Jordan: Gallaudet Not Inclusive
Deaf Culture and Gallaudet
By I. King Jordan
Monday, January 22, 2007;
Page A19
When I announced that I was stepping down as president of Gallaudet University, I spoke of the health of the university and said that Gallaudet was well positioned for the future. Sadly, this may no longer be the case.I have been a member of the Gallaudet community for 36 years and was privileged to serve as president for nearly 19 years. I strove to carry out Gallaudet’s mission and vision. During my presidency, Gallaudet’s endowment increased from $5 million to more than $175 million, and every year we had a balanced budget; facilities were added, including a state-of-the-art student academic center; new graduate and undergraduate academic programs were developed; and outstanding administrators, faculty and staff members were recruited, many of them deaf. Gallaudet increasingly attracted students with higher academic credentials.
All indications were that Gallaudet, a global educational and cultural center for people who are deaf and hard of hearing, was positioned to become even stronger.
We had a vision for an inclusive deaf university in which everyone is valued and respected and that offers educational programs to an increasingly diverse population of deaf, hard-of-hearing, deaf-blind and hearing students. A major priority in our strategic plan was to preserve Gallaudet’s rich cultural heritage and promote the study and appreciation of Deaf culture, deaf history and American Sign Language (ASL).
The board and I shared the conviction that our strategic goals and plans must drive how we allocate and use resources. When the board selected Jane Fernandes to be Gallaudet’s ninth president, it assured that the university would continue on the course we had set. I am convinced that the board made a serious error in acceding to the demands of the protesters by terminating Fernandes’s presidency before it began. Key board members have resigned, signaling their disagreement with the direction the board has taken.
A visiting team from the Middle States Association’s Commission on Higher Education made clear in its exit report to the campus community this month that closing a university and denying the free exchange of ideas is not an acceptable expression of disagreement. If this were to occur again, it stated, there would be “dire consequences” from Middle States with respect to the university’s accreditation.
Frankly, what is happening at Gallaudet is a struggle between defining the deaf community in narrow, exclusive terms or in broad, inclusive terms. There is a very small but vocal group of deaf people who define the community narrowly. I call this group the “absolutists.” They believe you are either deaf or you are not. You are either a supporter of ASL or you are not deaf. You either refuse to consider cochlear implants or you are not deaf. Many of our students, faculty and alumni who consider themselves deaf (including some born deaf to deaf families) would not be considered deaf by the absolutists.
Deaf people who have such strong positions are an important part of the deaf community. But they are only one group, and their thinking cannot lead Gallaudet. Their vision does not reflect our university’s vision of Gallaudet as an “Inclusive Deaf University” — a vision that Gallaudet’s board discussed at length and endorsed enthusiastically.
With the swirl about culture and the definition of the “deaf community” dominating the discussion, the message about academic excellence and the future of Gallaudet has been lost. The focus is primarily on culture. Gallaudet’s role in leading Deaf culture is important, but Deaf culture cannot lead Gallaudet. Academics and the academic achievements of our students must lead Gallaudet.
Since Jan. 1, Gallaudet has had an interim president. The board members’ choice of a permanent president will have long-lasting implications for the university. Many people outside Gallaudet believe the board will be voting to elect a “mayor” of the deaf community. The conversation “out there” has been more about popularity or role models than about academic leadership.
I understand this because of the way I became president and the way I did my job. When the Deaf President Now revolution led to my selection in 1988, I was thrust into two roles — university president and spokesman for the deaf community. I trust I have been successful in both roles. Any success I had as a spokesman for people who are deaf came only because I was first and foremost a strong academic leader. Had I not been a successful president, I could not have been a positive spokesman.
The university is as strong as it has ever been, but to thrive in the 21st century, Gallaudet must adapt to the needs of our students and the larger deaf community and to changes in society. We face a choice between a narrow view of our world and one that is more inclusive. If we give in to the absolutists, Gallaudet’s future will be severely, and adversely, affected.
It is essential to Gallaudet’s survival that the board, and everyone at the university, refocus on an inclusive vision for the university that aspires to academic excellence and respects Deaf culture.
The writer is president emeritus of Gallaudet University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/21/AR2007012101118.html
Commentary: Davila faces an extra-challenging job. Not only will he have to clean up the mess Jordan and Fernandes left behind, he also needs to engage in damage control as a result of Jordan’s false claims in the media. I cannot understand Jordan’s charge that the university isn’t inclusive. All deaf people have been accepted at the university, including oral, mainstreamed, and even those with cochlear implants.
