Saturday, September 16, 2006

• Gallaudet Faculty Report to Board of Trustees

  Faculty Report to Board of Trustees Written by FSSA Editorial Team    Friday, 15 September 2006 *University Faculty Oct 06 Report* *to the Board of Trustees* *Preamble* The University Faculty is dismayed at the Board’s history of taking what has generally been perceived as a dismissive attitude toward our concerns and proposals over the past six years. A segment of the Faculty views the submission of these reports as a futile activity due to the lack of genuine interactive dialogue and the paucity of substantive response. Nevertheless, in the interest of improving relations with the governing board, the Faculty Senate has decided to move forward with this opportunity. * * *Resolutions passed by the Faculty* The following four resolutions passed by margins approximating two to one at the Faculty’s most recent meeting, 8 May 06: 1. BE IT RESOLVED that the University Faculty hereby requests that Dr. Jane Fernandes publicly renounce her appointment as Gallaudet's ninth president. 2. BE IT RESOLVED that the Gallaudet University faculty demand that the search process be reopened and that there be no reprisals. 3. BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Gallaudet University faculty express no confidence in Dr. Jane Fernandes as President-elect. 4. BE IT RESOLVED THAT the University Faculty declares no confidence in this decision of the Board of Trustees to appoint Dr. Fernandes as President of the University. The Faculty has spoken with clarity and conviction regarding the Board of Trustees' decision to appoint Jane K. Fernandes as the ninth President of Gallaudet University, having exercised the most powerful tool in its parliamentary arsenal. *Summary of meeting between IKJ and Faculty Representatives (L. Bragg, P. Franklin, M. Weinberg), held on 8/28/06:* This meeting was requested by the Faculty pursuant to numerous expressions of concern regarding the President's "Guidelines for Expressive Activities" dated 28 June. Faculty resistance to the “Guidelines” stemmed from the perception that the rules are so numerous, specific, and complicated as to make it virtually impossible to obtain permission to demonstrate or post signs. Furthermore, the rules are heavy-handed, rigid, and created without participation of the Faculty. Finally, the rules exacerbate the current climate of fear on campus. Requests were formulated by the Faculty representatives to the effect that a UF representative be added to the Crisis Management Team and the yet-to-be-formed committee; consideration be given to reiterating current Board-approved policies rather than developing new policies; the 28 June document be put on hold and the support of the campus community, particularly that of the students, be sought for any new policies. The President responded that the 28 June Guidelines were developed as a temporary measure and that he is keen on developing community-based parameters for healthy, non-disruptive dissent. However, in his opinion, the current Board-approved policies may not be fully adequate. Despite Dr. Jordan’s assurances that the policy would be revisited shortly, many professors remain staunchly opposed to its continuance, even temporarily. * * If the President’s 28 June expressive rules are being presented to the Board as an action item, the faculty strongly prefer that the Board refer the draft back to the Crisis Management Team for consultation with campus groups in the spirit of shared governance.** *Communication between the Faculty and the Board* The Faculty once again declare the expectation that we be involved in the Board’s next round of deliberations to foster effective governance.   It should be noted that despite steps taken by the Board of Trustees since last May that might have led to an improved climate and better relations with the campus community, the Faculty were nevertheless completely excluded from the development of the 28 June Guidelines on expressive activities. Consultation is the hallmark of shared governance, and we strongly object to its absence in this instance. The Faculty declares continuing support for restructuring the Board so as to create direct channels of communication with the Faculty and other campus constituencies. Models of trusteeship involving the participation of the campus community are currently being discussed in Faculty circles and will, it is hoped, be discussed by the Board as well, possibly at a joint venue. * * *Faculty Forum, 11 September 2006* The University Faculty hosted an open forum for discussion of matters related to the appointment of Jane K. Fernandes as ninth President of Gallaudet University. The forum did not permit the proposal of resolutions. Seventy-two people were in attendance, including 54 members (24%) of the Faculty. Approximately 40% of those members of the Faculty in attendance addressed the forum. The discussion began with calls to take action and stop doing business as usual with an Administration and Board that ignore us. Responses to these calls included talk about building bridges and restoring trust. One professor asked how many of us count the days until we retire, and asked what the origin of this depression and malaise might be? Discussion continued on the fragmentation of the Faculty, the need for a strong voice and for genuine shared governance. One professor declared that the Board has heard us already, loud and clear, and has simply ignored us, while a second recalled the old saying that there is none so deaf as one who will not hear, and a third recounted the 2000 “earthquake” caused by the Faculty being shut out of the appointment of the Provost, subsequent to which our protest was completely ignored by the Board. One professor declared that sexism was evident in the protest against the appointment of Dr. Fernandes and reminded the house of the need to support women. Attention was called to the 28 June memo from Dr. Jordan imposing restrictions on expression, which memo was said to be of greater concern to the speaker than the events of May. It was related that an academic dean had forbidden a unit from adding a discussion of the May protest to its meeting agenda. One speaker was appalled that the events of last May showed the GUAA to be powerless; another felt the same about the fact that some Trustees cannot communicate with us without interpreters. There is absolutely no evidence, declared one professor, that more dialogue or more committees will ameliorate the situation: an oppressive system cannot be dismantled by the people who run it. Another member of the Faculty spoke about the lack of results from the Climate Process. It seems, she said, that we cannot simply submit our reports and expect that they will be acted upon. We must follow up on everything and apply pressure until action is taken. Perhaps we should set up an ad hoc committee to research the status of all the reports we’ve submitted in the past and ask hard questions about why our recommendations were not addressed. “The price of freedom – and justice – is eternal vigilance.” Another professor urged the importance of a Faculty lounge or coffee room in which professors could talk with one another and with members of the Staff, Administration, and Board. The declaration that we do not have effective administrative leadership on campus was met with applause. We have no control over what the Board hears about this meeting because we have no true, meaningful opportunity for dialogue. Two professors pointed out that everyone attending the meeting could be fired for insubordination because Faculty Governance had not applied for a permit to meet and express opinions, as currently required by the President’s 28 June “Guidelines” memo. The question was raised as to what the faculty can do now about the current situation. After the October Faculty meeting, too much time will pass until the Board of Trustees meeting in February. It was suggested that the Board is not receiving, or perhaps not reading, our reports or other communications from us. The reasons for this were questioned and it was suggested that the Board may just not care about the Faculty’s perspectives. A suggestion was made that the Faculty call a special meeting before the Board meets in October at which action should be taken to inform Congress of the Board’s failure to consult with the campus community. It was noted that our students want us to take action.Gallaudet Faculty Staff Students Alumni - FSSA.org! - Home                                       #  #  #  #  #  #  #  #  #  #  # Another  great post:  A cloud of Hopelessness by Alison Aubrecht  ASL Community Journal » Turmoils at Gallaudet University The opinions expressed by the author does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Mishkazena

  • 7:26 AM
  • 26 views
  • 2 eprops
  • 2 comments