Professor Sues Student (and university)

[marshwiggle]

Another article shedding a sliver of light...

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/08/02/professor-sues-university-over-its-response-student%E2%80%99s-grade


This short note includes that the instructions noted that the assignment was made in May and that the instructions indicated that the professor must receive the assignment by a certain date or an F would be awarded.  The student did not track the letter, though the professor had paid for that option. 

The exam was sent to students at the end of May. Students were told that McEvoy had to receive responses by June 12. The instruction said anyone who did not turn in the exam on time would receive a failing grade."

And presumably the tracking would allow her to check if any had been mailed on time but were delayed in delivery.

Right, so that clears up the postmark/received by confusion. But I still don't see the point of tracking. Tracking is important if the exam never arrives and the student needs to prove they sent it (or, rather, sent something). But if the exam does arrive, and has a postmark from before June 12th, then why would tracking matter? It was sent on time. It arrived late. If late arrival means an automatic fail, then tracking wouldn't change that; and if the important thing is an on-time dispatch, then a postmark should serve the purpose just as well as tracking. How does seeing what happened during the time in was in the USPS system change anything, once the exam arrives?

*One possibility occurred to me. Maybe the prof looked at the exam, saw that it was poor, (suggested by the eventual C-), and decided to reject it on the technicality of the lack of tracking rather than the more subjective grade to avoid pushback.

It's rather nit-picky and self-serving, but it would fit the established facts of the case.


*(A second possibility also occurred. It the grades were submitted after the 12th, but before the 16th, then she may not have wanted to go through the grade change process, and the lack of tracking made it justifiable. Like the previous explanation, nit-picky and legalistic, but it would fit.)

[Caracal]

Another article shedding a sliver of light...

https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2021/08/02/professor-sues-university-over-its-response-student%E2%80%99s-grade


This short note includes that the instructions noted that the assignment was made in May and that the instructions indicated that the professor must receive the assignment by a certain date or an F would be awarded.  The student did not track the letter, though the professor had paid for that option. 

The exam was sent to students at the end of May. Students were told that McEvoy had to receive responses by June 12. The instruction said anyone who did not turn in the exam on time would receive a failing grade."

And presumably the tracking would allow her to check if any had been mailed on time but were delayed in delivery.

Right, so that clears up the postmark/received by confusion. But I still don't see the point of tracking. Tracking is important if the exam never arrives and the student needs to prove they sent it (or, rather, sent something). But if the exam does arrive, and has a postmark from before June 12th, then why would tracking matter? It was sent on time. It arrived late. If late arrival means an automatic fail, then tracking wouldn't change that; and if the important thing is an on-time dispatch, then a postmark should serve the purpose just as well as tracking. How does seeing what happened during the time in was in the USPS system change anything, once the exam arrives?

*One possibility occurred to me. Maybe the prof looked at the exam, saw that it was poor, (suggested by the eventual C-), and decided to reject it on the technicality of the lack of tracking rather than the more subjective grade to avoid pushback.

It's rather nit-picky and self-serving, but it would fit the established facts of the case.


*(A second possibility also occurred. It the grades were submitted after the 12th, but before the 16th, then she may not have wanted to go through the grade change process, and the lack of tracking made it justifiable. Like the previous explanation, nit-picky and legalistic, but it would fit.)

You could be right, although I'd say that plan backfired.  Submitting a grade change seems much simpler than suing the student and your university. I never understand people who make choices like this. I always just give the student the benefit of the doubt when there's some issue because

1. In general I would like to live in a world where people aren't harshly punished for making minor clerical or organizational errors. I've certainly screwed things up before and I've always really appreciated it when people could be flexible and kind. Since I'm in charge in my classes, this is a chance for me to pass that on.

2. Maybe I contributed to the confusion in some way, or could have been clearer.

3. It's usually easier to just grade the stupid thing and move on. There are times I have to just tell a student I can't do anything about their grade and just deal with angry and panicked emails and/or messages to my chair. It happens almost every semester, but it isn't an enjoyable part of my job. Unlike this professor, I don't want to have a grade appeal and court dates. I'd like to finish my grading and go take a nap on the couch.

[marshwiggle]

*One possibility occurred to me. Maybe the prof looked at the exam, saw that it was poor, (suggested by the eventual C-), and decided to reject it on the technicality of the lack of tracking rather than the more subjective grade to avoid pushback.

It's rather nit-picky and self-serving, but it would fit the established facts of the case.


*(A second possibility also occurred. It the grades were submitted after the 12th, but before the 16th, then she may not have wanted to go through the grade change process, and the lack of tracking made it justifiable. Like the previous explanation, nit-picky and legalistic, but it would fit.)

You could be right, although I'd say that plan backfired.  Submitting a grade change seems much simpler than suing the student and your university.

