has been led by a self-perpetuating board that appoints its own replacements with very little external input. University bylaws prevent the board of trustees from receiving any communication or information from the campus community independent from the president’s office.
Moreover, the university’s governing system was set up in an era when deaf people had very little say in how they were to be governed – and were viewed as incompetent.
Such exclusion of stakeholders from the governing process reinforces institutional “audism” – discriminatory attitudes and practices based on the inability to hear. Because of limited interaction with the campus community, board members have not been exposed to its true diversity and thus have made decisions in a vacuum. Only a minority of board members are university alumni, which underscores their limited knowledge of campus concerns.
The campus community became frustrated because it was unable to get the board to address critical issues and hold the administration accountable for numerous failures. Sparked by groups of minority students objecting to the exclusion of a prominent black candidate from an all-white group of finalists, the protest quickly attracted supporters who had their own exposure to a governing system that seemed autocratic and unresponsive.
The protest then morphed into a characteristic revolution underpinned by a long list of grievances: systematic institutional discrimination (including racism and audism), rapidly falling academic achievement (as noted by a federal government report), repeated campus security misconduct, and administrative intimidation and retaliation.
Last May, at the beginning of the protest, a team of three outside mediators was brought in to facilitate communication. The administration agreed to systemwide reforms – for example, in the areas of diversity, communication and accountability – but these were ignored, fueling the eruption last month.
When officials of an autocratic system sense they are losing power, they frequently turn to propaganda, restrictive policies on information and physical coercion to retain power and suppress dissent.
Those outside Gallaudet were confused by what was happening on campus, and this confusion was reinforced by the administration’s implementation of a disingenuous media strategy: branding dissent as terrorism. University officials argued that there should be a “new order of deaf people” and claimed the campus community was afraid of technology – ignoring the fact that this campus revolution was led by many people who, like Ms. Fernandes, grew up reading lips before learning American Sign Language later in life.
The administration sought to claim that protesters were unreasonably charging Ms. Fernandes with not being “deaf enough.” When this was exposed as a red herring, the administration instituted – under the guise of safety – a campuswide policy restricting public assembly and discourse. When this failed to stop the protests, the administration turned to mass arrests of students (known on campus as Black Friday) and other displays of dangerous brute force, such as the bulldozing of students’ overnight shelters without checking first to ensure those structures were vacant.
The removal of Ms. Fernandes, who had been one of the top officials at Gallaudet for the past 11 years, is seen as only the first step. Gallaudet now faces a defining moment. The board needs to move expeditiously to become more inclusive and transparent, while demanding measurable accountability from the university administration. The campus community needs to return to its task of teaching and learning while working with the board in developing the kind of “shared governance” system that has been instituted in so many other colleges and universities.
Perhaps the person most critical to the university’s future will be the outgoing president, who has two months left in his presidency. President I. King Jordan can renounce the propaganda and lead, through example, the process of forgiveness. He can bring together stakeholders to reform the system. His lasting legacy – and to a lesser extent, Gallaudet’s future and viability – will be determined by his conduct and decisions in the next two months.
The outgoing president can determine whether the recent crisis was a revolution for a better Gallaudet – or a rebellion that still needs to be put down, along with the university itself.
Kelby Brick, a deaf attorney and Gallaudet alumnus, is former director for law and advocacy at the National Association of the Deaf and co-author of “Legal Rights: The Guide for Deaf and Hard of Hearing People.” His e-mail is kelbybrick@gmail.com. First step in Gallaudet revolution? – baltimoresun.com
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
IKJ and Respect
Hello Slemo,
In theory, I agree with you that President Irving King Jordan deserves some accolades for his contribution in the number of years he gave to Gallaudet University.
However, it is very difficult to remove the bitter aftertaste for what he has done in the last few months. Spinning the truth (trying to imply that Jane is not deaf enough is an insult to the whole deaf community and he must know that the issues is a lot deeper) is probably the worst thing he could have done and he, being a president should not have done that. The reputation of Gallaudet University is now at stake as a result of President Jordan’s “careless” otherwise “purposeful” (politics-savvy-wise) action.
Being an alumni living in London, UK, I had to answer many questions about the society in Washington, DC and Gallaudet University and I have to repeat several times that what the media is trying to tell is not completely true. I am of the opinion that this is the president’s responsibility to put the university in good name. Quite frankly, I see that this is a very selfish move for President King to spin the truth to the media so Fernie could keep her position as a president-designate and ignoring the whole community. This is very difficult for me to accept that.
The saying, one reaps what he sows. It is evident in the chains of events. President King Jordan asks for that and now he incurs the wrath of the community and he has to face them.
Yes, everyone deserves a second chance and President Jordan has to show us that he can earn our respect back and I believe that this will be a long process. This is very difficult to forget what he had done in the last few months really.
Sharvedh
On 11/1/06, Slemo Warigon <xxxxxx> wrote:
I. King Jordan has given more than 20 years of his life to Gallaudet. He
made many commendable contributions to the institution in spite of his
perceived flaws as one of our most recognized leaders.Efforts to portray King as a “racist” and dig up “dirts” on racism
within his administration are uncalled for. It’s probably not sexy to
defend a man who is on his way out, but what will we gain by assaulting
the character of such man based on questionable claims? Why are such
efforts being spearheaded by the very people with checkered past in
handling racial differences?As he approaches his final day as Gallaudet’s 8th president, I honestly
think King deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.Is that too much to ask?
