Thomas's Journal
 
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends View]

Thursday, March 18th, 2004

    Time Event
    8:00p
    end of term
    So today was the last day of classes for winter term. (Well, tomorrow actually, but my class is a Tuesday/Thursday class.) And suddenly a few students asked “How is the class participation grade computed?” It’s weird that they never think to ask this when it could still do any good for their behavior. It’s like suddenly, the last week, oh! my!

    I said there were two components, and you had to do both to get credit for the grade: section attendance and participation, and regular weekly participation on the course email list. Both were carefully explained from the first week. Students doing poorly at either had a warning note written on their mid-term paper bringing the requirements to their attention. The professor has assigned 10% of the grade to participation, and agreed with me at the beginning of the term that it was fair to do it the way I wanted: if you want a C, you have to both participate in half the section meetings, and participate on the email for half the weeks. For an A, you have to do both all the time. If you blow off either then you don’t get credit for participation.

    Two students asked how this would be computed early in the term, and I told them. Nobody else did. At every juncture, it was stressed that both participation in section and participation on the course email list were mandatory course requirements.

    And now there is a number of students who write decent papers (A- or A quality work), good thinkers, clearly did all or most of the reading throughout term, regularly attended section, and mostly entirely blew off the email requirement. They think it’s totally unfair, suddenly. Meanwhile, there are other students, otherwise identical, who wrote very nice weekly things for the email list, prompted good discussion on it, had interesting things to say. There ain’t no way that I’m gonna budge on this. But geez, what do you think the words “mandatory requirement” mean?

    I have the feeling that if they were told on the syllabus that they would outright fail the course if they didn’t do it, there would still be a crowd who blew it off and got suddenly persnickety.

    A while ago a professor in the department taught one of those big intro courses where he said that class attendance was mandatory, and announced from day one that if you missed so many classes, you would fail the course--or you could freely drop it--but you would not be permitted to get a grade. So the hatchet day came, letters went out to those students, and suddenly they showed up, complaining how unfair it was.
    8:30p
    the news from Claremont
    Act One
    In January, some students take a cross from an art project and set fire to it. In February, a racial slur about blacks was written on a calendar depicting George Washington Carver.

    Act Two
    Kerri Dunn, a visiting professor of psychology at Claremont McKenna College, speaks publicly about how she is considering converting from Roman Catholicism to Judaism. She is active in urging students to take seriously the incidents of racism and the issue in general.

    Act Three
    On March 9, Kerri Dunn speaks at a forum on racism at Scripps college. After the forum, she discovers that her car has been seriously vandalized: racist graffiti is painted on it, the tires are slashed, and windows broken. She reports the crime to the police. Members of the college communities are all quite rightly shocked and horrified. The FBI joins the investigation.

    Act Four
    All seven Claremont colleges all shut down for a day on March 10. Dunn refers to the vandalism of her car as “an act of terrorism.” Classes are released, staff is released, and all members of the community of the different colleges all gather for a day of anti-racism rallies, teach-ins, demonstrations, and other efforts to demonstrate that such incidents will not be tolerated. All of Los Angeles is proud of the example the colleges have set.

    Act Five
    Thursday, March 18, newspapers report that the police have found out the likely person who trashed Dunn’s car: Kerri Dunn. Two witnesses had seen her slash the tires, and the statements she gave to local police and the FBI are inconsistent. Property worth $1700 that she said was stolen from the car she later reports has “turned up”. She now faces possible state misdemeanor harges for filing a false police report and federal felony charges for lying to federal investigators. No reports have mentioned any insurance fraud charges.

    Epilogue
    Students at the Claremont colleges are horrified. All reports show that they feel greatly manipulated. Students remember creepy things Dunn said before the incident. She had been upset that there had not been more reaction to the slur on the picture of George Washington Carver. A student said that Dunn had said she was “fantasizing about students holding protests or rallies”.

    Now what.

    << Previous Day 2004/03/18
    [Calendar]
    Next Day >>

Thomas's Website   About LiveJournal.com

Advertisement