Term paper about "God" earns student failing grade

[Chip R]

I wouldn't tell them that they could not use any pictures. They could use as many pictures as they would like. It would not effect their grade in a negative way at all.

But that's not what I said. I said IF you told them that. Purely hypothetical. I don't know how you run your classes. I don't know whether you would or would not have that kind of a rule. You said you had some rules so let's just say that you added that rule to your set of rules. Student comes in and says, "Hey, Professor Jesus Freak, I'd like to do my presentation on the Holocaust and show some video of concentration camp victims." Now you may have reason to believe that a few students in your class may be emotionally upset by those pictures. Maybe one of them had grandparents that perished in the camps. So you think it may not be a good idea if that student showed that kind of video. They can show the camps and soldiers and the trains they put them in. Anything but the victims. So you tell that student, "Sounds like a good idea but I'm afraid that some of that footage may upset some of your classmates so I do not want you to show any footage of victims." Come presentation time the student defies your authority, goes against your wishes, breaks your rule and does it anyway. The presentation was fine except for the footage of the victims. So do you tell them that was a wonderful presentation and they get an A+ for the presentation or do you give them a lower grade because they went against your rule?

[GAC]

What's amazing to me about this topic is that the professor is being positioned by some as intolerent and inappropriate when he was acting in a manner consistent with tolerance and appropriately defined the assignment for the student in advance.

Nowhere did I imply that this professor was intolerant. I have no idea what this professor, or this English department feels. They won't talk. I'm not saying they are God-hating atheists or anything like that. I would simply like to know WHY they set such a restrictive parameter? To simply say because you want to be tolerant or don't want to offend is simply ridiculous and insufficient reasoning IMO. And as I stated earlier - to not go into greater detail to explain that type of reasoning does promote assumptions and accusations.

He didn't fail to give his student direction and then simply slap an "F" on the paper because he didn't like the word. The student failed her assignment because she didn't complete the assignment within the clearly outlined parameters. She was even given a very clear "out" and could have chosen to revise her paper to avoid receiving a failing grade.

It's not about her being give an "F". We all understand that this teacher set specific instructions and guidelines and she failed to do so. That's understood.

Why the exclusion? Maybe the teacher should have done a better job explaining in greater detail as to why he didn't want monotheism included? Did he do that? Again - tolerance is a flimsy excuse. Are college students, when doing research and writing papers for an English Lit class always suppose to remember to practice political correctness? Some of the greatest writings/research in literature ever written was not politically correct or tolerant, and challenged established ruules and thought. That thought was squelched in this instance IMO, and for very poor reasons. And why shouldn't monotheism be included in a comprehensive and thorough study of the subject matter at hand?

I hope both parties learn from this experience IMO.

[GAC]

Again, I ask (since no one answered the first two times it was brought up): Would people be this up-in-arms about unfair constraints if the student was writing about the effect of technology in our world, and was forbidden from using the word "computer"? What if the student was to write about the profound effect of differing modes of transportation without using the word "car"? How about th role of electricity in our society,without mentioning "light bulb"?

We can come up with these silly analogies all we want. How about writng one on computer software development and not mentioning Bill Gates or Microsoft? Or the development of the automobile assembly line and leaving out Henry Ford?

The point is, it would be some pretty incomplete research when you leave out such important and influential variables. So why do it if you want the research and results to be as comprehensive as possible?

You're asking someone to come to or form a hypothesis or conclusion and then restricting the material that is very relevant to the subject matter. That is all I'm saying.

[GAC]

They all were ... they all couldn't use the word God.

It's an intellectual exercise.... it's what they do in college.

And of course in your thinking, God and intellect are like oil and water right?

Reminds me of these words of the apostle Paul to all these "intellectuals"...

"The foolishness of God is wiser then men; and the weakness of God is stronger then men."

[Falls City Beer]

We can come up with these silly analogies all we want. How about writng one on computer software development and not mentioning Bill Gates or Microsoft? Or the development of the automobile assembly line and leaving out Henry Ford?

The point is, it would be some pretty incomplete research when you leave out such important and influential variables. So why do it if you want the research and results to be as comprehensive as possible?

You're asking someone to come to or form a hypothesis or conclusion and then restricting the material that is very relevant to the subject matter. That is all I'm saying.

Those aren't silly analogies; they're completely consonant and fair comparisons.

[westofyou]

And of course in your thinking, God and intellect are like oil and water right?

Oh please.... go find someone else to stone.

[GAC]

Those aren't silly analogies; they're completely consonant and fair comparisons.

Resulting in incomplete results when important variables are ignored and excluded. Wouldn't you want your research to be as comprehensive as possible. That is objectivity IMO.

[Falls City Beer]

Resulting in incomplete results when important variables are ignored and excluded. Wouldn't you want your research to be as comprehensive as possible. That is objectivity IMO.

Incomplete results?

Huh?

Maybe she should be allowed to orally present her paper. Or no, write it in crayon. About Fraggles--cuz she worships Fraggles. She should make the rules, right?

Where does it end? Shouldn't assignments have parameters as well as frontiers?

You are in one uphill battle, GAC.

[GAC]

Oh please.... go find someone else to stone.

Where's the funny picture? You usually post a funny picture in response

You throw plenty of stones whenever the discussion is religious in nature.

[westofyou]

Where's the funny picture? You usually post a funny picture in response

You throw plenty of stones whenever the discussion is religious in nature.

Nice try to bait me, I didn't ever mention religion, just the assignment. But keep trolling away. I'm hip to what you're attempting.

[GAC]

Incomplete results?

Huh?

Maybe she should be allowed to orally present her paper. Or no, write it in crayon. About Fraggles--cuz she worships Fraggles. She should make the rules, right?

Where does it end? Shouldn't assignments have parameters as well as frontiers?

You are in one uphill battle, GAC.

You're not blowin anyone out of the water with the Fraggle argument.

[Falls City Beer]

You're not blowin anyone out of the water with the Fraggle argument.

I bet Fraggles understand that the teacher (and not the student) makes the assignment and the class rules.

[GAC]

Nice try to bait me, I diodn't ever mention religion, just the assignment. But kepp trolling away. I'm hip to what you're attempting.

Now I'm a troll because I disagree with your remark and call you on it?

You troll on religious discussion threads as much as anyone with your pithy remarks.

Add something of relevance to the discussion at hand.

[RosieRed]

You're asking someone to come to or form a hypothesis or conclusion and then restricting the material that is very relevant to the subject matter. That is all I'm saying.

No. Not in this case. Her paper was to be on "Religion and its Place within the Government."

It's quite easy to discuss religion's place within the government without using the word God.

God is not the subject of the paper; religion is. The student was in no way restricted as to what materials she used to form her hypothesis or conclusion.

[westofyou]

Add something of relevance to the discussion at hand.

I did.

It's an intellectual exercise.... it's what they do in college.

Sorry you found it "pithy"