Jordan accused the ‘absolutists’, whatever they may be, of protesting when he knew that both the faculty and staff, hearing and deaf, were also opposed to the appointment of Fernandes. If one takes the time to examine the ‘leaders’ of the Unity for Gallaudet, one can see that they came from a wide range of diverse backgrounds. Let’s look at one of the leading bloggers on the Internet who is pro Unity for Gallaudet: me. I am an example of how inclusive Gallaudet was. I went to Gallaudet as a 100% oral student, not knowing any signs except for two: Gallaudet College. It was the same for many friends of mine who were also oral. Don’t forget Jordan himself; he became profoundly deaf at the age of 21 and yet he was accepted at Gallaudet. What about Davila?  He didn’t become deaf until the age of 8 and then he learned both English and ASL. Heck, if Gallaudet utilizes discriminatory practices and excludes certain groups of deaf people, you won’t find me here, participating in Unity for Gallaudet. Doesn’t that speak for something?
Why is Jordan still intent in misleading the media? Gallaudet will always be inclusive. I think I’ll write a letter to the editor.
PS. “Denying the free exchange of ideas” was a problem during the Jordan Administration.
No personal insults permitted in this blog.
Deaf Culture and Gallaudet
By I. King Jordan
Monday, January 22, 2007;
Page A19
When I announced that I was stepping down as president of Gallaudet University, I spoke of the health of the university and said that Gallaudet was well positioned for the future. Sadly, this may no longer be the case.I have been a member of the Gallaudet community for 36 years and was privileged to serve as president for nearly 19 years. I strove to carry out Gallaudet’s mission and vision. During my presidency, Gallaudet’s endowment increased from $5 million to more than $175 million, and every year we had a balanced budget; facilities were added, including a state-of-the-art student academic center; new graduate and undergraduate academic programs were developed; and outstanding administrators, faculty and staff members were recruited, many of them deaf. Gallaudet increasingly attracted students with higher academic credentials.
All indications were that Gallaudet, a global educational and cultural center for people who are deaf and hard of hearing, was positioned to become even stronger.
We had a vision for an inclusive deaf university in which everyone is valued and respected and that offers educational programs to an increasingly diverse population of deaf, hard-of-hearing, deaf-blind and hearing students. A major priority in our strategic plan was to preserve Gallaudet’s rich cultural heritage and promote the study and appreciation of Deaf culture, deaf history and American Sign Language (ASL).
The board and I shared the conviction that our strategic goals and plans must drive how we allocate and use resources. When the board selected Jane Fernandes to be Gallaudet’s ninth president, it assured that the university would continue on the course we had set. I am convinced that the board made a serious error in acceding to the demands of the protesters by terminating Fernandes’s presidency before it began. Key board members have resigned, signaling their disagreement with the direction the board has taken.
A visiting team from the Middle States Association’s Commission on Higher Education made clear in its exit report to the campus community this month that closing a university and denying the free exchange of ideas is not an acceptable expression of disagreement. If this were to occur again, it stated, there would be “dire consequences” from Middle States with respect to the university’s accreditation.
Frankly, what is happening at Gallaudet is a struggle between defining the deaf community in narrow, exclusive terms or in broad, inclusive terms. There is a very small but vocal group of deaf people who define the community narrowly. I call this group the “absolutists.” They believe you are either deaf or you are not. You are either a supporter of ASL or you are not deaf. You either refuse to consider cochlear implants or you are not deaf. Many of our students, faculty and alumni who consider themselves deaf (including some born deaf to deaf families) would not be considered deaf by the absolutists.
Deaf people who have such strong positions are an important part of the deaf community. But they are only one group, and their thinking cannot lead Gallaudet. Their vision does not reflect our university’s vision of Gallaudet as an “Inclusive Deaf University” — a vision that Gallaudet’s board discussed at length and endorsed enthusiastically.
With the swirl about culture and the definition of the “deaf community” dominating the discussion, the message about academic excellence and the future of Gallaudet has been lost. The focus is primarily on culture. Gallaudet’s role in leading Deaf culture is important, but Deaf culture cannot lead Gallaudet. Academics and the academic achievements of our students must lead Gallaudet.
Since Jan. 1, Gallaudet has had an interim president. The board members’ choice of a permanent president will have long-lasting implications for the university. Many people outside Gallaudet believe the board will be voting to elect a “mayor” of the deaf community. The conversation “out there” has been more about popularity or role models than about academic leadership.
