All I can say is that the comments confirmed to me what I had to keep to myself all semester: that most of you mental midgets are the most immature, sheltered, homophobic, sexist, racist, lying sacks of s—t I have ever met in my life. … Seton Hall may be kissing you’re a—es now, but out here in the real world, brats like you will be eaten for breakfast.
— Professor Mary Ann Swissler — responding to some complaints from her students about her Promotional Writing course — for more go here and here
|
|||||
Samizdata slogan of the dayFebruary 14th, 2003 |
 10 comments to Samizdata slogan of the day |
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Brian,
that’s why I am reluctant to visit your education-oriented blog. I’m afraid of getting my knuckles rapped with a ruler. 😉
The erinoconnor.org response is plenty evil.
“The consumerist mentality of Swissler’s students is palpable in their comments. They speak as readily of how much money they have wasted on the course as they do of how offensive she is to look at–as if she had an obligation to please them visually with her person, as if her clothing and hairstyle had anything to do with the quality of her instruction, as if her red moped and yellow thermos materially damaged students’ abilities to learn. This is the rudeness of entitlement, the hostility of students who labor under the mistaken idea that education should entertain them, and that teachers are performers whose job it is to play to their audience.”
Yes, o rebellious slaves, hear your betters and cease whining about the useless illiterate slob of a school-master whose salary you pay. It is “consumerist” and “entitlement” to think that when you pay $$$, you should recieve that for which you paid.
I cannot comment on Professor Swissler’s teaching ability or the quality of her courses. However, there is no indication Seton Hall conducted an objective assessment of her course and delivery. There is only her admittedly troublesome reaction to anonymous comments.
However, the contents of those comments amount to immature, petty character assassination. On this basis Professor Swissler’s assessment of “most” of her students seems somewhat accurate. Given the elementary school level intellectual content of the comments, these students appear somewhat “academically challenged”. The LEDE comment was a classic, as it LEADS me to posit they would find any class difficult.
Given the theory “write for your reader”, I would suggest her reply was entirely appropriate. She used the phrasing and terminology even the “mental midgets” in her targeted readership were sure to understand. This is a perfect example of putting theory into practice. Well done that. She should be commended for her good teaching technique.
Bad professors and dim students are universal, but what forced me to comment was the statement of Pete Reader, Communication Department Chairman. Having discussed the clear communications style of Professor Swissler, lets now analyze his comments.
“I am an advocate of free speech and believe that we have the freedom to express our opinion as long as it is respectful to others. Unfortunately, Professor Swissler was not.” Apparently his limits on free speech are very selective. There is no mention of the disrespectful anonymous comments, nor if the authors face any consequences. The conclusion that can be draw is that freedom of speech only applies to certain members of the university community, and that you can say whatever you want as long as you don’t sign your e-mails. Not exactly shining lessons in civil behavior.
“I am sure that many of you feel hurt by her words, as was I.” It appears the students to whom the e-mail was addressed can dish it out but can’t take it. The fact that he, as well as other students, claim to be hurt indicates a wide spread emotional fragility of all concerned. Those students suffering from this brittleness will certainly have a hard time of it in the “real world”. Again, Professor Swissler is to be commended for attempting to prepare “most” of her students for life outside the classroom.
“You would think that someone who works professionally as she does would behave more responsibly and set a better example.” This statement can lead (there’s that word again) the reader to examine the Chairman’s own behavior and example. This is not a good communications technique given the negative assessment one can make draw from his conduct and statements.
“However, please set aside her e-mail as a bad example of someone not thinking clearly and [do] not take it personally.” Again, this is not a good communications technique as the wording can draw attention to his own fuzzy thinking in hiring Prof. Swissler in the first place, then issuing such a fawning email. This attention also extends to whoever hired him- given his display of poor qualifications as a Communications Chairman.
If I need to hire a shallow pouting airhead, I’ll know “some” Seton Hall communications grads fit the bill perfectly. At least they will be fashionably dressed. They should attach a full body photo with their resume. Then we can meet for breakfast. Lastly, please don’t take any of this personally. I wouldn’t want my words to hurt anyone.
