Post-Tent City: IPSAC Unveils Finalists
I’m in the rearguard here, but better late than never, I suppose. By now, the majority of you know that the Interim President Selection Advisory Committee (IPSAC), headed by Dr. Jane Dillehay, submitted its recommendations to the Board, and the BoT has announced the three finalists for the (most likely thankless!) job of Interim President at Gallaudet University. As most of you know, they are Dr. Robert Davila (Letter of Intent, CV); Dr. William Marshall (Letter of Intent, CV); and Dr. Steve Weiner (Letter of Intent, CV).
Since the initial announcement, quite a few deaf bloggers have commented on these three men. BiblioMarket comments briefly, and announces his support for Davila; Bionic Ear also made a short statement, but is rather noncommittal. Elizabeth over at Mishka Zena also likes Davila, while Carl Schroeder at Kalakau’s Corner limits his commentary to a criticism of Dr. Marshall’s ASL skills. Finally, Ridor over at RidorLIVE, who always has something to say, initially came out as against Davila, but has subsequently admitted he’d be okay with either Davila or Weiner.
I, on the other hand, do not have any strong feelings for or against any of the three, and while it’s interesting to see where people stand, I think playing this game isn’t in the best interests of Gallaudet or the community. This is, as Jamie Berke at About.com says, the “ultimate deaf temp job.” The last man left standing after this weekend has the job for, at best, two years. The job itself is already a tough one– being a college/university president is stressful, and for this particular slot is going to be even more so, what with heightened campus and community expectations, as well as a far more intense-than-usual media spotlight. My sympathies to whoever elects to occupy College Hall come January 1. The fact that quite a few people chose to throw their hats in the ring is a good sign; there’s still interest in leading Gallaudet, and hopefully, there’ll be a healthy pool of applicants for the permanent presidency when the time comes. Glancing over the comments in various forums, I found myself agreeing with Neil and his comments over at Ridor’s domain. Neil says in part,
…is it a requirement that next president wear their “Dâ€eafness on their sleeve? This is a dangerous question. We got rid of JKF because she was an example of who a leader should not be (deaf or hearing) while rejecting her assessment that she wasn’t “Deaf Enough.” Dr. Davila has the background of someone who SHOULD have been picked as Prez the first time around. If the FSSA rejects him because of any number of reasons Ridor mentioned, what does that say about the group’s rejection of the “Not Deaf Enough†card?
I agree– the battle over Fernandes should never have been one questioning her credentials as a member of the community. It was extremely unfortunate that public perception (and within the community as well to some extent) focused narrowly on whether her bona fides as a deaf person were established. This is what disheartened me a little about Carl Schroeder’s comments: we can’t afford to revisit this dangerous path again, even if a large number of people feel that nothing less than a champion of ASL will do.
Rather than dissect the genealogy and community status of the candidates, or break down their resumes (all of which look relatively good, IMHO), I’d like to briefly touch on a few issues I think should be the primary concern for the next president. I fully agree with Steve Weiner’s contention that “…the university CANNOT be on a holding pattern and wait for the next president to begin implementation of new initiatives.” He is correct: Whether it’s Marshall, Davila, or Weiner, the next president can’t just rubber stamp decrees and do the bidding of the BoT and other administrators. He is going to have to guide the university through the next 18 to 24 months, and leave the institution in satisfactory condition to hand over to the next administration.
Here’s a brief laundry list:
1) rescind the “Guidelines for Expressive Activities and Assembliesâ€; if such an outline is needed, then it needs to be revisited with an eye on a reasonable approach and expectations. The document as it stands was obviously drafted to curb the protest, and should never have been issued.
2) immediately conduct an investigation into DOSS/DPS, and begin the much-needed reforms in that department, starting with ASL proficiency. As I suggested earlier, it wouldn’t hurt to start recruiting from among advanced ASL students, CODAs, and others with a genuine interest in deafness, ASL, and the Gallaudet community.
3) effectively address the deficiencies within the PART report and ensure that accreditation succeeds. This one is particularly crucial, but won’t be solved overnight. It will be a long-term effort that will continue into the next administration– but it’s crucial that necessary corrections begin now.