I understand this because of the way I became president and the way I did my job. When the Deaf President Now revolution led to my selection in 1988, I was thrust into two roles — university president and spokesman for the deaf community. I trust I have been successful in both roles. Any success I had as a spokesman for people who are deaf came only because I was first and foremost a strong academic leader. Had I not been a successful president, I could not have been a positive spokesman.
The university is as strong as it has ever been, but to thrive in the 21st century, Gallaudet must adapt to the needs of our students and the larger deaf community and to changes in society. We face a choice between a narrow view of our world and one that is more inclusive. If we give in to the absolutists, Gallaudet’s future will be severely, and adversely, affected.
It is essential to Gallaudet’s survival that the board, and everyone at the university, refocus on an inclusive vision for the university that aspires to academic excellence and respects Deaf culture.
The writer is president emeritus of Gallaudet University.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/21/AR2007012101118.html
Commentary: Davila faces an extra-challenging job. Not only will he have to clean up the mess Jordan and Fernandes left behind, he also needs to engage in damage control as a result of Jordan’s false claims in the media. I cannot understand Jordan’s charge that the university isn’t inclusive. All deaf people have been accepted at the university, including oral, mainstreamed, and even those with cochlear implants.
Jordan accused the ‘absolutists’, whatever they may be, of protesting when he knew that both the faculty and staff, hearing and deaf, were also opposed to the appointment of Fernandes. If one takes the time to examine the ‘leaders’ of the Unity for Gallaudet, one can see that they came from a wide range of diverse backgrounds. Let’s look at one of the leading bloggers on the Internet who is pro Unity for Gallaudet: me. I am an example of how inclusive Gallaudet was. I went to Gallaudet as a 100% oral student, not knowing any signs except for two: Gallaudet College. It was the same for many friends of mine who were also oral. Don’t forget Jordan himself; he became profoundly deaf at the age of 21 and yet he was accepted at Gallaudet. What about Davila?  He didn’t become deaf until the age of 8 and then he learned both English and ASL. Heck, if Gallaudet utilizes discriminatory practices and excludes certain groups of deaf people, you won’t find me here, participating in Unity for Gallaudet. Doesn’t that speak for something?
Why is Jordan still intent in misleading the media? Gallaudet will always be inclusive. I think I’ll write a letter to the editor.
PS. “Denying the free exchange of ideas” was a problem during the Jordan Administration.
No personal insults permitted in this blog.
January 22nd, 2007 at 10:26 am
I CANNOT believe what IJK said… I could not read any further.
Is he delusional or something??
“When I announced that I was stepping down as president of Gallaudet University, I spoke of the health of the university and said that Gallaudet was well positioned for the future. Sadly, this may no longer be the case.”
Well-positioned for the future? What the heck does he mean?
Gallaudet was already in a mess PRIOR to the protest as proven in the MSA report.
Jordan is just incredibly jealous of Davila – hoping he wouldn’t be up for the job, so he’s making it more difficult for him, trying to shift the blame entirely on the protesters for not accepting Jane. Davila is also proving him wrong because he keeps telling media we don’t want Jane because of her background – lookie at Davila!
“Many people outside Gallaudet believe the board will be voting to elect a “mayor†of the deaf community. The conversation “out there†has been more about popularity or role models than about academic leadership.”
Oh come on, IJK! You practically hand-picked Jane and you fully knew what you did was WRONG – bypassing the search process selection! And you already knew how bad of a shape Gallaudet was in.
Oh, people think that way because you, IJK, fed the media LIES since the beginning of the whole mess, making the deaf community look bad.
By the way, it IS a deaf community at a DEAF University, and DIVERSITY of people is in that community.
Get your head examined, IJK and leave Dr. Davila alone!
I may not be making any sense here because I’m really PO’d…
January 22nd, 2007 at 10:29 am
Bravo, Iammine, you said it beautifully. Hmm, perhaps you can write a letter to the editor, too.
January 22nd, 2007 at 10:30 am
We should wait and see when Dr. Davila will reply.
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 pm
If Gallaudet was truly inclusive all along, then COSC wouldn’t have had to be formed in the first place. The white students’ favorism of Ron Stern, despite his underqualifications in the higher ed arena, certainly tells me it’s all about popularity and culture than academics excellence.
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Anon, if you read carefully, he spoke of communication inclusion, not of color. I agree with you that racism is a problem at Gallaudet. Glenn Anderson has excellent credentials and we still have no explanation why he wasn’t among the finalists.
 About Ron Stern, I understand that he focuses on academic excellence, too.
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:29 pm
I can’t wait to listen to Dr Davila will answer.
IamMine is already cured from deafhood.
