I.K. Jordan Departing Dec. 22 admidst SCANDAL

….. ain’t this somethin’? Read this memo from I.K. Jordan below my comments. old man Jordan and his sidekick Fernandes made a huge mess of Gallaudet’s Accreditation status, jeopardizing all students at Gallaudet with the possibility of worthless degrees, and Jordan, knowing damn well he had made a stinkin’ mess, made sure he got his ass out of Gallaudet just in time to not have to deal with it. And this little shit thinks he’s worthy of the salary he’s been paid? To make matters worse, his Board of Trustees is filled with personally selected spineless lemmings who don’t have the balls to hold him or Fernandes accountable.
Yet…. they approved the renaming of two buildings after the Jordans, approved a ’sabbathical’ vacation of one year which will allow Jordan to keep his $500,000+ base salary and presumably return to ‘teach’ at Gallaudet again, making him the highest paid teacher in the whole damn country, and have not bothered to investigate his participation in the embezzlement misappropriation of $4 million that was intended to be put into the DPS for increased student safety.
Dr. Davila – if you’re reading this, I hope to God you are going to clean house, starting with the Board of Trustees and right down the line to all administrators involved in the cover up of this theft, including Paul Kelly. If Jordan claims innocence, it matters not one damn bit, because there are thousands of people across this country who do not believe him and never will. If he wants to clear his name, then a full scale investigation is the only way to go. I hope you have the strength of character to initiate this investigation, and to stand up to this current Board of Trustees and remove those that do not belong there anymore, most especially Ken Levinson. Gallaudet needs a clean sweep of all the crooked personnel if you’re going to make any lasting effect on it’s future.
############

From: President
Subject: Middle States Accreditation (MSA) – Additional Information
Date: Friday, December 8, 2006 3:21:53 PM EST
To:
Reply to:

December 8, 2006

MEMORANDUM [From I.K. Jordan]

TO: The University Community
FR: I. King Jordan, President
RE: Middle States Accreditation — Additional Information

The University has been informed by its principal accrediting agency, the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, that concerns have arisen concerning Gallaudet’s compliance with a number of the association’s accrediting standards. I received a letter from MSA on November 21, outlining these concerns, and MSA’s Commission on Higher Education subsequently posted on its website a summary of them, along with steps that it intends to take. The following link is to the MSA website: http://www.msche.org/institutions_sas_pds.asp?idInstitution=237.

I will now give a brief history of Gallaudet’s accreditation process, the reasons for this decision by MSA, and what I believe to be its implications.

Gallaudet University has been accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools, Commission on Higher Education since 1957. Middle States defines accreditation as follows:

Accreditation is the means of self-regulation and peer review adopted by the educational community. The accrediting process is intended to strengthen and sustain the quality and integrity of higher education, making it worthy of public confidence and minimizing the scope of external control. The extent to which each educational institution accepts and fulfills the responsibilities inherent in the process is a measure of its concern for freedom and quality in higher education and its commitment to striving for and achieving excellence in its endeavors.

The accreditation process is further defined as “a voluntary, self-regulatory, peer review process.” This process generally follows a ten year cycle. Full accreditation reviews are conducted every ten years, with periodic reviews, which are less extensive, at the mid-point of each ten year cycle. Gallaudet’s last full accreditation review was completed in 2001, at which time MSA reaffirmed its accreditation. Gallaudet completed its five year, mid-cycle Periodic Review Report and submitted it to the Middle States Commission on June 1, 2006. The PRR was compiled as responses to and progress reports on recommendations made in the 2001 report from MSA to Gallaudet, when its accreditation was reaffirmed. The PRR was prepared by a committee comprised of University faculty, staff, administrators, and graduate and undergraduate students. Drafts of the PRR were reviewed by various on-campus bodies, including Faculty Committee B and the Faculty Senate. Suggested revisions were incorporated into the report before it was sent to MSA.

Since the PRR was submitted to MSA, various allegations have been made in the press about Gallaudet’s programs, its students, and its relationship with the federal government. As MSA has become aware of these allegations, it has decided to postpone reaffirmation of Gallaudet’s accreditation while it compiles additional information on whether or not Gallaudet continues to meet some of the Commission’s standards for continuing accreditation. I want to be very clear that Gallaudet’s accreditation has not been revoked by MSA, but, at the same time, I want to be very clear that this postponement of reaffirmation is a very serious matter. It will involve a site visit by an MSA visiting team and the preparation of additional reports by Gallaudet. It will also require the participation of a broad range of individuals on the campus. There is also the possibility of an additional site visit during the spring semester.

Before describing this process further, I first want to comment on the importance to Gallaudet of its accreditation status and describe the range of actions that MSA could take at this time. Why is accreditation so important? The individuals who are affected most by a university’s accreditation status are its current, former, and future students. Admission to graduate school may depend upon an individual’s possession of a bachelor’s degree from an accredited undergraduate institution. Similarly, accreditation of most professional programs requires that they are housed in a college or university that is accredited. Likewise, professional certification and licensing in certain fields depends upon the possession of a graduate or professional degree from an accredited program. Therefore, most higher education institutions are prepared to cooperate fully with accrediting bodies in order to receive the imprimatur of accreditation and the benefits this confers on the students who hold its degrees.

The MSA statement on the range of actions it can take with respect to accreditation indicates that it can delay a decision on reaffirmation for up to one year as it completes its review. There is a range of actions it could take upon completing its review, including:

• Reaffirming accreditation.
• Rejecting the PRR and requesting a resubmission.
• Suspending Accreditation.
• Issuing a “Show Cause ruling” meaning that the institution would be required to demonstrate why it should not lose its accreditation.
• Placing the institution on probation.
• Removing Accreditation.

We are still in discussions with MSA concerning exactly what it will require during this period of further review, but we currently have some details. First, and most urgent at this point, is a site visit by what MSA calls a “small visiting team.” This is scheduled for January 10-12, and the timing is non-negotiable. The visiting team will be comprised of 4 individuals, including 2 university presidents, a special assistant to a president, and a vice president of MSA. The University is in the process of determining with whom they will meet and scheduling those meetings. Information that they have requested is also being compiled. Second, MSA requires a supplemental report, due by March 1, 2007, that addresses 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. Third, MSA requires an additional report by April 1, 2008 documenting (1) the institution’s further response to recommendations from the 2001 evaluation team report and (2) implementation of a documented, organized and sustained process to assess the achievement of institutional and program-level student learning goals that includes direct evidence of student learning.

Clearly, the Gallaudet community is being called upon for a major effort in this regard, and many individuals–students, faculty, staff, administrators, and board members–will have to devote considerable time to it. I will be involved in initial planning until my departure on December 22, and I am working with the Interim Provost to identify a planning group to start the process of making the necessary arrangements for the site visit and the preparation of the report that is due on March 1.

[End memorandum]

############ Get Christmas Cash in just one business day! ##########
Cash Advance Network: Need money now? Get up to $1000 in just 24 Hours – Apply online!

~ by Kenneth Samson on December 12, 2006.