Erratum

Editorial WHO WILL THE NEW LEADER BE? There are three or four key positions in the field of deafness on which the fate of deaf people , in large part, rests. One is the presidency of Gallaudet. Dr. Edward Merrill, Jr., who is currently president, has announced his upcoming resignation. Dr. Merrill's administration has been one of magnificent achievement. He came to Gallaudet with only peripheral experience in deafness, but immediately immersed himself in mastering sign language and learning the educational and cultural aspects of profound hearing loss. Dr. Merrill soon sensed that as president of Gallaudet he had responsibilities for what happened , not just to students on the college campus , but what happened to all deaf people in the United States and to some extent internationally . To meet these awesome charges, long hard-working days were demanded, as well as evenings of grueling protocol functions, and weekends of travel. Dr. Merrill has paid this price and deaf people are better off for his efforts. Since Dr. Merrill has announced his plans to retire as president there has been a mad scramble among potential successors. M=iny highly qualified candidates are available and interested . The issue is what are the criteria for fulfilling such a key position? There are many among which are proven administrative successes. Gallaudet embodies all of the horrors of trying to administer any college faculty with their tenure, their insulation from real world problems, and their enormous but petty egos. The play "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" is almost a whitewash of this problem. At Gallaudet, the administrative problems are compounded because in addition to the college itself, there is an elementary school, a high school, a continuing education program, etc., all under the college president. As if these were not enough headaches, most of the nonfaculty are in Federal Civil Service. This makes firing anyone almost impossible and is in general an impediment to quick decisive action. A second requirement for a Gallaudet president is significant experience at the college level. Gallaudet has had successful presidents who lacked this, but in today's climate such experience is important. A third factor is a knowledge of deaf people, their language, their educational needs, and the general socio-cultural issues of their lives. This raises the question of whether or not the president should be a deaf person. Of course, the presence or absence of hearing should not play a role, only the competence and motivation to do the job. Perhaps, most importantly, the new president of Gallaudet must be able to represent the college before Congress and the general public. The money comes from Congress. Anybody who lacks the skills required to get adequate federal funds for operation is totally incompetent for the presidency and would be a disaster to the college. Finally, there must be a commitment to deaf people and their potential in the next president. Years of experience in deafness or being deaf oneself is no assurance of this. It is a difficult, intangible trait to measure, but its presence or absence in the president will pervade the college and to some extent, Congress' and the public's image of deaf people. Gallaudet's Board of Trustees has members with the broad diverse backgrounds needed to select the next president. Their responsibility in this role is enormous. The major danger is that their decision-making role will be taken from them by political wheelers and dealers on Congressional staffs. McCay Vernon, Ph.D. Editor ERRATUM Two figures were in error in the October 1982 AAD commentary section: "Report of the Educational Research Committee of CEASD: Parent-Infant Education: A Focus for the Eighties." In paragraph 4, page 740 of that issue, sentences 4 and 5 should read as follows: "In these ["school-based" parent-infant programs], 24% of the 0-4 year old children being served are 24 months or younger. In the remaining "home-based" programs, 50% of the children are 0-24 months old." 810 A.A.O. I December 1982 ...