Random Thoughts Anew

[mahagonny]

Bullies, thugs, trolls, and rudesbies might understand the concept in the abstract--they don't understand, or don't care to try to understand, about putting the concept into practice. That might be unsolvable. But sometimes, maybe one or two times in a hundred, if you can show Joe or Jane Bully, Thug, Troll, or Rudesby that they've actually hurt a real human being--occasionally that sticks.

So subjecting everyone to the infantilizing, scolding, and finger-wagging for the sake of the one or two times in a hundred that it might stick with the right person is a good use of resources?

Well, people with full time teaching gigs probably aren't worried about money, and may forget that some are.

[little bongo]

Bullies, thugs, trolls, and rudesbies might understand the concept in the abstract--they don't understand, or don't care to try to understand, about putting the concept into practice. That might be unsolvable. But sometimes, maybe one or two times in a hundred, if you can show Joe or Jane Bully, Thug, Troll, or Rudesby that they've actually hurt a real human being--occasionally that sticks.

So subjecting everyone to the infantilizing, scolding, and finger-wagging for the sake of the one or two times in a hundred that it might stick with the right person is a good use of resources?

Yes. F-ck yes. This. Is. Why.

Consider yourself scolded.

[marshwiggle]

Bullies, thugs, trolls, and rudesbies might understand the concept in the abstract--they don't understand, or don't care to try to understand, about putting the concept into practice. That might be unsolvable. But sometimes, maybe one or two times in a hundred, if you can show Joe or Jane Bully, Thug, Troll, or Rudesby that they've actually hurt a real human being--occasionally that sticks.

So subjecting everyone to the infantilizing, scolding, and finger-wagging for the sake of the one or two times in a hundred that it might stick with the right person is a good use of resources?

Yes. F-ck yes. This. Is. Why.

Consider yourself scolded.

For suggesting this kind of "training" isn't a good use of resources? 

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

[apl68]

Aren't all eggs 'poached?'

No.  They aren't alive. (Not in the ag sphere, anyway).

They are pilfered, however.

For some reason a "pilfered" egg doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

But then I've never liked eating the things anyway.

[mamselle]

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

OK.

I'm instituting a new forum award. We used to have the Serpent's Tooth, etc., but this is a different one.

For jumping from one stated hypothesis to an unjustified antecedent with alacrity and blind speed:

   Kangaroo Logic Award #1

I'm sure there are others earlier and there will be more to follow, but this is no. 1.

M.

[marshwiggle]

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

OK.

I'm instituting a new forum award. We used to have the Serpent's Tooth, etc., but this is a different one.

For jumping from one stated hypothesis to an unjustified antecedent with alacrity and blind speed:

   Kangaroo Logic Award #1

Can you clarify? Here was the original:

Bullies, thugs, trolls, and rudesbies might understand the concept in the abstract--they don't understand, or don't care to try to understand, about putting the concept into practice. That might be unsolvable. But sometimes, maybe one or two times in a hundred, if you can show Joe or Jane Bully, Thug, Troll, or Rudesby that they've actually hurt a real human being--occasionally that sticks.

So subjecting everyone to the infantilizing, scolding, and finger-wagging for the sake of the one or two times in a hundred that it might stick with the right person is a good use of resources?

Yes. F-ck yes. This. Is. Why.

Consider yourself scolded.

So questioning the value of people being scolded resulted in the injunction that I should consider myself scolded.  Where is the jump?

[mamselle]

No-one is suggesting you are either being scolded or are guilty of something to be scolded for.

The videos are informational. If you see them as imputing guilt, that's your projection.

It all unravels from there.

M.

[mahagonny]

I know you are, but what am I?

[little bongo]

Bullies, thugs, trolls, and rudesbies might understand the concept in the abstract--they don't understand, or don't care to try to understand, about putting the concept into practice. That might be unsolvable. But sometimes, maybe one or two times in a hundred, if you can show Joe or Jane Bully, Thug, Troll, or Rudesby that they've actually hurt a real human being--occasionally that sticks.

