I was thinking the same thing, Thomas. She's not a friend, exactly -- she is someone I know and who interviewed me for a job. She's very private and I wouldn't want to overstep.
From what I've seen, the feather-ruffling on Fernandes' part was not just audacity in the sense of doing things that are good for the university and heck with the people who don't agree; it was more towards not delivering on promises. As in, her style is/ was a problem, but there seem to be problems with her actual skills as an administrator that I haven't really seen addressed in the media coverage of this.
That all coalesces into a picture of someone who is [insert sign here: the sign for "hearing", which is a finger rotating in front of the lips, placed instead in front of the forehead, which means "someone who thinks like a hearing person even if he/she is deaf."]
Hey, should I apply for the job? (KIDDING.)
More stuff in my in-box today... ugh. This is just SO bad for the Deaf community.
Have you seen them addressed elsewhere on the web? From the links people have posted here so far, I gather that the students' beef is mostly with the process, not so much with the persons involved. Of course, this could be an oversight on my part.
To me this sounds comparable to "acting white" in the Black community or the word "Jecke" that some Israelis disparagingly use for Jews of German descent. Are the implications similar? If so, this would increase my sympathy for her. The Republic of scholars is emphatically a meritocracy, not a democracy. I find it counterproductive and demeaning when its members with the least demonstrated merit make competent administrators jump through hoops to 'prove' they're 'one of us'.
I may not be representative. But for what it's worth, speaking as someone whose gut reaction is antipathy for the protests, my thoughts are "yet another bunch of overzealous student activists", as opposed to "these Deaf people just can't get their act together now can they?"
Open Letter to the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees, Administration, Campus and External Community on the Gallaudet Presidential Announcement
May 3, 2006
To refer others to the NAD webpage with this letter, please use:
http://www.nad.org/GallaudetOpenLetter3
On Monday May 1, 2006, the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees Interim Chair Celia May Baldwin announced its selection of Provost Jane K. Fernandes as its 9th president. The announcement (see http://pr.gallaudet.edu/presidentialsearch/?ID=8658) quoted Baldwin as saying: "Jane has a deep understanding of how this university works, having served in senior leadership positions here for more than a decade." That same afternoon, Gallaudet students protested the decision. Faculty and staff concerns are also surfacing. The NAD has all along been communicating with students, faculty, staff, and alumni - and others having a vested interest in Gallaudet University. We stand with these concerned stakeholders, who sincerely believe that they are not being respected nor heard.
Last October, the NAD Board of Directors wrote an Open Letter to the Gallaudet Board of Trustees (see http://www.nad.org/GallaudetPresidentOpenLtr). In that letter, the NAD Board noted the long-standing and positive relationship between the NAD and Gallaudet. The letter continued by articulating priorities and principles important to the NAD. Among those were that Gallaudet's next president be an individual who can sustain Gallaudet's historic role as a "beacon of hope for all deaf citizens in the world" and who has "a deep understanding of the challenges faced by deaf people every day in this country and worldwide". The Open Letter added that "the next president must also be a visionary in promoting academic excellence, as well as committed to diversity in hiring and promoting qualified deaf administrators, faculty, and staff members".
The NAD also brought together, in a December 2005 a round table with four individuals who represent different segments of our large and diverse community (see http://www.nad.org/gallaudetroundtable ) who expressed their hopes and expectations for Gallaudet.
Last month, the NAD wrote a second Open Letter (see http://www.nad.org/GallaudetOpenletter2). In that communication, which was addressed to the Gallaudet University Search Committee, Board of Trustees, campus community and the larger deaf and hard of hearing community, the NAD noted the fact that all three finalists were deaf individuals with records of distinction. This second letter referenced the role of the NAD in advocating for a deaf president even before and during the historic Deaf President Now events of 18 years ago (http://www.nad.org/NAD-DPN). The NAD urged the Trustees to appoint as the next president, a person "able to unite the community behind a common vision and inspire individuals and groups both on and off campus to reach for a noble cause bigger than any single person or issue." Further, the NAD urged stakeholders to closely scrutinize each candidate according to the Presidential qualifications and expectations as outlined by the search committee?-and to communicate their expectations and views to the committee and the Trustees.
We recognize the tremendous level of unrest this week on and off campus. We believe that current furor is fueled by disconnect between the stated goals of the University and the actions of the administration. Specifically, we are troubled by growing evidence that the final decision by the Board of Trustees may not reflect deeply felt values of students, faculty, alumni, and other community stakeholders - values arising from Gallaudet's unique place in our community and articulated in our previous open letters, as well as in the Presidential Agenda outlined by the Trustees (see http://pr.gallaudet.edu/presidentalsearch/?ID=8140). Tumultuous and rapidly spreading undercurrents among the students and the campus community also seem to be influenced by ongoing issues related to a lack of diversity within campus, distrust of the current administration, perceived low academic expectations, and poor community morale. Progress is also being restrained by the twin chains of bigotry - audism and racism - which deserve attention and action.