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Anonymous – there was a racism issue on campus, yes and is still a big concern right now.
What IKJ was implying that this protest was mainly focused on a small group, consisting of SOLEY ASL users.
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:50 pm
IKJordan’s letter turned me off.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Yeah I am shocked he scooped that low. He is the one that is not moving forward and he is just being a sore loser. He is now just a typical person to me and out of touch of the Deaf Community. I hope he stops writing letters like that. He is hurting Gallaudet more that way.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Sadly, I do not see anywhere in Jordan’s letter an acknowledgement of responsibility or an apology towards the university, the community and the school (MSSD) that I addressed in my essay on Reunify Gallaudet’s blog. Pointing the finger at the board in blame does not help the matter at all. A true leader acknowledges responsibility and does not place blame but works diligently to bring about unity.
Jordan and Jane K. Fernandes are the absolutists themselves in that they would not budge from their positions, they would not listen to other people, and they referred to stay in their cocoons instead of going out to get in touch with students and faculty.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:23 pm
The letter to Washington Post by I. King Jordon shows that he is desperated wiping the egg off of his face.
Please click on the url (Washington Post) above and post your comments to the article that i.king jordon wrote because there are cronies of his trying to brainwash the society that we, the deaf community, got the wrong perspective of this issue.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:29 pm
This is a shocking op-ed piece.
He continues to push JKF and says about Dr. Davila only, “Since Jan 1, Gallaudet has had an interim president.” He doesn’t have the courtesy to even name Dr. Davila, nor offer any support.
As others have said here–he is not helping Gallaudet.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
We should all post our comments directly to the Washington Post article so the outside community can see our perspective
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Elizabeth:
You say you think you will write a letter to the editor. Please do. The sooner the better.
Cochlear implantées
entered Gallaudet long before Cochlear Implant Center was opened at Gallaudet in 2000.
New students enter New Signers’ Progam every year in August before Jordan became president. Students of varying communication modes outweigh the percentage of absolutists. Once again, the percentage of hearing faculty members that voted “no confidence” in Fernandes way way way outweighed the percentage of deaf faculty members (something out of 82%). Therefore, Gallaudet has been inclusive all the time.
I-am-Mine:
I love that you say that Jordan’s head needs to be examined!
Actually, Jordan’s op-ed essay is not eloquent. It was written in a revengeful manner — the anger that Capt. Ahab feels
in Herman Melville’s novel,
“Moby Dick.”
P.S. I do not want Dr. Davila to write to the editor. I want him to ignore him; rather, I want faculty members to write to the editor
about the lack of integrity in the Jordan administration
as well as in that of Dean of CLAST Karen Kimmel who altered from failing grades to passing grades — a dishonourable act! Unethical!
Jean Boutcher
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Rev. Croft:
I completely agree that Jordan has failed to offer
support to Dr. Davila.
JB
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Jordan is taking revenge on both BoT and Gallaudet for rejecting his goal of Fernandes becoming the president. The extent of his investment in Fernandes only adds more validity to the perceptions of PSC being fixed, especially when his position should be neutral. His current conduct indicates a very poor sportmanship and a lack of love for Gallaudet.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Jean, you are right about not bothering Dr. Davila to write to the Post. The Post is strongly biased, not worth for us to write the letters to them. I just feel the Post and IKJ are sort of a team that continues intimating the Gallaudet community and Dr. Davila. Just ignore the Post and move on.
Really, the IKJ letter does not matter to me, but enterain me showing how arrogant he still is.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:24 pm
Yeah I agree that we just need to move on. I actually think this is his way of distracting the community of his mistakes that he made.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:27 pm
IKJ’s letter made one take a deep, deep breath. The kind of breath that wants to let out an explosive snort.
The man who ordered the Earth Juice stunt and issued the celebrated 19 inch ruler is capable of anything, including self-delusional writings. The puffery of his words is embarrassing.
If not for the distortion being pushed onto the uninitated public, I would just dismiss it as the pathetic musings of a has-been.
MZ, expose him! Show how he is representing things in a self-serving way and conveniently omitting mention of the PART report, distorting the true Gallaudet situation and misrepresenting the huge task left to Dr. Davila.
Hmph. (cough) (exasperated laughter.)
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:32 pm
He deserves to be in jail. I have seen his face smug and scared shitless. I hashed truthful words in his face and he walked away. Money has been mismanaged, missing and suspect. The letter he wrote pains me to no end, what I feel signs still open wounds. He doesn’t want it to close, and heal. Someone, I beg of you, please write an op-ed about King Jordan. And make damn sure some newspaper, if not the sly Post, prints it. Fernandes has gotten her way with some newspapers, and Jordan. Where are ours?
