I’m in the rearguard here, but better late than never, I suppose. By now, the majority of you know that the Interim President Selection Advisory Committee (IPSAC), headed by Dr. Jane Dillehay, submitted its recommendations to the Board, and the BoT has announced the three finalists for the (most likely thankless!) job of Interim President at Gallaudet University. As most of you know, they are Dr. Robert Davila (Letter of Intent, CV); Dr. William Marshall (Letter of Intent, CV); and Dr. Steve Weiner (Letter of Intent, CV).
Since the initial announcement, quite a few deaf bloggers have commented on these three men. BiblioMarket comments briefly, and announces his support for Davila; Bionic Ear also made a short statement, but is rather noncommittal. Elizabeth over at Mishka Zena also likes Davila, while Carl Schroeder at Kalakau’s Corner limits his commentary to a criticism of Dr. Marshall’s ASL skills. Finally, Ridor over at RidorLIVE, who always has something to say, initially came out as against Davila, but has subsequently admitted he’d be okay with either Davila or Weiner.

I, on the other hand, do not have any strong feelings for or against any of the three, and while it’s interesting to see where people stand, I think playing this game isn’t in the best interests of Gallaudet or the community. This is, as Jamie Berke at About.com says, the “ultimate deaf temp job.” The last man left standing after this weekend has the job for, at best, two years. The job itself is already a tough one– being a college/university president is stressful, and for this particular slot is going to be even more so, what with heightened campus and community expectations, as well as a far more intense-than-usual media spotlight. My sympathies to whoever elects to occupy College Hall come January 1. The fact that quite a few people chose to throw their hats in the ring is a good sign; there’s still interest in leading Gallaudet, and hopefully, there’ll be a healthy pool of applicants for the permanent presidency when the time comes. Glancing over the comments in various forums, I found myself agreeing with Neil and his comments over at Ridor’s domain. Neil says in part,

…is it a requirement that next president wear their “D”eafness on their sleeve? This is a dangerous question. We got rid of JKF because she was an example of who a leader should not be (deaf or hearing) while rejecting her assessment that she wasn’t “Deaf Enough.” Dr. Davila has the background of someone who SHOULD have been picked as Prez the first time around. If the FSSA rejects him because of any number of reasons Ridor mentioned, what does that say about the group’s rejection of the “Not Deaf Enough” card?

I agree– the battle over Fernandes should never have been one questioning her credentials as a member of the community. It was extremely unfortunate that public perception (and within the community as well to some extent) focused narrowly on whether her bona fides as a deaf person were established. This is what disheartened me a little about Carl Schroeder’s comments: we can’t afford to revisit this dangerous path again, even if a large number of people feel that nothing less than a champion of ASL will do.

Rather than dissect the genealogy and community status of the candidates, or break down their resumes (all of which look relatively good, IMHO), I’d like to briefly touch on a few issues I think should be the primary concern for the next president. I fully agree with Steve Weiner’s contention that “…the university CANNOT be on a holding pattern and wait for the next president to begin implementation of new initiatives.” He is correct: Whether it’s Marshall, Davila, or Weiner, the next president can’t just rubber stamp decrees and do the bidding of the BoT and other administrators. He is going to have to guide the university through the next 18 to 24 months, and leave the institution in satisfactory condition to hand over to the next administration.

Here’s a brief laundry list:

1) rescind the “Guidelines for Expressive Activities and Assemblies”; if such an outline is needed, then it needs to be revisited with an eye on a reasonable approach and expectations. The document as it stands was obviously drafted to curb the protest, and should never have been issued.

2) immediately conduct an investigation into DOSS/DPS, and begin the much-needed reforms in that department, starting with ASL proficiency. As I suggested earlier, it wouldn’t hurt to start recruiting from among advanced ASL students, CODAs, and others with a genuine interest in deafness, ASL, and the Gallaudet community.

3) effectively address the deficiencies within the PART report and ensure that accreditation succeeds. This one is particularly crucial, but won’t be solved overnight. It will be a long-term effort that will continue into the next administration– but it’s crucial that necessary corrections begin now.

4) begin the process of healing the cracks in the community. Part of this will involve tackling thorny topics such as audism, racism, sexism, voyeurism, botulism… you get the idea. Both Weiner and Marshall acknowledged the split in both the campus and larger communities in their letters of interest. While Davila makes no mention of recent events, I would hope he too recognizes that these are not ordinary times, and whoever ascends to the top post is going to have to be a peacemaker extraordinaire, on top of all the other responsibilities of running Gallaudet.

and 5) I’d like to see the next president begin to formulate a new policy on how to deal with deaf education from top to bottom. While Gallaudet is not solely responsible for the finished products of deaf ed and special ed programs nationwide, it certainly can take the lead. Once upon a time, Gallaudet required an entrance exam, and those graduates of residential schools who passed the exam and went to Gallaudet were the pride of their local communities. Gallaudet Normal School graduates went on to teach in schools and programs, and influenced the course of such schools. There was a symbiotic relationship throughout the realms of deaf education, and I think Gallaudet needs to return to this to some degree. While I in no way advocate a total return to the past (for example, the Normal School didn’t admit deaf graduate students for decades; this was one of the paramount issues that forced a break between Edward Miner Gallaudet and Alexander Graham Bell), I do think Gallaudet could do better where K-12 education is concerned.

There’s tons of other areas that could be improved or worked on, sure, but I think these five elements are among the more essential items on the agenda Gallaudet’s new leadership should pursue. To me, the ability of the interim president to tackle this list will count far more with me than whether the man in question is the best ASL signer of all time, or has a ten-generation heritage of deaf family members, or graduated from the “right” schools, or any other criteria.

[P.S.: I think it’s rather ironic the final announcement will take place on December 10, traditionally “Gallaudet-Clerc Day” in the past, an event that was often celebrated with a banquet and a tribute to these two men.]