AdeQUAte = Dead in the Water

Recently, Gallaudet received an improved rating from the Office of Management and Budget evaluation. It’s rating went from “ineffective” to “adequate.” Stories marking this change have been published in the Washington Post and elsewhere.

Before cheering and patting each other on the back, let’s examine what this rating really means. “Adequate” is NOT “effective” nor is it even “moderately effective.” To put it in terms of a lifeguard who is swimming practice laps at the pool, adequate means the lifeguard is just barely keeping his head above water while treading water at a standstill. True, he -hasn’t- drowned, but he hasn’t moved, either, much less completed any laps. “AdeQUAte,” in other words, is “dead in the water.”

It is interesting to note that “adequate” has different meanings when applied to Gallaudet and NTID. For some reason, Gallaudet is being held to a lower standard than NTID in order to achieve the same mundane rating. NTID continues to achieve MORE success with HALF the amount of federal funding that Gallaudet receives, but both are still rated merely “adequate.”

See this comparsion, and note especially “Program Results/Accountability”:

NTID: [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/summary/10003311.2005.html]

The Institute has maintained high levels of performance on the key outcome indicators of persistence, graduation rates, and post-school outcomes and has taken steps to increase performance in all areas. However, additional progress is necessary because the enrollment target for undergraduate students and the graduation and retention rates for sub-baccalaureate students were not met.

details:

see the full, detailed report at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/detail/10003311.2005.html]

Program Code 10003311
Program Title Federal Support for the National Technical Institute for the Deaf
Department Name Department of Education
Agency/Bureau Name Department of Education
Program Type(s) Block/Formula Grant
Assessment Year 2005
Assessment Rating Adequate
Assessment Section Scores
Section Score
Program Purpose & Design 60%
Strategic Planning 75%
Program Management 56%
Program Results/Accountability 40%
Program Funding Level
(in millions)
FY2006 $56
FY2007 $56
FY2008 $56

Now, compare that with Gallaudet’s results:

Gallaudet: [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/summary/10003306.2006.html]

Gallaudet failed to meet its goals or show adequate progress in key areas, including the number of students who stay in school, graduate, and either pursue graduate degrees or find jobs upon graduation. For example, its undergraduate graduation rate of 42% has been stagnant and below its annual target levels.

details:

see the full, detailed report at [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/detail/10003306.2006.html]

Program Code 10003306
Program Title Federal Support for Gallaudet University
Department Name Department of Education
Agency/Bureau Name Department of Education
Program Type(s) Block/Formula Grant
Assessment Year 2006
Assessment Rating Adequate
Assessment Section Scores
Section Score
Program Purpose & Design 60%
Strategic Planning 75%
Program Management 100%
Program Results/Accountability 25%
Program Funding Level
(in millions)
FY2006 $107
FY2007 $107
FY2008 $107

Send me One Million FREE Guaranteed Visitors

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “AdeQUAte = Dead in the Water

  1. Ambiguous ani’t it? However I think it is has a more positive meaning because the evaluaton shift up from irrelevant to adequate not down from effective to adequate.

    There are signs of effort and change going on.

  2. Damn it. I realized something — any undergraduate school with a good reputation in research has that reputation because of its faculty. There needs to be a reason for the best faculty in the country to want to come to Gallaudet and teach in what may to them be a foreign language.

    It’s possible, but it is another aspect of the ASL outreach that will need to be done. Faculty must be solicited on their merits, and be brought in under the same Wlpan-like program. With the absolute glut of postdocs in the sciences (many of the Ph. D.’s I know are on their third postdoc!), it shouldn’t be impossible to recruit them together with ASL language training.

  3. Brian — ITA. Gallaudet needs to use ASL to teach. For students who do not know it, there must be an Wlpan-like program in place to bring them up to speed as quickly and thoroughly as possible. If that means that a student goes there in May and stays over the summer before classes start in Fall, then so be it.

  4. i think it’s a bit unfair to say that gallaudet has low graduation rate…I think Gallaudet has low graduation rate on time. 4 years period. Many students leave Gallaudet then return years later and finish…

    how does that count for gallaudet?

  5. We need bilingual-bicultural education for deaf students. That’s the only way to get the scores up. Deaf children need to be exposed to ASL as early as possible in life in order to develop normal language skills. Then they will be able to learn English more effectively, when they have ASL as a base.

  6. It’s damned irrelevent to start pointing fingers at who is really to blame for Gallaudet being a 3 on a scale of 1 to 5. What can be done to improve its ranking? Until this school has the highest possible rank, until hearing students with no investment in Deaf culture are banging down its doors to get to get degrees from computer science, linguistics, or biology because they’re just so F-ing good that these people are willing to learn ASL just to have the prestige of a Gallaudet diploma … it’s not good enough.

    Unless that school begins shooting for the moon, it’s not enough. Until Gallaudet is the g-damned best in the country, it’s not good enough. Until it’s a 6 on a scale of 1 to 5, it’s not good enough. Hearing people should be jealous that Deaf students have an easier time at Gallaudet.

  7. Yes, and how much of the low graduation rate is due to transferring from NTID/RIT or CSUN to Gallaudet University?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s