So subjecting everyone to the infantilizing, scolding, and finger-wagging for the sake of the one or two times in a hundred that it might stick with the right person is a good use of resources?

Yes. F-ck yes. This. Is. Why.

Consider yourself scolded.

For suggesting this kind of "training" isn't a good use of resources? 

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

No, Marshwiggle. For being you.

[mamselle]

No-one is suggesting you are either being scolded or are guilty of something to be scolded for.

The videos are informational. If you see them as imputing guilt, that's your projection.

It all unravels from there.

M.

A hypothetical, based on an actual situation:

A young man comes to your office hours jittery, anxious, and about to cry. You try to work on materials for the upcoming exam, and finally, he says, "You're my only male prof this term and I don't know who else to tell. Can I talk to you?"

Mystified, you nod, and he bursts out, "I was raped in the men's room last night by an instructor I had last spring. I feel awful, it hurts, and I'm so ashamed and scared I don't know what to do. Can you help me?"

Would your reply be more or less informed by the videos you've been asked to view, or could they be useful in helping you frame a response?

M.

[mahagonny]

No-one is suggesting you are either being scolded or are guilty of something to be scolded for.

The videos are informational. If you see them as imputing guilt, that's your projection.

It all unravels from there.

M.

A hypothetical, based on an actual situation:

A young man comes to your office hours jittery, anxious, and about to cry. You try to work on materials for the upcoming exam, and finally, he says, "You're my only male prof this term and I don't know who else to tell. Can I talk to you?"

Mystified, you nod, and he bursts out, "I was raped in the men's room last night by an instructor I had last spring. I feel awful, it hurts, and I'm so ashamed and scared I don't know what to do. Can you help me?"

Would your reply be more or less informed by the videos you've been asked to view, or could they be useful in helping you frame a response?

M.

If you were asking me, I don't have an office.

I would be OK with the tenure track being required to get this training, and the rest of us not, because they are the ones by far doing the most harassing, bullying and sexual assault, and they are the most trouble to discipline or terminate when it happens, and also their service costs the students more.
At the same time, if I'm going to get this training but be paid for my time it's at least a square deal, as opposed to what they probably have in mind currently.

For suggesting this kind of "training" isn't a good use of resources? 

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

No, Marshwiggle. For being you.
[/quote][/quote]

I don't know whether you frequented the old forum back when Marshwiggle was opining that adjunct teaching should pay like babysitting as long as the market would bear it, and no one but me gave any pushback. They thought his idea was just dandy. Now that he's on a tack with showing less than the usual amount of respect for sensitivity training everyone's heart is bleeding. Sensitivity training fortifies the tenure track privileges and optics. That why people care about it. Keeping as much money as possible away from adjunct funding is also an aim of the tenure track. If you're on the tenure track and you want to show how much you care about your fellow human, it's not as easy as people think.

Is there the slightest evidence that making people take training courses to educate them not to abuse students or staff has any effect on people's behavior?

Ah, but that's not what's it's all about.  It's about covering one's institutional hind end.

Of course. And who benefits when that gets done.

[marshwiggle]

No-one is suggesting you are either being scolded or are guilty of something to be scolded for.

The videos are informational. If you see them as imputing guilt, that's your projection.

It all unravels from there.

M.

A hypothetical, based on an actual situation:

A young man comes to your office hours jittery, anxious, and about to cry. You try to work on materials for the upcoming exam, and finally, he says, "You're my only male prof this term and I don't know who else to tell. Can I talk to you?"

Mystified, you nod, and he bursts out, "I was raped in the men's room last night by an instructor I had last spring. I feel awful, it hurts, and I'm so ashamed and scared I don't know what to do. Can you help me?"

Would your reply be more or less informed by the videos you've been asked to view, or could they be useful in helping you frame a response?

M.

First of all, I have never seen a student at that level of crisis in my entire career. While a few people will have, I would guess it would be a very tiny portion of instructors who would. (Anyone who has actual statistics on this is welcome to produce them.)

