@jdavidjentsch I am sorry you have to go through all of this! much solidarity! if there is anything I can do to support, let me know
-
-
OK 1) I fully agree 2) This is the part I find a bit dangerous because it can also be dishonestly applied but I see your point and I concur that prevention is needed.
-
For 2: I made a specific distinction between non-anonymous for CONTENT and anonymous (but reversible if found to be abusive, but a neutral party) for VIOLATIONS (i.e., the lecturer said racist stuff).
-
No system can be perfect, but the one that gave rise to the above horrible anonymous abusive message was a worse one than what I propose. Dialogue on better systems is always going to be ongoing of course.
-
Indeed :) Yes, you are right, this distinction could help avoiding most of the problems.
-
Another point is that all feedback should be after the marks are out.
-
Both UC and SUNY require students to make evals before marks; only released to Prof after
-
That's a good system.
-
Yes, but still. Students are in a disadvantaged position of power. Thus there must be reassurances that there not going to be retaliations to their honest and justified comments. Breaking this trust is what worries me. I see your point, do you see mine?
- 25 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.