houlahound said:
So if you write the syllabus as the instructor do you also choose the content, the scope, the criteria, the purpose, the intent, the rationale, the course structure, the course design, do you set the standard of achievement, quality control the standard you set yourself etc.
What qualifies you to do all this and how do you know you are right?
Something seems amiss to me.
Apple_Mango said:
I have to agree with this post. The fact that educators have the power to do all of this appears to be amiss to me. My English teacher made a rule on her syllabus that she marks students for being even one minute late to class. However, she never enforced this rule. She herself came in two minutes late to class one time. Never mind the fact that most workplaces give a person a grace period.
If she really did decide to enforce the rule, students couldn't do anything about it.
With regard to houlahound's post that you quoted, the instructor is usually not the sole arbiter of the course content, structure, scope, and purpose. Normally, the course won't be too far from the same course as taught by other members of the department. As far as grading standards, those are typically up to the instructor. If the standards for a particular course section are really out of whack, students can (and usually will) complain to the department chairman. If too many students complain, the instructor's supervisor will most likely take a closer look at that particular instructor's methods.
houlahound seems (or rather, seemed, since he is now banned) to be under the impression that the classroom is a democracy, with everyone, including the instructor, having an equal vote. IMO, that isn't and shouldn't be the case. What qualifies the instructor to set up the course a particular way is some expertise in the area covered in the course, expertise that the students don't have.
Regarding your Englilsh instructor, I doubt that there are many department chairs who would fault her for enforcing a tardiness policy. Inasmuch as she didn't enforce the policy and was late once herself doesn't detract from having such a policy -- it just points out some hypocrisy on her part for being late. As to the policy itself, maybe it was intended to be only a threat, to encourage students to come to class on time.
I'm not sure that "most workplaces" give a person a grace period. Many years ago I was disciplined at a factory job I had for coming in late; namely, I was transferred to a much less desirable place in the plant, with much less desirable hours. Just a few days ago, I was talking with a friend who works for Seattle Metro. He mentioned that it was impossible for him to take the bus to work (Metro is the bus company in Seattle), because the erratic bus schedule would cause him to be late to work, which would trigger disciplinary action.