We also recognize the unique role of a University community in promoting freedom of speech, respect for diversity, support for vigorous debate, and tolerance for the exercising of civility in response to dissent and strongly expressed discourse. At this time, discussion is warranted and should be not only tolerated, but encouraged. The current unrest reflects the deeply felt values assigned to Gallaudet by students, faculty, staff, alumni and other community stakeholders, values the NAD and others in the national and worldwide community of deaf and hard of hearing people also hold dear. Gallaudet acknowledged, and expressed commitment to such values in the announcement of the search. There, the University stated that it was eager to identify a president with the abilities to "ensure full access and open communication throughout the University." The Trustees also set as a qualification the ability to "lead the entire Gallaudet community and its students (K-12 and college level) through times of crisis and challenge."
Accordingly, the NAD calls upon the Gallaudet University Board of Trustees, President I. King Jordan, and Provost Jane K. Fernandes to take corrective action with courage and wisdom to resolve in a positive manner the growing discord, divisiveness and disconnect on and off campus. Such decisive action would begin the healing process and enable all involved to move forward. The current leadership must move expeditiously to "unite the community behind a common vision and inspire individuals and groups both on and off campus to reach for a noble cause bigger than any single person or issue."
Members of the NAD and its supporters are deeply concerned that if this crisis is not resolved immediately and decisively by Gallaudet University, there would be increased risk for long term and permanent impact in the areas of recruitment, enrollment and financial giving.
The NAD is determined to stand firm for the cherished values of our community and for the well-being of the world's only liberal arts university for deaf and hard of hearing people. This is precisely why the NAD stands with Gallaudet students and the entire community in retaining the true greatness of Gallaudet University and the hope it represents to the nation and the world.
Sincerely,
Andrew J. Lange
President
National Association of the Deaf
We want a president who can address critical issues
at Gallaudet, from low academic expectations to poor community morale, in which Jane Fernandes during her 6-year tenure as Provost has demonstrated an inability to make significant progress. She has created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation among the faculty and never followed through with her promised implementation of the Audism Mandates, failing to recognize deaf and hard-of-hearing students' communication rights.
I would like to share the cause and effect issues here with you.
1. The Provost was appointed without communicating with the Gallaudet faculty members due to lack of the person oriented approach. Are we happy?
2. She has axed many good people except for the person who abused physically three different students at the Pre-college Program because of the political favoritism. Why could not she comply with the DC laws and the Gallaudet policy?
3. She had destroyed everything especially the staff and teachers' hard work on curriculum and extra-curriculum programs which were supported and spent by Gallaudet University at the Pre-college program without communicating or discussing. As a result the enrollment of students was disastrously declined. Did her power and politics hurt our spirit and morale?
Please let me ask youÂ…."How can she repair these previous problems by transferring from the negative environment to the positive environment? Doubtlessly Jane F. will be incapable of dealing with the issues due to her lack of person oriented skills and art of motivation and leadership. Gallaudet University could be a disaster if she is appointed as the President of Gallaudet University.
I recently had a conversation with someone who indicated that "there is a lot of hostility towards Dr. Fernandes, but can you tell me what exactly it is about her that people don't find appealing in terms of leadership?" I sure can. I can explain to you why I wouldn't embrace her leadership. Here is my story?-I hope others come forward and share theirs, too. Back when I was a student, there were some discussions regarding the closure of the department of Television, Film, and Photography. (Or, to be more accurate, the merging of photography with digital media?-which would cut out "film" as a major). The reason given for this was that there were not enough majors?-and students from that department were upset. After some investigation, it was revealed that there were, in fact, 7 majors?-not all of whom would be graduating that upcoming May. Because we were disappointed by the lack of willingness on Karen Kimmel's behalf to openly listen to our concerns (that visual media is the future of this University and the signing community)?-we decided to request a meeting with Dr. Fernandes. We were expecting the opportunity to share our concerns with her and hoped that she would investigate the matter. When we arrived at the meeting, we were greeted by both Dr. Fernandes and Karen Kimmel. We were, needless to say, taken aback by the presence of the associate dean?-it left us feeling as though we did not have the space to openly express our frustrations. In hindsight, her presence shouldn't matter all that much given the fact that our concerns were not going to change with or without Kimmel in the room. But as students, we were terrified by the two stiff-faced presences that sat before us. Dr. Fernandes proceeded to explain that Kimmel had been invited because (to vaguely quote her) "I do not know much about this situation). During the meeting, one of the students started to explain what his concerns were. He was cut off several times by Dr. Fernandes. After the second or third time of being cut off, the student stated that he was not finished explaining his concern. Dr. Fernandes looked at him and very firmly (and with all the color drained from her face) stated that "we are having a conversation here. If you cannot have a conversation, this discussion is over." She then started to attack another student in the room. Her comment to that student (who was taking notes) was "This meeting is confidential," to which the student responded, "We never agreed that this meeting would be confidential." The provost's response in kind was "We never agreed it wouldn't be." She also went on to say, "If you spread information about this meeting, I will take action." Her face was unfriendly, angry, and her demeanor stiff. And beyond being hurt by her approach (one of the participants was so distraught that she left the meeting and went to a professor in her department in tears) we were beyond shocked. What, we wondered, did we do that made her so angry? At the end of the meeting (which was very brief), Dr. Fernandes looked at us and said something to the extent of, "If you came here thinking that I would overturn Kimmel's decision, you were wrong. I support her decision." I want the leader of this school to be approachable, charismatic, and friendly. But beyond that, it is so important to me that we have a leader who will listen openly to concerns and if not investigate the matter thoroughly, will leave the impression that ones concern is important to him or her. I am horrified at the possibility of how many people outside of the university she will turn off with such an approach.
