Posted on 02/13/2013 5:38:11 AM PST by massmike
A couple things:
1. Schools set themselves up by giving gatekeeper responsibilities to individual instructors making subjective evaluations. In this case, a grade of B being required in a particular course.
It would be better to entrust the gatekeeping function to a collective decision of the faculty. For example, an average of B over six courses, with not more than two C’s. After all, it is the faculty - and not individual members of the faculty - who recommend the conferring of a degree.
2. While the psychology profession has removed homosexuality per se as a personality disorder (because not all homosexuals are incapable of leading productive and happy lives), homosexuality is nevertheless associated with a complex of personality disorders (e.g., narcissism), which can significantly impact professional conduct to include the exercise of professional judgment.
In this case, there may be a reason that this particular course serves as a gatekeeper course going beyond simple mastery of a body of knowledge. There can be, for example, concerns for profession conduct including the exercise of professional judgement, that can only be observed in clinical setting. If this is the case, the institution should consider having a panel of faculty involved in the grading of the course.
3. Were the University ordered to increase the student’s grade, the disability from seeking the career this student has in mind would be lifted, mitigating the loss of future income to the delay in time in seeking the more rewarding career.
That the student’s lawyer erred so badly in his economic loss calculation should dispose the court to dismissing the case out-of-hand. But, I notice this was not what the court has done. Perhaps we are only very preliminary into the court case.
A couple things:
1. Schools set themselves up by giving gatekeeper responsibilities to individual instructors making subjective evaluations. In this case, a grade of B being required in a particular course.
It would be better to entrust the gatekeeping function to a collective decision of the faculty. For example, an average of B over six courses, with not more than two C’s. After all, it is the faculty - and not individual members of the faculty - who recommend the conferring of a degree.
2. While the psychology profession has removed homosexuality per se as a personality disorder (because not all homosexuals are incapable of leading productive and happy lives), homosexuality is nevertheless associated with a complex of personality disorders (e.g., narcissism), which can significantly impact professional conduct to include the exercise of professional judgment.
In this case, there may be a reason that this particular course serves as a gatekeeper course going beyond simple mastery of a body of knowledge. There can be, for example, concerns for profession conduct including the exercise of professional judgement, that can only be observed in clinical setting. If this is the case, the institution should consider having a panel of faculty involved in the grading of the course.
3. Were the University ordered to increase the student’s grade, the disability from seeking the career this student has in mind would be lifted, mitigating the loss of future income to the delay in time in seeking the more rewarding career.
That the student’s lawyer erred so badly in his economic loss calculation should dispose the court to dismissing the case out-of-hand. But, I notice this was not what the court has done. Perhaps we are only very preliminary into the court case.
Rofl @ lehigh priests (in Bethlehem, no less!) and parting red C.
A+ for you, and gratitude for the hilarious clever post, truly beyond all I could ask or imagine!
Nazareth had some good tunes....Love Hurts, Hair of the Dog (Now You’re Messing w. a Son of a B...). Appropriate tunes for this lawsuit
I work for a college.....and the professors and staff are bigger douches than the students....no kidding. This is also a grad student too....which makes this case much more winnable for her
She lost and per this article her attorney says she won’t appeal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.