4) begin the process of healing the cracks in the community. Part of this will involve tackling thorny topics such as audism, racism, sexism, voyeurism, botulism… you get the idea. Both Weiner and Marshall acknowledged the split in both the campus and larger communities in their letters of interest. While Davila makes no mention of recent events, I would hope he too recognizes that these are not ordinary times, and whoever ascends to the top post is going to have to be a peacemaker extraordinaire, on top of all the other responsibilities of running Gallaudet.
and 5) I’d like to see the next president begin to formulate a new policy on how to deal with deaf education from top to bottom. While Gallaudet is not solely responsible for the finished products of deaf ed and special ed programs nationwide, it certainly can take the lead. Once upon a time, Gallaudet required an entrance exam, and those graduates of residential schools who passed the exam and went to Gallaudet were the pride of their local communities. Gallaudet Normal School graduates went on to teach in schools and programs, and influenced the course of such schools. There was a symbiotic relationship throughout the realms of deaf education, and I think Gallaudet needs to return to this to some degree. While I in no way advocate a total return to the past (for example, the Normal School didn’t admit deaf graduate students for decades; this was one of the paramount issues that forced a break between Edward Miner Gallaudet and Alexander Graham Bell), I do think Gallaudet could do better where K-12 education is concerned.
There’s tons of other areas that could be improved or worked on, sure, but I think these five elements are among the more essential items on the agenda Gallaudet’s new leadership should pursue. To me, the ability of the interim president to tackle this list will count far more with me than whether the man in question is the best ASL signer of all time, or has a ten-generation heritage of deaf family members, or graduated from the “right” schools, or any other criteria.
[P.S.: I think it’s rather ironic the final announcement will take place on December 10, traditionally “Gallaudet-Clerc Day” in the past, an event that was often celebrated with a banquet and a tribute to these two men.]
Its amazing to see that after all the months of ruckus of unfair proccess, howls of opression, screams of lack of people of color, and audism cries that even the new deafhood chocked IPSAC restarted the selection process shockingly came up with an almost identical mix of final three candidates. It makes me wonder if the deafhood charisma has really gone to the dogs this time.
Wonderful. Thnak you. I totally agree with you.
Raphael J. St. Johns
I ment - I agree with you Mr. Sandman.
And richard-whats even more amazing is that we have survive thru the months of cancelation of Home Coming, the arrested of protesters, the lies of the IKJ administration, the refusal of the IKJ people to share the Alumni database (with the Alumni Association, of all people!)etc.etc. Wow..gee whiz! Amazing!
Raphael J. St. Johns, C-87, G-00
Having known Stephen Weiner for many years, since our YLC days in Pengilly, Minnesota, I must admit to be extremely disappointed to discover that he’s being considered for an interim position. Gallaudet University makes it clear to us all that Interim President CANNOT apply for a full presidency. I believe rather firmly that Stephen Weiner would lead and nurture both Deaf scholars and ASL into the 21st century. He may have his reasons that I don’t know.
BTW, I am sorry if you’re a little disappointed in me.
Mahalo with aloha, Carl
Hi- a couple of clarifications. I supported the protest, to an extent. From what little I know of Deafhood (still reading the book!), I support the general concept, but I’m disappointed it got so bound up and intertwined with the protest to the extent that it did. I hope people can read the book and explore the concepts within on their own merits.
I strongly think that Gallaudet needs to reaffirm through *both* words and actions its commitment to ASL, not just pay lip service. This is one of the reasons I think an overhaul of DOSS/DPS is warranted.
As for the “identical” pool, I wouldn’t say it was identical, and it’s difficult to know just how similar the process is without knowing for sure who applied. Last time there were 24 applicants, 21 of whom were deaf. This time there were, I believe, 13. That’s a smaller number, and some of the same people obviously applied twice. A smaller pool, a similar cast of characters, etc., and you’re going to wind up with a similar choice of finalists, regardless of whether IPSAC and others wanted different people.
