Your post is making me ponder, so that's good. I am in total agreement with you about the anti-Fernandes bashing, it does not reflect well on us. There's a difference between saying one doesn't like JK because of her personality and going into a public dissertation of what she did to someone or creating some immature anti-Fernades cheerleading soundbites that I see on gallypreswatch.com. I agree a lot of recent comments in the blog are deteriorating in substance. My name even came up there as "K.Merriweather = Out, Dr. Anderson = already OUT, Ron Sternes = IN", just because I don't agree with their preference of candidate. I could only laugh!
I am sure you already know I'm firmly against having Stern or anyone else, regardless of race, who does not presently meet the minimal qualifications, including possession of a doctorate degree to be considered as a viable candidate. The fact that many people in the deaf community are willing to bend the widely-accepted rules for one man- by playing semantics with the word "will" (possess), by downplaying the importance of the degree "PhD does not guarantee leadership skills anyway", and by ignoring the fact that PSC has allowed someone who does not meet at least 2 minimal to advance to this far...does not reflect well of us as members of the Gallaudet community. Equally troubling is that while the community has no problem of conceptualizing scenarios of how audism could play a part in decision-making, they have shown same level of UNwillingness to accept that racism in the form of white privilege could play a part as well! Instead of asking that the possibility of racism needs to be looked at carefully in order to be ruled out or addrssed... I keep seeing attempts to deflect, deny, distract...that does not reflect well of Gallaudet community either. Like you, I am not in favor of rushing the process just to have a President before school ends for the summer. Rushing this process already fraught with questionable and unaddressed problems could potentially cause distrust and friction for a long time.
Your post is making me ponder, so that's good. I am in total agreement with you about the anti-Fernandes bashing, it does not reflect well on us. There's a difference between saying one doesn't like JK because of her personality and going into a public dissertation of what she did to someone or creating some immature anti-Fernades cheerleading soundbites that I see on gallypreswatch.com. I agree a lot of recent comments in the blog are deteriorating in substance. My name even came up there as "K.Merriweather = Out, Dr. Anderson = already OUT, Ron Sternes = IN", just because I don't agree with their preference of candidate. I could only laugh!
I am sure you already know I'm firmly against having Stern or anyone else, regardless of race, who does not presently meet the minimal qualifications, including possession of a doctorate degree to be considered as a viable candidate. The fact that many people in the deaf community are willing to bend the widely-accepted rules for one man- by playing semantics with the word "will" (possess), by downplaying the importance of the degree "PhD does not guarantee leadership skills anyway", and by ignoring the fact that PSC has allowed someone who does not meet at least 2 minimal to advance to this far...does not reflect well of us as members of the Gallaudet community. Equally troubling is that while the community has no problem of conceptualizing scenarios of how audism could play a part in decision-making, they have shown same level of UNwillingness to accept that racism in the form of white privilege could play a part as well! Instead of asking that the possibility of racism needs to be looked at carefully in order to be ruled out or addrssed... I keep seeing attempts to deflect, deny, distract...that does not reflect well of Gallaudet community either. Like you, I am not in favor of rushing the process just to have a President before school ends for the summer. Rushing this process already fraught with questionable and unaddressed problems could potentially cause distrust and friction for a long time.
Hello, Kristi! Thanks for stopping by. I always welcome comments, of course. *heh*
That said, my views have gradually changed since. I still am not in favor of any of the three candidates for the reasons I already enumerated. Ron Stern's lack of a terminal degree and experience in higher education troubles me still, so we're in agreement on that.
But I am less inclined now to urge the PSC and the Board to rescind the present process and re-start again. I'm beginning to think the least disruptive path may well be letting the search conclude, and then dealing with the aftermath. There definitely needs to be some examination of current search protocols, and some revisions made for the future.
However, I do not see racism as a factor in the process, and I think those that are insinuating racism as a reason why Dr. Anderson was not in the final group of candidates are reading way too much into the whole matter. I get the feeling that some individuals would not be satisfied with anything less than the installment of Dr. Anderson as president, and may very well cry "racism!" for anything that falls short of this goal.
That does not mean that I am against a discussion of racism, nor does it mean that I feel that racism is not a problem in our society. What it does mean is that I want the best candidate for the job of President of Gallaudet, not necessarily the most "PC" candidate or the most "Deaf-friendly" candidate. You want to be pro-Deaf and advocate for the Deaf community? Go fight for Nancy Bloch's job. You want to fight the good fight over race and social policy? Run for office or lead a non-profit and advocate, advocate, advocate. This present debate and discussion is about leading a university (albeit for deaf/Deaf students), which is in the world of academia. That's currently where I stand.
Last but not least, thanks for a thoughtful comment!
Hello, Kristi! Thanks for stopping by. I always welcome comments, of course. *heh*
That said, my views have gradually changed since. I still am not in favor of any of the three candidates for the reasons I already enumerated. Ron Stern's lack of a terminal degree and experience in higher education troubles me still, so we're in agreement on that.
But I am less inclined now to urge the PSC and the Board to rescind the present process and re-start again. I'm beginning to think the least disruptive path may well be letting the search conclude, and then dealing with the aftermath. There definitely needs to be some examination of current search protocols, and some revisions made for the future.
However, I do not see racism as a factor in the process, and I think those that are insinuating racism as a reason why Dr. Anderson was not in the final group of candidates are reading way too much into the whole matter. I get the feeling that some individuals would not be satisfied with anything less than the installment of Dr. Anderson as president, and may very well cry "racism!" for anything that falls short of this goal.
That does not mean that I am against a discussion of racism, nor does it mean that I feel that racism is not a problem in our society. What it does mean is that I want the best candidate for the job of President of Gallaudet, not necessarily the most "PC" candidate or the most "Deaf-friendly" candidate. You want to be pro-Deaf and advocate for the Deaf community? Go fight for Nancy Bloch's job. You want to fight the good fight over race and social policy? Run for office or lead a non-profit and advocate, advocate, advocate. This present debate and discussion is about leading a university (albeit for deaf/Deaf students), which is in the world of academia. That's currently where I stand.
Last but not least, thanks for a thoughtful comment!
This is the most balanced assessment of the GU Presidential search process I have read. I strongly agree with the sentiments expressed that a selection of Fernandes would polarize the community and that it is unthinkable that the committee would chose someone to be the President of a University without a terminal degree. And it makes positively no sense why two indviduals with terminal degrees and higher education administration experience were eliminated in favor of Stern. At this point, the process has lost its integrity, should be scrapped and start over.
This is the most balanced assessment of the GU Presidential search process I have read. I strongly agree with the sentiments expressed that a selection of Fernandes would polarize the community and that it is unthinkable that the committee would chose someone to be the President of a University without a terminal degree. And it makes positively no sense why two indviduals with terminal degrees and higher education administration experience were eliminated in favor of Stern. At this point, the process has lost its integrity, should be scrapped and start over.
Commenting by HaloScan