Jordan, you spiteful, old man. Burn in hell for all I care. How dare you continue to split us. You’re the one who messed up the MSA accreditation, not us “absolutists”. You are damn right, we are absolute sure we made the right decision when it came to the protests.
Get rid of him.
Christine
January 22nd, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Denial, Denial, Denial, so forth…..
January 22nd, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Greg,
you said “Just ignore the Post and move on.”
Bad idea. Do something about it because the majority is reading it. Yes, majority is hearing.
January 22nd, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Well said, White Ghost!! Why IKJ why? Calling them a bad name “Absolutists” I dont think so, IKJ… You are in denial yourself.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:04 pm
This letter IKJ wrote a letter showed that he didnt want anyone else runs Gallaudet except for Jane Fernandes ! He wanted Jane passes down his vision . Too bad Jane is NOT the ones runnning for Gallaudet Univ !! The letter is very insulting to deaf community . it hurted us deeply !!! we must move on and heal our deaf community . I am truly believe in Dr Davila will clean up the mess if we can make a good teamwork not divided us !!! Let s Go Gally !! My Understanding is that Gally is in danger of losing the university status … It is all IKJ faults for not opened communication on campus If for open communicated, it would have NOT happened again !!!
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Why is Jordan still intent on misleading the media- very good question.
Does anyone know if the Middle States Association’s exit report is available somewhere? Was it made public, or do only the admin have access?
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:13 pm
IJK just made a, to quote him, “hurtful comment” about our beloved Gallaudet. He sounds like an angry ex-president, who has turned corrupt and committed an act of treachery and disloyalty during his tenure at Gallaudet.
Mishka Zena, please do write a letter to the editor.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I didn’t want to read the rest…..
He is getting away with murder.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Jordan’s Washington Post article coupled with the MSA report makes me wonder just how far Jordan’s reach is?
MSA has scolded protesters for the mess Gallaudet is in now rather than at Jordan. They labeled the protest as “an act of violence” because the free flow of exchange of ideas and communication was oppressed. I had to barf at that…an act of violence??? Please.
Makes me wonder if Jordan has friends on that MSA team that is currently investigating Gallaudet?? Just how far is his reach??
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:38 pm
why did you delete Aaron’s comment?
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 pm
I don’t know, ChrisH – I don’t think it was intentional.
MZ wouldn’t have done it on purpose.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 pm
sorry that I make a mistake. you can delete my #30 comment.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Not having attended Gallaudet nor having been present at the protests, I don’t feel I have too much to comment about his statement, except to note that it was clear to me (though I did have to dig around; kneejerk reactions were too easy in all of this) that the protest was indeed composed of people from a wide variety of backgrounds: hearing, hard of hearing, CI, oral (“late ASL’d as I like to think of it) and so on. So clearly that part of his contention is false and throws the rest of his statement into doubt. It would not be difficult to demonstrate the diversity among the protesters.
It is also clear that there are many entrenched problems at Gallaudet, prior to the protests. These can be independently verified in the various different third party reports on the campus done in previous years.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Oops – delete mine, too (31) – new posts pop up, making Aaron’s post look gone!!!
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Oh, I also meant to say, these are all things that any competent reporter checking around should be able to find and add to their coverage of this event. It continues to annoy me that they do not. What, exactly, are they being paid to DO? Not investigative reporting, that’s for sure.
January 22nd, 2007 at 4:47 pm
MZ – you’re going to need to dig up your old posts on why JKF’s leadership was ineffective due to her performance during the 11 years.
I remember there were a lot of links to letters from parents from Kendall and fac/staff, as well as students.
Apparently those never made it to the media or “deaf newspapers or blogs” as one said.
Jeez. Thanks a lot, IKJ-JKF’s PR.
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:06 pm
Aaron, you are living in ikj’s past if you reply to ikj’s letter. Your letter will make the Post editor LOL! Believe me. It is not worth to argue with his letter at this time. We are breathing new air now. Hopefully, one day the Post reporter Susan Krinze, who wrote many articles about Gally protests, will have an interview with Dr. Davilla, probably asking him what he thinks of ikj’s op-ed letters.
We expect more ikj and jfk letters sent to the Post in the future. Don’t feel anger when you see their letters again. I think Elizabeth and other deaf bloggers should not post their op-ed letters again, or we would discuss same and boring problems about these people. We should ignore these people as nothing has happened to us. It is a time to move on.
If Dr. Davila asks us to, that would be a different story.
