Deaf Schools United

Timeline set to find new leader for deaf school

BY RUTH LIAO
Statesman Journal

January 30, 2007

State officials hope to appoint a new director for the Oregon School for the Deaf by next school year and announced a timeline for the recruiting process Monday.

State education officials acknowledge the timeline is a time crunch and that a number of residential deaf schools nationally are currently seeking administrators as well.

“The pool is very limited,” said Jay Gense, the interim director of special schools, who is overseeing the recruitment. “People who are interested in those kinds of positions will have some choices. We’ll have to demonstrate and highlight the qualities of Oregon School for the Deaf and Oregon.”

Former director Jane Mulholland was dismissed Dec. 28.

Gense said he has already contacted various interest groups to make up a steering committee of 14 representatives.

Deaf advocate Rob Bartell said he hopes at least half of the steering committee will be made up of those who are deaf or hearing impaired, in order to ensure sensitivity to deaf culture. Bartell is a representative of the Oregon Deaf Coalition, an organization created in reaction to Mulholland’s dismissal.

Blogger note: - check this for reference
timelines

State must be open about deaf-school issues

Reports of policy violations raise additional questions

January 30, 2007

Parents, graduates and other supporters of the Oregon School for the Deaf still are waiting for a good explanation for why director Jane Mulholland was dismissed last month.

A story in Saturday’s Statesman Journal traced five incidents of policy violations or inappropriate teacher-student relations that occurred after 1999, when Mulholland took charge at the school.

Are these the reason that Mulholland was fired? Deputy Education Superintendent Ed Dennis should say.

Each incident was dealt with at the time. The teachers were penalized. However, such reports should raise red flags, given heightened concerns regarding the grooming behavior that can precede sexual abuse.

Authorities should be doubly vigilant at the school for the deaf, where some students live in dorms and all students face challenges in communicating. Both the school and the Department of Education, which oversees it, bear great responsibility for safeguarding children in the state’s care.

If these incidents were the reason for Mulholland’s dismissal, another serious question arises: What did the Department of Education do to help her improve conditions at the school?

Mulholland says she put safety measures in place and conducted regular training about sexual-abuse reporting. If this wasn’t adequate, there’s no indication of coaching or improvement plans in her personnel file.

The Department of Education was concerned enough about the school’s safety measures to ask the Department of Justice to investigate in 2005. But the education department pulled the plug when the study grew more complicated, and therefore more expensive, Dennis said late Monday.

Perhaps the findings would have helped the deaf school avoid two staff/student incidents that occurred the following year. Perhaps the findings would have bolstered the state’s case for firing Mulholland. We’ll never know.

Dennis promises a more rigorous audit, covering both the deaf and blind schools, by late summer. That will help the schools but not Mulholland.

The state maintains that it doesn’t have to tell the public anything; as an “at-will” employee, Mulholland simply can be fired.

We don’t buy it. The state owes the public some answers.

(the below comments are going out to the Governor, Legislators, ODE and newspapers) Instead of reading the Sunday newspaper I spent the morning rereading over all the things I have received this week concerning the OSD/ODE events.

Newspaper: Statesman Journal-Ruth Liao.
She says “six incidents of inappropriate sexual conduct” This is using the wrong wording here and painting a wrong picture. There is only one “inappropriate sexual conduct” in these reports and that incident happened before Jane Mulholland ever became Director at OSD. Once she was Director she worked with the investigation and law enforcement people. The other 4 incidents are not “inappropriate sexual conduct” Those 5 incidents are more of “staff not following procedures”. You can talk yourself “blue” in the face and give your staff all the needed training/instructions and there will always be some who just do not follow it. The one incident of a student being taken off campus was both the parents and the staff errors and the 16 year old student was sentenced for her crime, but the charge was kidnapping not “sex abuse” and to top that off the “sexual conduct” did not occur on the OSD campus.

Susan Castillo says “ new procedures would be put in place at OSD for more staff-wide training to increase student safety”. Jane Mulholland has done her best over the years to have staff-wide training, but ODE failed her by not giving her the support that she needed to make the training better. Then again she can talk herself “blue” in the face and still there are some staff that just don’t get it. That is human nature in this world.

