I actually think it's not that hard. Complaints about violations go to the appropriate person, likely HR. Feedback on improving the course goes to the lecturer. Those students who believe improving the course = homophobia, will have to be dealt with accordingly.
-
-
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?
-
Fair enough. Then allow anonymous comments but if found to be abusive they are un-anonymised by a 3rd party and the students are told this explicitly. However, you can't address what I said above either way: anonymised comments can still bear the features of the writer.
-
In many ways, I might know who left it regardless. Or worse yet, I might have 3 people who fit the bill and retaliate against all 3. It's very tricky.
-
Yes, it is very tricky! That was my whole point
But I do agree in that they (we all) must be made accountable, no doubt. -
Also, to be fair, students raise all their concerns in class, and especially to the TAing PhD students, if in any way interactive like a practical class or one with seminars, almost always and without exception in my experience. So again you know who is complaining about what.
-
Obvi, my experiences and not universal and teaching/TAing 6 courses a year for 4 years at BBK is again not a universal experience, but I genuinely do not believe there is such a thing as anonymous when it's students you spend hours with. You just know who writes what if you care.
- 20 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.