A professor recently wrote a candid essay in which she confessed a secret: she didn't want to write a letter of recommendation for a student, solely because this student has different views (presumably) about gun rights.Apparently, this professor has chosen to judge her student solely by the "content of her character" .. and found her lacking. Because her student has a political value which differs from hers.
The professor wrote:
She seems to be a good kid, Sarah. And I don’t know what she really thinks of gun advocacy and political failures that have cost us all these lives and our sense of safety as educators. I don’t know what she does on the weekends. I also don’t know if she understands emotions, or what real rage feels like. It seems to me no person who has truly experienced the full impact of their own emotions would ever go near a gun.Perhaps the "content of her character" is the reigning factor here. The Professor seems to wonder about the character of The Student ... and she confesses that her refusal to recommend a student is dependent on that "character" rather than the academic work the student has done.
That is not the job of a professor. In Academia, the priority when recommending a student is the quality of her work; political (and even 'moral') issues should be transparent when judging the value of the student.
This professor has obviously been caught up in the politics of Academia, and she has forgotten her role as an instructor; which is ... to teach.
Not to teach her personal political/sociological priorities, but to teach her students how to THINK.
A competent teacher would find satisfaction in the success of a student who disagrees with her.
As it is, this professor seems incapable of separating her professional judgement from political correctness, or to focus on academic achievement of her student. It doesn't matter if "Sarah" seems to be "a good kid". It only matters if "Sarah" has met or exceed academic standards.
(Unfortunately, we don't have that information; we only have the demonstration of angst from the professor, who seems to have forgotten her role in a teaching environment.)
If this university professional had been able to do her job, she would not find herself in such a moral quandary, which she clearly defines when she says:.
So what do I do? Do I write her a recommendation because I originally said yes? Do I say no and explain myself? Do I ignore her email?No. What you do is to write a sterling recommendation, and then quit your day job. When you find yourself in a moral quandary, it's a clear sign that you are less competent than Sarah is.
I'm very disappointed in you.
(All of this professorial Angst is just pissing me off!)
2 comments:
Welcome to the dictatorship of the left.
A competent teacher would find satisfaction in the success of a student who disagrees with her.
One of my favorite teachers of all time often said his ultimate goal was to "teach myself out of a job." He didn't get along well with everybody, but if any of his students were to progress in his field to such an extent that they would become his replacement -- even as an early replacement -- he'd enter into retirement a happy man.
As to the linked article: So what do I do? Do I write her a recommendation because I originally said yes? Do I say no and explain myself? Do I ignore her email?
You write the recommendation as you said you would. Anything else, and you are now a liar as well as a coward and hypocrite. It doesn't matter that you found out "Sarah" sees the world differently from you, and it wouldn't have mattered if you wrote the recommendation and found out about "Sarah's" respect of guns later, after the fact. You said you'd write a recommendation, so you write the damn recommendation.
Post a Comment