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:09 pm
Hello, I am a Gally graduate. I find the op-ed article saddening, misleading and not helpful. As dianrez mentioned above, I am curious about the PART report. Can you elaborate this? Do I understand correctly that PART is critical for performance measurements to meet Federal Government’s requirement according to Clinger-Cohen Act law? Is there any Gallaudet’s PART report available? Was ASL really stated as a major priority in strategic plan as IJK mentioned in op-ed? Was it part of objectives that are supposed to be measured in performance? If so, does anyone know what the performance result in annual reports show so far? Thanks for listening!
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:27 pm
[...] IKJ’s Hidden Audism By Aaron Valentine IKJ’s infamous article can be found at MishkaZena’s “Jordan: Gallaudet Not Inclusive” When I read the whole transcript, there are a lot of contradictions in the article and I will reveal something. [...]
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Greg, I’m not living in IKJ’s past. I’m saying, do something about it such as counter-posting or write article. But I agree with you.
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Jordan is tending to his wounds just like an injured animal would do. Poor Davila having to come in and “clean the house” and get the affairs straightened out but im sure Davila was very enthusaistic about taking this job and doing it right. Davila knows that the whole world is watching him and has to leave Gallaudet with a clean slate when he finishes his presidency. Is that fair to Davila? Im not sure. Why wasnt Jordan exposed when the University posed a high risk with Dept of Education and MSA. Was this the first time it ever happened to Gallaudet?
January 22nd, 2007 at 5:58 pm
Anja,
You can find it at http://pr.gallaudet.edu/dailydigest/?id=10134 for MSA exit report.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:02 pm
#37 Greg,
I disagree that we should ignore the op-ed letters from the likes of ijk because so many hearing people, hearing parents of deaf children are being brainwashed about that we, the geniune Deaf people, doesn’t know what we are talking about,etc. These hearing people need to understand and know the truth.
Another words, ijk and his cronies are putting gasoline on the fire and we are putting it out by speaking up.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Please, I ask all of you, if you DO write a letter: be mature, and focus on facts. Anything less will be disregarded at best, and fodder for our critics at worst. Onward.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:10 pm
Jordan is probably expecting us to write letters as he knows that his letter would have made us upset. Im sure Davila would tell us to move on and forgive (but not forget for what he did) and help make Gallaudet a better place again. We do not want to become divisive again. Would the show that PBS is showing in March help us as it plans to explain about deaf culture? Also maybe we need to change our strategies in order to get hearing people to understand us better and etc instead of attacking at Jordan and JKF as they expect us to do.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Hey everyone, including Mishka Zena, please post your same comment on this site:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/21/AR2007012101118.html
That is the same site of IKJ’s article that everyone is reading so don’t let anyone just read his without all of your comments.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:30 pm
I certainly will write a letter. The majority of the Washington Post readers are clueless that Jordan is misleading them. Keep in mind that among the readers are Congressional people who determine the amount of funding for Gallaudet. We have been losing the media battle since last May. Hopefully Davila will get the silent PR machine up running and roaring again, educating the public Gallaudet HAS ALREADY BEEN INCLUSIVE from the very beginning.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:44 pm
MZ, delete my #13…I made double comments; it was a glitch.
I think deafmommy is right…we should refocus on securing Gallaudet’s accreditation and developing plans for fixing GU’s system. Don’t let Jordan divert our attention. Note that he uses labels and blames the Board of Trustees, while refusing to acknowledge responsibility for his actions. So let’s not imitiate him but move forward and work together proactively. Let’s give Dr. Davila a chance to provide real leadership where it is needed.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:52 pm
MZ,
Re writing letters to the Post I happen to know for fact from growing up in Washington, D.C. during my youth years, many politicians, Congressmen, Senators, and government officials, especially my grandfathers (who both worked for the gov’t), DO read the Post. My grandfathers passed their addiction to me and I got to reading the Post daily when I was at MSSD. I do not know about the current politics of the editors at the Post, but I don’t think it hurts to write a letter anyway. Go ahead and send one…we should, too! I think it’s time the Post listens to another side, folks from the deaf community.
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:55 pm
The truth hurts. The next time there is a illegal protest Gallaudet should be Shut Down.
There are so many other universities cartering to all deaf people that Gallaudet is standing on the gallows pole.
what you all don’t get is that right now you are contributing to Gallaudets demise due to tyoiur own selfish actions.
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Dan McClintock
Did you read the url (Washington Post) above and post anonymous comments.