A school-resource officer at OSD? If this officer knows ASL fine but if he has to use an interpreter then students will probably not even want to talk to him. As I have said many, many times in the past “Deaf people do not trust “ hearing people” unless they have earned “our” trust first.

“Management consultant will be hired to report on leadership needs of the school and focus on staff training recommendations”?? Here again ODE is the one who has failed Jane Mulholland in the past. Two such studies were started and never completed. One such study was completed but when Jane Mulholland asked for the report, ODE never gave it to her. So our tax dollars are going down the drain on consultants that never produce results or are not passed on to the right people. This in the end results in the dismissal of the school Director just so ODE can cover up THEIR mistakes. Now turn around and waste more tax dollars on a consultant to do the very same studies that 3 other consultants did????

Salem Monthly Newspaper-Cliff Boyer
“Several of the incidents at the Deaf school that are now being reported involve “boundary” issues and I’m wondering if perceptions of personal boundaries are any different in the deaf community? Do deaf people have a different sense of “boundaries”? Would deaf people interpret some of the behavior as acceptable?” My response to the above questions are: YES In the “hearing” world your “tone” of voice is what sets your “boundaries”. In the “Deaf” world your “body language and facial expression” is what sets our “boundaries”. Also physical contact is a normal thing in the “Deaf” world only because we can not hear when wanting ones attention. OSD is a “home away from home”. How the staff acts towards each child’s needs should be no different than how you would act towards that child in your own home. If a child wants a hug or just to set on your lap and “snuggle” or whatever the child wants; that child should be accommodated. To consider this “inappropriate behavior” by a staff member is telling the child “I don’t care about you”. If ODE considers this the proper way for the OSD staff to act with children, then so be it and the State of Oregon will pay very dearly for it in the long run in support services to these individuals in a variety of ways (mental health, living expenses, prisons, etc). There are no services in the State of Oregon for Deaf and Hard of Hearing adults.

Process & Timelines for Recruiting for the Director of the Oregon School for the Deaf: Jay Gense
In the list of groups in this one there is one big omission: Oregon School for the Deaf Alumni Association. This organization is the largest “stakeholder” of Oregon School for the Deaf. All the others are minor stakeholders. It is the normal procedures in all Deaf Schools in the United States that the group that helps find a new Director for a Deaf School is made up of at least or more than 51% of Deaf individuals on the group. Looking at the list of the groups in this list, I personally feel that only 2 or 3 Deaf individuals will be on this group of 13. This is unacceptable to the Deaf Community of Oregon. At the present time there are 10 other Deaf Schools in the Untied States that are looking for a new Director. Given what has transpired recently in Oregon, I see no way that any person in their right mind would want to apply for a job as the Director of Oregon School for the Deaf. The pay is too low (Dennis says he can fix that but it is DAS that can fix it not him and DAS has its own rules). The attitude and non-support at ODE is a turn off to anyone who even looks at the job.

The funny part in reading all the past happenings there is one thing that strikes me as being “funny”. Ed Dennis keeps saying “hire a stronger manager”. He never says “stronger manager/educator”. This makes me think he is only focusing on the “manger” (My background and experience are in management, leadership development and community organizing) with no consideration for “education”. Maybe he has one of his “political” pals lined up to take over as Director of OSD?

So my conclusion to all of the above is: ODE is not telling use the truth (they sure know how to put up smoke screens) and they have a plan already in place to take OSD in a “different direction” and it is the direction that none of us in the Deaf community or parents/teachers want to go.

So folks lets keep up our pickets, letters/emails and person contacts with Legislators and other higher up people than those at ODE. Our goal is to get Jane Mulholland back into her office (Dennis says “this in not an option”, but it is the only option that we the stakeholders and Deaf Community have, there is no other person better in the whole USA for this job.)

Second goal is to set up a “School Board” for OSD and if OSB wants one too we can help them do it.

Third is to make this a “Parents Rights” state (I am working on getting legislation for both the school board and parent’s rights.)

The fourth things is to get all interpreters in the mainstreaming programs “certified” . (This was put into law in 2005 by the legislators and ODE is now working on getting the certification program in place. I am hopeful that all the interpreters in the mainstreaming programs are certified by this coming fall.) Will be fun seeing how many mainstreaming interpreters can pass this test (I sure hope ODE is not watering down this test) and how many interpreters the mainstreaming programs can find out there to fill positions.

George Scheler