In college, a lot of my peers (myself included) sought out the professors who were hardasses, fearing we wouldn't receive "genuine" critiques of our work when with a "nice" professor. People who were nice were always deemed as "easy" in terms of getting a grade.
When I talk about being "evil," I don't mean "evil" in the sense of "giving appropriate critical feedback on student work," which is my job. (Albeit only to a certain extent, but the intersecting lines of privilege involved would take a lot of time to untangle and map.)
What I mean is that I would engage in de facto discrimination against students in marginalized positions.
Let's say, for example, that a student has a chronic health condition and is also struggling with a mental illness. What I would prefer to do would be to give a student like this a bit of breathing room so that they can feel comfortable doing the coursework without having to conform to arbitrary standards. It would be nice if such students were registered with the Office of Disability Services, but many students aren't, especially because "disability" has historically been a backdoor for discrimination against nonwhite communities in the United States. If I were being a "hardass," however, I would not grant any extra help to the students who need it, citing the necessity of "rules" and "standards," which - again - are completely arbitrary and completely under my control.
The sole reason I would set students in marginalized positions up for failure (while the more privileged among them succeed) would be to stage a superficial demonstration of my authority for my own benefit. In other words, I would allow people to suffer so that an unjust hierarchy of power can be upheld.
That's what I mean by "evil."
I hope your new place is more accepting of your teaching style.
The University of Pennsylvania is the academic equivalent of Game of Thrones. The expectations are different, but the quality of the students is as well. Since there's no pretense of "accessibility," I can evaluate work according to meaningful real-world standards, which isn't possible at a regional public school. Elite students can be treated like intelligent adults who can handle critical feedback specifically because no one who needs "kindness" would make it that far in the first place.
Like I said earlier, the lines of privilege are complicated.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2020-05-13 12:47 pm (UTC)When I talk about being "evil," I don't mean "evil" in the sense of "giving appropriate critical feedback on student work," which is my job. (Albeit only to a certain extent, but the intersecting lines of privilege involved would take a lot of time to untangle and map.)
What I mean is that I would engage in de facto discrimination against students in marginalized positions.
Let's say, for example, that a student has a chronic health condition and is also struggling with a mental illness. What I would prefer to do would be to give a student like this a bit of breathing room so that they can feel comfortable doing the coursework without having to conform to arbitrary standards. It would be nice if such students were registered with the Office of Disability Services, but many students aren't, especially because "disability" has historically been a backdoor for discrimination against nonwhite communities in the United States. If I were being a "hardass," however, I would not grant any extra help to the students who need it, citing the necessity of "rules" and "standards," which - again - are completely arbitrary and completely under my control.
The sole reason I would set students in marginalized positions up for failure (while the more privileged among them succeed) would be to stage a superficial demonstration of my authority for my own benefit. In other words, I would allow people to suffer so that an unjust hierarchy of power can be upheld.
That's what I mean by "evil."
I hope your new place is more accepting of your teaching style.
The University of Pennsylvania is the academic equivalent of Game of Thrones. The expectations are different, but the quality of the students is as well. Since there's no pretense of "accessibility," I can evaluate work according to meaningful real-world standards, which isn't possible at a regional public school. Elite students can be treated like intelligent adults who can handle critical feedback specifically because no one who needs "kindness" would make it that far in the first place.
Like I said earlier, the lines of privilege are complicated.