In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reaffirmation and Rebuilding, 2007–2014 CHAPTER 6 p T he passions surrounding the protests of 2006 seemed to have run their course by the beginning of 2007.All was calm as Robert Davila assumed the presidency on January 2,2007, and given his history as assistant secretary of education and director of NTID,he was ideally situated to restore confidence in the university.The two most pressing issues facing him were the concerns expressed by the federal government and the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE).Under the federal Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993,Gallaudet, along with all federally funded agencies,was required to establish a strategic plan with measurable goals or outcomes.Gallaudet had done this,but it had fallen short of several of its goals,which led to the ineffective rating it received in the OMB PART process in 2006.During the campus closure in the fall,a Department of Education official had contacted Gallaudet’s liaison officer to ask if the campus was operating.The liaison officer answered yes because some classes were being held.Had the answer been no,the department official would have been obligated to withhold Gallaudet’s federal funding.1 The MSCHE presented a different and more complex problem. It informed the university that it was sending a small visiting team on January 10 and that Gallaudet would have to submit a supplemental information report to the commission no later than March 1, 2007.This report had to address the following issues: 1. the effectiveness of shared governance, including the presidential search process; 2. nurturance of a climate that fosters respect among students, faculty, staff, and administration for a range of backgrounds, ideas, and perspectives; 3. mission review and implementation of a comprehensive institutional strategic plan; 4. implementation of a comprehensive enrollment management plan that addresses student recruitment, retention, graduation, and placement; 5. evidence of the academic rigor of the degrees offered; and 6. procedures for ensuring that changes and issues affecting the institution are disclosed accurately and in a timely manner to the Commission. The commission also requested an additional report on Gallaudet’s further response to the recommendations from the 2001 MSCHE evaluation team  Chapel Hall windows. 156 the history of gallaudet university report and how the university planned to implement a documented, organized, and sustained process to assess the achievement of institutional and program-level student learning goals, including direct evidence of student learning.2 This monitoring report was due by April 1, 2008. The MSCHE team visited Gallaudet January 10 to 12 and met with a variety of constituencies, including the trustees, students, faculty, and administrators. During the site visit, the MSCHE team repeatedly told the Gallaudet community that the university had been out of compliance with Middle States’accreditation standards when it closed during the protest.The team’s report noted several other problems, including that there was a great deal of fragmentation within Gallaudet regarding its mission and that the shared governance structure was unclear and possibly ineffective (something MSCHE had mentioned in its 2001 report). It strongly suggested that the various constituencies consider reviewing the mission and that the university should become more active in the Middle State Association and other relevant higher education organizations. Lastly, the team encouraged Gallaudet “to develop a report that [could] be a template for an operational plan for the university over the coming 18–24 months.”3 By 2006, the factors the MSCHE considered in the accreditation process had changed quite a bit since Gallaudet had first been accredited in 1957. Rather than give weight to institutional inputs such as faculty credentials, the condition of facilities, or the number of volumes held by the library, the standards placed more emphasis on assessment of outputs or outcomes such as student achievement, English literacy, and career preparation. Strategic planning also had increased in importance—institutions were now seen as needing to change and evolve, rather than remain static. According to MSCHE, Gallaudet had weak strategic planning, and it had ignored the 2001 recommendations to improve governance. From the perspective of the Middle States Commission, the board, faculty, administration, and even students all shared the blame for the conditions at Gallaudet. Davila’s first step was to reestablish an academic leadership team. Chemistry professor Michael Moore (BA 1968) agreed to serve as interim provost following Fernandes’s departure, and, in doing so, he willingly accepted what he knew would be a very difficult situation. Moore began the process of...

Share