Second, the very fact that the student is at that level of crisis means that this is a job for counselling services; i.e. people with way more than an instructional video to guide them in dealing with the situation. Sending (or taking) the student there is the most sane and helpful option. I have first aid training, and if someone is bleeding profusely I can try to apply pressure, but calling 911 and getting the professionals to take over ASAP is the glaringly obvious best idea. Also, in the case of criminal behaviour, such as a sexual assault, it will again be people in counselling services who will have the training and protocols in place to deal with it.

The most compassionate response to someone with a problem is directing them to someone who can actually help with the problem. When people have had health or personal issues that require some sort of academic accomodations, such as extensions on assignments or projects in courses for which I am responsible, then it is absolutely my place to deal with those things. Those situations are relatively common. It would not make sense for counselling services or health services to dictate any academic accomodations, not because they don't care, but because it is not their area of expertise or responsibility.

Finally, it is highly unlikely that an instructor is going to be the person to whom a student feels close enough to reveal such information. (There is a possible exception if the course is something like social work, psychology, or some sort of clinical mental health course, where sexual assault  and its consequences are actually relevant to the course. In that case, then the instructor would be someone with relevant training and expertise way beyond any generic video training session.)

[mamselle]

Huh.

As an adjunct, I've had two such situations arise, and as a member of a campus-based faith community, two others.

Working as a faith education director, another situation with a very small child arose (thankfully it was not what it appeared to be, but our oversight pastor's husband was the rector of a private school that had just seen a court case go against them so we were taking no chances).

Maybe because they know I've dealt with abuse issues myself, they feel like I'm more approachable--I never bring that up directly, but I'm pretty sure it's known.

Maybe because I'm female they expect I'll be more responsive.

But the fact that you've never dealt with such issues doesn't mean they're not there or that the circumstances you describe have done more than help keep you immured from becoming aware of them.

Or maybe you, and your students, and all those they deal with are just lucky and none of the seriously bad stuff that really does happen in the world has ever touched any of you.


^ Unrelated random thought:

   I'm very grateful to whomever made the technology available to create long tape loops of Gregorian chant to work by when I have mind-numbing, soul-searing stuff to do that I'd rather not be spending the time on, but must.

There is a balm in Gilead.

M.

[smallcleanrat]

I agree with the points you are making in your last post, marshwiggle.

But why would a video training module be irrelevant to this?

I thought it was fairly typical for the trainings to include guidance on how to do exactly what you're describing. Mine have always included example scenarios of what to do if a student or colleague confides in you to say they are in crisis or have been the target of assault or harassment. It's basically mental health first aid (including the importance of not trying to directly counsel the person yourself) and how-to advice on either encouraging that person to reach out to appropriate resources or how you yourself can alert the appropriate campus services of the situation.

(Edited to add) I'm also curious as to why, on a different thread, you said you thought expecting a professor to pick up a phone to pass the situation on to people trained to help someone in crisis was not reasonable, because it goes beyond what that professor would be required to do in a normal professor-student relationship (I.e. one in which the student does not have "issues" that make them "much more work").

[AvidReader]

If you were asking me, I don't have an office.

I would be OK with the tenure track being required to get this training, and the rest of us not, because they are the ones by far doing the most harassing, bullying and sexual assault, and they are the most trouble to discipline or terminate when it happens, and also their service costs the students more.
At the same time, if I'm going to get this training but be paid for my time it's at least a square deal, as opposed to what they probably have in mind currently.

I don't see why this is a tenure/NTT/adjunct division. Most students can't tell the difference. When I adjuncted, I had a student talking about her next semester's courses who said, "I don't want to take a course with a part-time instructor next semester. They don't care about their students. I want to take a course with someone like you." Student was flabbergasted to learn that I was part-time. Students don't notice private offices vs. the large and crowded adjunct office (or, at least, not enough to see it as a distinction in rank). Every faculty and staff member should be paid to take the training, and take it, because the last thing a student in distress needs is to be blown off.

AR.