To be fair, the chronology of events seems to be:
1. Pro submits "F" based on no tracking.
2. Student contacts chair.
3. Chair requires grading of exam.
4. Prof submits "C-"  for exam.
5. Student contacts provost claiming grade was biased.
6. Provost responds to prof telling her the grade was "prejudiced" and authorized grade change to "pass".*

It seems the lawsuit followed all of this, and it's probably more about the chair and provost siding with the student than about the actual grade assigned.

*No indication of whether the provost had any expertise in the relevant discipline to determine the validity of the grade.

[ergative]

This is such a bizarre story all around. A kinda-dumb-but-everything-is-weird-in-Covid-times policy is one thing. Suing a student for being mean is just wildly out of proportion; and suing a university for changing a passing grade to a 'pass' grade is. . .  just . . . wtf, man? Here are the options:

1. Do nothing. Student gets a grade of 'pass' instead of C-. Move on with your life.
2. Sue the university (and student wtf) and lose. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job.
3.  Sue the university (and student wtf) and win. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job. But the student publicly retracts the statement about how you're too biased to grade fairly, and their final exam grade is now C- instead of 'pass]. Congratulations?

In what universe is the benefit of [3]--if there is any benefit at all--worth the risk of [2], and worth the hassle compared to [1]? WTF, prof?

[marshwiggle]

This is such a bizarre story all around. A kinda-dumb-but-everything-is-weird-in-Covid-times policy is one thing. Suing a student for being mean is just wildly out of proportion; and suing a university for changing a passing grade to a 'pass' grade is. . .  just . . . wtf, man? Here are the options:

1. Do nothing. Student gets a grade of 'pass' instead of C-. Move on with your life.
2. Sue the university (and student wtf) and lose. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job.
3.  Sue the university (and student wtf) and win. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job. But the student publicly retracts the statement about how you're too biased to grade fairly, and their final exam grade is now C- instead of 'pass]. Congratulations?

In what universe is the benefit of [3]--if there is any benefit at all--worth the risk of [2], and worth the hassle compared to [1]? WTF, prof?

I agree, and I would have gone with [1]. However, it's pretty obvious that the chair and the provost were more concerned with appeasing the student than with any serious evaluation of the quality of the student's work.  I imagine that's really the thing the prof can't let go. (Even though it does her no favours to pursue it.)

[Caracal]

This is such a bizarre story all around. A kinda-dumb-but-everything-is-weird-in-Covid-times policy is one thing. Suing a student for being mean is just wildly out of proportion; and suing a university for changing a passing grade to a 'pass' grade is. . .  just . . . wtf, man? Here are the options:

1. Do nothing. Student gets a grade of 'pass' instead of C-. Move on with your life.
2. Sue the university (and student wtf) and lose. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job.
3.  Sue the university (and student wtf) and win. You're a laughingstock, and now your university knows you're a nuisance and you've lost all possible pull or benefit of any doubt with them for anything you ever want to do in the future. Everyone knows that you're a complete loser who overreacts in wildly weird ways to really trivial events that are part-and-parcel of your job. But the student publicly retracts the statement about how you're too biased to grade fairly, and their final exam grade is now C- instead of 'pass]. Congratulations?

In what universe is the benefit of [3]--if there is any benefit at all--worth the risk of [2], and worth the hassle compared to [1]? WTF, prof?

I agree, and I would have gone with [1]. However, it's pretty obvious that the chair and the provost were more concerned with appeasing the student than with any serious evaluation of the quality of the student's work.  I imagine that's really the thing the prof can't let go. (Even though it does her no favours to pursue it.)

Maybe? I can also imagine some other possibilities.

1. Provost asked the chair or someone else in the department to look at the exam and that person told the provost they thought the grade was unfair.

2. In the course of this whole thing, faculty member made comments about the student to the provost which convinced the provost that the faculty member wasn't likely to be fair to the student about the grade.

3. The professor has acted like such a lunatic throughout this whole thing that the provost has no faith in their judgement and thought the fairest thing is to just give the student a pass.

[jerseyjay]

I agree that this is bizarre all around.

But what I find notable is that the class was about.... Business Law.

Stupid rules, inflexibility, frivolous lawsuits.... all the things that make business so great in America.

[ergative]

I have thought, repeatedly, over the last few years, that the things I read about in the news would be flagged by fiction editors as excessively obvious and heavy-handed in their intended irony. Reality needs another couple rounds of edits.

[apl68]

I have thought, repeatedly, over the last few years, that the things I read about in the news would be flagged by fiction editors as excessively obvious and heavy-handed in their intended irony. Reality needs another couple rounds of edits.

The real world has always had that quality.

[mamselle]

Yes.

A well-known children's book author who was a member of our congregation and attended our "Stone Soup" Bible Studies at the age of 89 once remarked, when discussing one of the more astounding events of the 1970s (think, Nixon, etc.), "It wouldn't be believed in fiction."

We figured she'd know if anyone did.

M.