January 22nd, 2007 at 7:38 pm
MZ,
Great that you agree to write to The Post. I earnestly hope that other faculty members will write, too. It is of utmost importance that The Post readers be informed that Jordan has avoided to mention in his op-ed article that — through the U.S. Department of Education — the White House gave Gallaudet an F grade for the PART for 2000-2005 in November 2005 — the same year when Jordan had announced his retirement. Both The Laurent Clerc Center (MSSD and KDES) and Gallaudet
gave Fernandes poor evaluation every year from
the late 1990s to 2006. The protest was not about “not Deaf enough”; rather, it was
about the ineffective leadership.
I do not want Dr. Davila to respond to Jordan’s op-ed or to accept an interview with The Washington Post regarding Jordan. The umbilical cord between the new Gallaudet administration and Jordan-Fernandes must be completely cut off!
Jean Boutcher
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:04 am
I am shocked …..”The fact is, Gallaudet was founded back in 1864 with the goal of using sign language as the PRIMARY mode of communication for instruction, BECAUSE speech and lipreading were imperfect and difficult to master. The oralists have thousands of other colleges and universities to choose where they can go and use their oral skills. Gallaudet is for those who depend on or prefer sign language. Oralists are welcome there, as I was, but they are expected to learn sign language there in order to communicate with non-oralists!”(Washington Post)
January 23rd, 2007 at 7:08 am
ChrisH – that person didn’t mean to exclude anyone of diverse backgrounds, but still the fact that Gallaudet is a signing campus and has been since 1864.
For example, you see ASLians outside of classes, but not in education/classes, but usually either SEE, PSE, or SimCom.
It should be the other way around – use ASL in classes, not having an ASL interpreters for teachers who don’t know sign language very well.
I thought about this a lot – I actually was going to do a vLog, but I don’t think my signing would be clear enough. I can read ASL with no problem, but my brain is so rigid that it sticks with PSE.
SimCom is used to reinforce speech – and for some people, it’s fine for them, but what does that have to do with learning at Gallaudet where it IS a signing campus?
They can still talk to anyone they want to use using their voice, if they want to while signing.
I was raised using SEE and SimCom – and you can ask a lot of mainstreamed deaf/hoh how they were told about ASL. NOT GOOD!
I was often scolded for not using my voice, that I wouldn’t be as successful in life if I didn’t.
I just did not feel comfortable internally using voice and signing at the same. I never felt natural about it – even YEARS of speech therapy. But I was forced because they believed it was the best thing for me. Including my mother, who only understood at that time, that such sign language was SEE. She fully supports ASL now because she can see how it is a language on it own, though she doesn’t know how to sign it. She regrets it.
I have friends who are oralists and they are fine the way they are, and I do not put them down for not knowing sign language. But some learned sign language later and admitted they were able to understand much more with sign language.
It’s funny that we’re being put down for wanting to use ASL in classes and are called absolutists, but yet no one was there yelling at the teachers for putting down ASL all those years.
Gallaudet is a signing campus, and DOES include everyone of all backgrounds.
What I don’t understand is – if a student wants to access speech in addition to signing, why not get an interpreter voicing the signing teacher, if that student wants to benefit the both of the world?
This way, everyone gets equal access and ASL can be used effectively.
I’m going to steal Selmo’s famous saying:
Just my opinion and I could be wrong.
January 23rd, 2007 at 7:40 pm
I still wait for Dr. Davila’s word’s coming out. He is the priority to say. Watch out of his words when he announces in his speech.
January 24th, 2007 at 9:36 am
To ChrisH #54, that’s true Gallaudet was founded in 1864.
A lot of things have changed since then if you haven’t noticed.
Because some deaf people want to use whatever tools they are offered to get in thier world should not be an open invitation for deaf culturists to ridicule them.
As much as any of you want to deny it that is what is being cast out to the world during the recent protest.
Cancer patients have been given greater chances at living due to medical science discoveries. Deaf people who choose to use the medical community or other forms of communication to better thier quality of life should be welcomed and not shunned.
IKJ has only stated what is happening in the purist terms which may be hard for some of you to swallow or admit.
I suggest you put you raw emotions aside and get honest with yourselves!
January 24th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Pamela, many deaf people, including those wearing hearing aids and cochlear implants,not only attended Gallaudet, but also participated in the protest. Deaf identity was used as a red herring to distract the media and the public from the real issues.
January 24th, 2007 at 10:47 am
That’s correct, MZ.
Pamela, I am a CI user and there are also others like me, as well as different backgrounds of deaf/hoh people involved and supported the protest.
This is being blown out of proportion….
