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.