Back when I was a student, there were some discussions regarding the closure of the department of Television, Film, and Photography. (Or, to be more accurate, the merging of photography with digital media?-which would cut out "film" as a major). The reason given for this was that there were not enough majors?-and students from that department were upset. After some investigation, it was revealed that there were, in fact, 7 majors?-not all of whom would be graduating that upcoming May.
Because we were disappointed by the lack of willingness on Karen Kimmel's behalf to openly listen to our concerns (that visual media is the future of this University and the signing community)?-
we decided to request a meeting with Dr. Fernandes. We were expecting the opportunity to share our concerns with her and hoped that she would investigate the matter.
When we arrived at the meeting, we were greeted by both Dr. Fernandes and Karen Kimmel. We were, needless to say, taken aback by the presence of the associate dean?-it left us feeling as though we did not have the space to openly express our frustrations.
In hindsight, her presence shouldn't matter all that much given the fact that our concerns were not going to change with or without Kimmel in the room. But as students, we were terrified by the two stiff-faced presences that sat before us.
Dr. Fernandes proceeded to explain that Kimmel had been invited because (to vaguely quote her) "I do not know much about this situation).
During the meeting, one of the students started to explain what his concerns were. He was cut off several times by Dr. Fernandes. After the second or third time of being cut off, the student stated that he was not finished explaining his concern.
Dr. Fernandes looked at him and very firmly (and with all the color drained from her face)
stated that "we are having a conversation here. If you cannot have a conversation, this discussion is over."
She then started to attack another student in the room. Her comment to that student (who was taking notes) was "This meeting is confidential," to which the student responded, "We never agreed that this meeting would be confidential." The provost's response in kind was "We never agreed it wouldn't be." She also went on to say, "If you spread information about this meeting, I will take action." Her face was unfriendly, angry, and her demeanor stiff.
And beyond being hurt by her approach (one of the participants was so distraught that she left the meeting and went to a professor in her department in tears) we were beyond shocked.
What, we wondered, did we do that made her so angry?
At the end of the meeting (which was very brief), Dr. Fernandes looked at us and said something to the extent of, "If you came here thinking that I would overturn Kimmel's decision, you were wrong. I support her decision."
I want the leader of this school to be approachable, charismatic, and friendly.
But beyond that, it is so important to me that we have a leader who will listen openly to concerns and if not investigate the matter thoroughly
After some investigation, it was revealed that there were, in fact, 7 majors?-not all of whom would be graduating that upcoming May.
More stuff in my in-box today... ugh. This is just SO bad for the Deaf community. Evidently there was a vote of no-confidence from the faculty. Dunno if that will do anything.
Quote:Faculty members then went on to vote 77 to 68 to ask Fernandes to step aside and 85 to 58 to call for the search to be reopened, with no reprisals against anti-Fernandes protesters on the Northeast Washington campus.
There is also a petition circulating:
Quote:2. No reprisals for students, staff, faculty and alumni.
But what of Gallaudet's identity? Jane described a vast array of views - should Gallaudet serve honor students? Or developmental students? ASL? Cochlear implants? Students of color? Non-signing students? There's a lot of mixed views of what exactly defines Gallaudet. "An inclusive deaf university of academic excellence," she said. That's what it's all about, people. Academics. You're not at school to make friends or participate in deaf-rights rallies. You're there to learn. This is a very important message I'm saying here. Gallaudet University is not the Washington, D.C. Deaf Club. Anybody who disagrees with that is probably going to have a problem with the Provost.
Total student population at Gallaudet: 1,900.)
Oooh, lots of good stuff on that blog, I encourage people who are interested in this to look around.
it is the way she dictated the persons in private ?- with plenty of vitrolic threats, acidic remarks and so on.
For the last 5 to 8 years, what did she really do? She steered ASL to the curb and open the wide access for others to fill in ?- thus lessened the true identity of Deaf persons.
I would love to meet Ron Stern someday and shake his hands to get the vibes from him whether he is really the right person to lead the Gallaudet University or not.
Second of all, how can we trust her to "walk the walk"? [..] it's hard to believe she has the sincerity, passion, or people skills to act in true alliance with the Gallaudet community. [..] She does not have the mutual trust and respect needed to succeed in that role. [..] we cannot ignore that the overwhelmingly negative vibes that result from interacting with her [..] please don't forget the deeply divisive rift in the Gallaudet community that seems to follow her wherever she goes. Whether intentionally or due to genuine social and communicative ineptitude, Fernandes is the wrong individual [..]. She simply does not have the requisite people skills.