Pax Vobiscum (Peace be with you),
— Zendun, the Deaf and Dumb
“The reason people find it so hard to be happy is that they always see
the past better than it was, the present worse than it is, and the
future less resolved than it will be.” — Marcel Pagnol, French Writer
(1895-1974)
reprinted with permission by the listserv moderator
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
Proof “Not Deaf Enough” False
Why am I bringing this up again? I have two commenters who are tenaciously arguing that Fernandes was rejected because she was “Not Deaf Enough”. I’ve repeated that I shared the same oral background Fernandes had, but they seem not to get it. So here I am again. For those who remains skeptical, please read the post I wrote few days ago and also take the time to read the comments left by the readers. Mishkazena An Ex-Oralist
Believe me, if Fernandes was rejected because she was “Not Deaf Enough”, heck, I would be completely opposed to the Unity For Gallaudet, instead being one of the leading Unity for Gallaudet deaf bloggers. I am at a loss why these two skeptics refused to accept the refusal of many of us with oral backgrounds, mainstreamed, hard of hearing, and people fitted with hearing aids and cochlear implants, to support the appointment of Dr Fernandes, either and for us, it was never about her “Not Deaf Enough”. Some members of the deaf community may feel rejected by her because they feel she hadn’t accepted them as equals, which only reflects the extent of audism on the university. People have complained to me that Dr Fernandes have taken to targeting at the culturally deaf students while she was a Provost, criticizing them few times unfairly. A good leader embraces all diversity of the deaf people on the university, regardless of their communication backgrounds. Apparently this is not the case, according to those who confided in me.
The proof is in the factual sheet I designed, Updated Factual Sheet For Protest. If these nay sawyers are still not able to get it after reading the factual sheet, then their blinders are too deeply embedded, just like Dr Fernandes did. A good leader would be receptive to the feedback by members of the university one is assigned to lead and the failure to heed these feedback only reinforces the perception that she doesn’t have what it takes to be a good leadership.
I do want to say one thing about these tenacious pro Fernandes commenters. They are very loyal to her. That may blind them to the fact that with them, she may be a good friend, however she is not the right person to assume the presidency of Gallaudet University. Whatever, Dr Fernandes is very fortunate to have very loyal friends.
What do you think?
On a personal note, I am still receiving threats and nasty attacks/bashing, so this blog is still moderated. However, I want to point out that not many blogs publish comments from the other party, especially the pro fernandes ones. I will continue if the pro fernandes commenters show civility, but so far only few are willing to discuss this without including threats and personal attacks on me and other protesters in their comments. elizabeth
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
Effective Leaders – Quotable Quote
“Six traits of effective leaders:
1. Make others feel important
2. Promote a vision
3. Follow the golden rule
4. Admit mistakes 5.
Criticize others only in private
6. Stay close to the action
Example has more followers than reason. We unconsciously imitate what pleases
us, and approximate to the characters we most admire.”
Christian Nevell Bovee
www.gallynet.org
reprinted with permission by the author
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
DPS and Sing Language Proficiency
elizabeth: this is disturbing, in the light of the DPS misconduct with the students the last few weeks. This also violates the university policy of open communicaiton
Regarding ASL and campus employees; I was on campus Wednesday and I saw
at the front gate two members of DPS at the guard house. They spoke
verbally to several deaf people who only signed ASL. These DPS people
couldn’t communicate with them. I am not picking on these people,
but, even as a hearing person and a campus visitor, I really do see the
need for campus employees to sign ASL. Neither guard could sign. They
pointed and spoke verbally. I feel bad for them. They did not hire
themselves. I felt worse for the deaf people. I really think it is
thoughtless for the DPS to put hearing people without signing skills in
a position where they have to communicate on campus.
Gunsmoke
Wed, 1 Nov 2006 19:57:27 EST
www.gallynet.org
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
The Reunification of Gallaudet: Healing Through Dialogue
A new discussion board (http://tinyurl.com/y8d6qq) has now been set up
to promote the healing and reunification of the Gallaudet community
through open, honest, respectful dialogue among people on ALL sides of
the protests (for, against, ambivalent). This discussion board,
entitled “The Reunification of Gallaudet,” welcomes all members of the
Gallaudet community including students, staff, faculty, parents,
alumni, former employees, loved ones, and members of the Deaf/deaf/hard
of hearing/hearing impaired/deaf-blind community at wide.
Topics may include, but are not limited to: brainstorming ideas for
promoting the healing and reunification of the wider Gallaudet
community, both on and off campus; racism and white privilege; audism
(toward BOTH Deaf ASL users AND ALSO toward people who were raised
oral, are hard of hearing, more comfortable with signed English than
ASL, etc.); issues related to accountability and governance at
Gallaudet; etc.
The most important rule is to demonstrate RESPECT toward others.
During the past few months. discussion related to the protests and to
Fernandes has often become polarized and hostile. So let me please
re-emphasize that “The Reunification of Gallaudet” discussion board is
meant to be a safe place for ALL people on ALL sides of the protests to
air their views without fear of being attacked. All those who
participate are asked to please respect the spirit and intention of
this discussion board.
This discussion board is located at free-association.net. The
short-cut URL is:
http://tinyurl.com/y8d6qq
(This takes you to the real URL, which is much longer.)
Anyone may read the discussions without registration. However, those
who wish to reply or create new topics will first need to register and
log in.
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
-
Archives
- November 2006 (99)
- October 2006 (506)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