January 24th, 2007 at 12:05 pm
Iam, Jordan wanted the community divided and fighting each other, so he threw a red herring. He knew he and Fernandes would garnish more support if they appears to be a ‘victim’ of deaf identity politics, but it was never an issue as Gallaudet had always accepted students of different communication backgrounds from the beginning.
January 25th, 2007 at 10:07 pm
it is too bad that ljk outlashes galladuet university in the washington post. i am currently from edmonton, alberta. i went to kendall when i was a small girl with my mom attending bachelor degree at gallaudet.. when ijk was president.. all over the world look him up.. and it s a shame how low he can get to now.. he is putting himself on the spot from time to time… it is his own fault.. it is our duty as a former student, alumni, current student, and espically friends in deaf community have to prove to the u.s govt and the world that gallaudet university is the best for deafies to do their studies and follow our dreams to what we want to be… dr. davila i remember standing next to him i thought he was awesome.. cutting the ribbon for the kendall back in 1980. IT SURE WAS NICE TO SEE HIM AS A INTERIM PRESIDENT. HE IS THE RIGHT PERSON TO CLEAN UP THE MESS THAT IJK LEFT AND GUIDE THE UNIVERSITY INTO A WONDERFUL UNIVERSITY FOR EVERYONE WITH A HEARING LOSS.. NO MATTER HOW DEAF YOU ARE.. PROVIDING THE NEEDS TO EACH STUDENTS… WITH A OPEN COMMUNICATION!!!!!!!!!!!!
January 26th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
Since just about everything else about Jordan’s op-ed -as well as any other aspect of him and his gal- has already been touched on and hit on, so many times… I’d like to focus briefly on this matter of the MSA “warning”
As Jordan himself states in his article:
“A visiting team from the Middle States Association’s Commission on Higher Education made clear in its exit report to the campus community this month that closing a university and denying the free exchange of ideas is not an acceptable expression of disagreement. If this were to occur again, it stated, there would be “dire consequences†from Middle States with respect to the university’s accreditation.”
dire –adjective, dir·er, dir·est.
1. causing or involving great fear or suffering; dreadful; terrible
2. indicating trouble, disaster, misfortune, or the like
3. urgent; desperate
[Origin: 1560–70;
January 26th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
(Half of post somehow got cut off. Here is second half of it!)
Now, first off, “dire consequences” means what? -That any and all protesters get life in prison? That if one person dares to speak up, the MSA will swoop down on Gally with bulldozers and level the land for parking lot? -That accreditation will be taken away permanently, never to be restored? No, no, and no again. It only means they would have to seriously look into everything, and decide their next course of action. They do NOT say that immediate and permanent loss of all accreditation would automatically occur. That is what Jordan would like all to believe. It’s a gun held to your head. “Behave now or the world ends”!
But one thing being missed or forgotten here. If there should have to be yet another protest, lockdown, or lunchroom boycott… does it not matter WHY? Like the DPN shutdown, there was a reason for this. And if it needs to happen again, there would be a true and dire need for it. If people want to dish out warnings of “dire consequences,” remember that it’s dire circumstances which created a dire need, to defeat a dire mistake by a dire tyrant. I get the impression “dire” is yet another word being tossed around in the PR spins, to strike fear into the masses. “Anything YOU do will now have dire consequences!” But what about actions of the BoT and Jordan stooges that could still force more action? I do not advocate further lockdowns, sitdowns, or any other types of “strike,” but perhaps if it did come to it, then “dire consequences” may be just the “armageddon” needed to bring about total change?
Remember, when T.H. Gallaudet could not get the help he needed from the Braidwoods, he went to France and got even better help from Clerc, Sicard, and their people. Perhaps, faced with the loss of MSA accreditation, Gallaudet would strike out to new frontiers, with a totally new agenda, new leaders, and new accreditation…?
January 26th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
Dan McClintock,
FYI, the Washington Post readership have been dramatically plummetted unlike the past readership of pre-late 90s, because of the Internet access to wide array of news.
We have to write out our responses in very public ways – various media mediums.
Sadly, the Washington Post newspaper have been through the real change within the different Graham, Kathleen Graham’s son.
If Kathleen Graham is still alive. She would not let the IKJ’s Op-Ed article running her fingers til the balance of opposition’s viewpoint to rebutt IKJ’s claims.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
January 31st, 2007 at 3:33 pm
IJK has “Avoidant Personality Disorder.” It is very obvious in what he had done, and stated. Very defensive, too. When one is guilty, one tends to be too defensive. Think about that.
Vonne Gulak.