I’m with Julian on this one. Regardless of the inane, dashed-off comments on the myprofessorsucks site, it sounds like Swissler is yet another deadbeat, eccentric-cum-nutcase Liberal Arts prof. Personally, I don’t have the patience for her ilk, having growing up around universities. And, in all honesty, I’m not entirely sure if the comments on appearance are unfounded. Academics who can exist comfortably outside the real world of business (and academia is a bizzare, surreal dimension, don’t kid yourself) seem to take a degree of pride in being slovenly and unkempt. It’s some sort of ego trip, as if they exist in a realm of mind so pure that petty, material things like wearing clean clothes and not looking like a baglady don’t matter. Well guess what folks? Appearances matter! No, really, take a look at, whatdoyoucallit, ALL OF FSCKING HISTORY! People convey power and responsibility via a commanding appearance, and what these students are saying, though in an embarrassingly petty fashion, is that their confidence in their instructor is undermined by her disheveled self-presentation. Sounds like she got what she deserved, though I’m sure it makes me terribly shallow to say so *cough*
I do agree with al3x re clothes. I once had a prof wear the same dress for three weeks straight in summer. Students were betting when she would change.
I personally have been dodging the fashion police for years. To quote David Niven ” a gentleman does not let his tastes be dictated by the whims of fashion”. Unfortunately, from the way I dress, nobody can tell I’m a gentleman.
The image stuff is really by-the-by, the really biting comments amount to: easy grades, no work, rare and trivial assignments, no tests, a writing teacher who can’t spell and can’t string together a grammatical sentence.
She should know that people out in the real world don’t use silly propagandist terms like “homophobic”.
A word on the appearance complaint and the notion of conveying “power and responsibility via a commanding appearance.” It seems this professor was an adjunct. She had little power, low pay (probably about the $1500 one student would have paid for the course), and apparently little academic freedom since her semesterly contract was not renewed.
It’s not so much that I’m defending her as pointing out that the college administrators can speak their customer-service-squawk as much as they want, but the real customer service would be investing in full-time professors rather than creating a disgruntled part-time professorial labor pool to save money. It’s not like tuitions are going down. Meanwhile, another frustrated adjunct will be hired in her place.
I agree with Biased Observer; the students turned an opportunity for constructive criticism of Swissler’s teaching into petty, trival, and blatantly sexist comments about her appearence. The students got exactly what they deserved, namely a response that stooped to their level of discourse. One can ignore the extreme and inappropriate comments of one professor, but if these students’ comments are representative of today’s young adults, I’m afraid for the future of this society.
A consumerist mentality and sense of entitlement are rampant among today’s college students (although they are usually not expressed with so much hostility). Students criticize Swissler for being “too easy,” yet professors suffer if they are too demanding. (If you doubt this, take a look at the whiny comments about other professors posted on myprofessorsucks.com). Students ask for class notes to be posted on web sites so they don’t have to attend class. They barrage professors with email asking questions that are explained on the course syllabus, which they lost weeks ago and never took the initiitave to replace. They come to class and ask “when are you handing assignments back” when you have brought them to class every day for two weeks. They want to be spoonfed and coddled in every possible way. Many of us untenured faculty give into these consumerist demands to avoid negative student evaluations and their impact on our tenure and promotion. It’s all a game, and the rule is to keep them entertained and comfortable.
Anyone who spells “you’re” when they should have used “your” or spells lead “lede” doesn’t deserve to be a professor, much less a teacher. Just a note for you profs: Unlike your colleagues at the stuffy, pretentious conferences you attend, we don’t care about your personal radical, paradigm-shifting approaches to a subject. We just want to LEARN. Secondly, NO ONE knows of the big names, or stars, in your academic field. Outside of it, they are just another professor, like one of those anonymous stormtroopers from “Star Wars.” Swissler got what she deserves. If you act like a pretentious snob, are a bitter and cynical person by nature, neglect your personal hygiene, regularly misspell words, and carry a nasty disposition, can you possibly be expected to be treated any different? Non-comfority should be encouraged; being a non-conformist for the purpose of fitting in should not.