Carl, I’m sorry you’re disappointed in Steve Weiner. As you may know from my earlier posts, he was my compromise choice the first time around. I wouldn’t give up hope yet– there have been cases at other universities where the interim president becomes the permanent president after demonstrating their value in the job. Even though right now the interim president is bound by an 18-24 month period, that could very well change.
I’m a little disappointed not because of your views; I too agree Marshall has sub-par signing abilities. Where I’m concerned is that by calling attention to that, we risk dragging the bogeyman of “Not Deaf Enough!” out again, and that could skewer other critcisms and obvious flaws of candidates. Since this is the interim position, and the community is desperately in need of new leadership, and all three have good qualifications across the board, I’ve chosen not to endorse any of them and not to dismiss any of them. Rather, I’d hope they pay attention to lists like mine, and see if they can put Gallaudet back on course again.
Great post, Mr. Sandman!
I like your proposed laundry list.
Regarding Dr. Marshall’s limited ASL skills, I think your concern that we would be revisiting the “Not Deaf Enough” notion by calling attention to his inadequate signing skills is moot. After all, one of the job requirements for the Interim President is fluency in BOTH ASL and written English. The degree of a candidate’s “cultural Deafness” is entirely beside the point. Suppose we have a candidate who signs fluently in ASL, but does not read and write English at a satisfactory level of competence, we would instantly say that candidate is unacceptable. The same should go for any candidate who writes brilliantly, yet signs poorly. We are not discriminating. Dr. Marshall just doesn’t satisfactorily meet one of the job requirements.
Don’t you agree, Mr. Sandman?
It is obvious once again that the protest was about “Not Deaf Enough”. Will someone finallyadmit it so we can move on!
Not committed to any candidate as I don’t know enough to make an announcement supporting someone. Besides, I didn’t grow up in the right culture to justify an opinion.
Touché, Juan. *grin* You’re absolutely correct. I do agree. I guess one of my (narrow?) focuses during the whole protest was perception, both internal and external. While I kept hearing raves about how the protest was being conducted on the ground (and I have no reason to doubt my sources!), it was clear to me and many, many others that the PR war outside of campus was disastrous. As you can see from some of the comments on my blog alone, there are still people ready to stand up and denounce even this process as a validation of “Not deaf enough.”
However, as you know by now, that fear is moot: Dr. Davila is the next president.
(Meryl: I too decided to withhold an endorsement, for many reasons. However, I look forward to seeing what Dr. Davila has planned, and I hope he can successfully address crucial issues, such as those I listed in this post. We’ll see…)
Hi Sandman - I have to say I like your idea of Gallaudet taking leadership. To do that the University would first have to make a decision of some kind based on research about what is good for Deaf education, and I bet they’d lose endowments for preferring one way over another - no matter how much research supports their decision.
Hello Joseph– long time no “see”… what do you mean by “have to say?” *grin* It sounds like you’re admitting agreement despite not wanting to, or something similar…
I’m not sure Gallaudet would lose endowments- perhaps you could explain further why you think this is the case? Right now, Gallaudet promotes itself as a “big tent” for all kinds of deaf students (at least this was the line Jordan and Fernandes promoted!), and Gallaudet, through its graduate programs, has supported research on deafness in areas that are rather diverse. So Gallaudet could very well support changes in one type/form of deaf education, yet still maintain funding related to different types of education, etc., on the grounds that it’s working to improve deaf education across the board (which I think it should do anyway).
Where I see a need is that too many students enter Gallaudet (or expect to go to Gallaudet) unprepared for college at a fairly fundamental level. Gallaudet can tighten its own admission standards, keep them the same, or even loosen them a bit more (although perhaps maybe not– they’re pretty loose as it is, I think, and probably bumping against certain minimal standards now…), but the problems in K-12 programs will still remain, regardless. By working to improve K-12 programs, Gallaudet can help deaf students across the board, whether they choose to go to Gallaudet or not. For educators, Gallaudet, and the community, going to the root of the problem will be a far more long-lasting solution than any short-term fix on campus that people might dream up.