g*l
2 楼
He apparently rubbed 'bosses' the wrong way to start with, by asking if he
could take 3 weeks vacation when he was first assigned
the TA. He probably should have laid low when he was warned that the prof is
not fond of him. But still... Below is a comment from the article:
Anonymous posted on Jun 24, 2:11pm
Full disclosure: I'm a PhD student and TA who cares a lot about teaching and
about my students. I have had the opportunity to teach for extraordinary
students and I've had supportive professors who were both concerned about
the quality of teaching and wanted to help me learn. I'm extremely grateful
my Columbia department is not like this.
The comments implying that he was a bad TA are demagogic and absurd. Bad TA
according to whom? The professor disliked the TA; the firing had no
relationship to the quality of his teaching as perceived by students, and
not even the department disputes this. In other words, this was not a
response to complaints or concerns by students about the TA but a response
by a professor to what he perceived as challenges to his authority.
First, not one student was apparently bothered by the 'fucked' email but the
professor, who apparently considered it enough of an issue to start
disciplinary measures. That professor obviously has no concept of what it
means to be a foreigner living in the United States and not understand the
linguistic codes. Second, on the grading issue, it sounds like the TA wanted
to be more lenient towards his students because there was no syllabus
policy about late grading and he thought it was unfairly punitive to take so
many points off of the first late assignments when there was no precedent
on the syllabus. Certainly, he probably should have asked the professor, but
it sounds like the issue was resolved satisfactorily from the point of view
of the professor and it sounds to me like the professor was the one being
rigid towards the students and negligent. The fact that this professor had
no late work policy on the syllabus is pathetic; it speaks volumes about his
priorities. Third, the exam was proctored smoothly by one TA as arranged--
why wouldn't it be? I proctored an examination for a professor of mine for a
class I was not even teaching so that the professor could do something else
that day. Obviously, that professor did not face disciplinary action. Why?
Because it is absolutely unimportant as long as the exam is proctored. If
the TA had been derelict in his responsibility and the exam had not even
been proctored, that would be more serious, even though frankly, any
professor who had a whit of sympathy for the TA would probably have resolved
the issue outside of disciplinary channels and forced them to reproctor the
exam; considering that no harm was done at all, at worst, this should have
resulted in some sort of probation.
So, if it is not about student perceptions of the TA, what /is/ it about? My
conjecture: a professor who was hyper insecure about the slightest
infraction of his arbitrary decisions and went ballistic when he was
disobeyed. In light of how mild these infractions are, the fact that there
was no probation, or warning, or anything is evidence to support this view.
In my department, or any reasonable one, when there are issues like this,
there would probably be a talk and there might be some sort of probation and
serious warning.
The union position that there should actually be transparent policies about
when you can destroy the life prospects of a graduate student is completely
reasonable.
The fact that the dean finds it legitimate to destroy someone's future for
arranging for someone else to proctor an exam should be understood for what
it is - horrific.
Only some sort of authoritarian sociopath completely lacking in sympathy for
a person who wanted to visit their home country during spring break would
take this sort of measure. Shame on that entire department for lining up in
favor of this professor to jettison a 1st-year TA and ruin their future
prospects over this sort of minute infraction.
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
could take 3 weeks vacation when he was first assigned
the TA. He probably should have laid low when he was warned that the prof is
not fond of him. But still... Below is a comment from the article:
Anonymous posted on Jun 24, 2:11pm
Full disclosure: I'm a PhD student and TA who cares a lot about teaching and
about my students. I have had the opportunity to teach for extraordinary
students and I've had supportive professors who were both concerned about
the quality of teaching and wanted to help me learn. I'm extremely grateful
my Columbia department is not like this.
The comments implying that he was a bad TA are demagogic and absurd. Bad TA
according to whom? The professor disliked the TA; the firing had no
relationship to the quality of his teaching as perceived by students, and
not even the department disputes this. In other words, this was not a
response to complaints or concerns by students about the TA but a response
by a professor to what he perceived as challenges to his authority.
First, not one student was apparently bothered by the 'fucked' email but the
professor, who apparently considered it enough of an issue to start
disciplinary measures. That professor obviously has no concept of what it
means to be a foreigner living in the United States and not understand the
linguistic codes. Second, on the grading issue, it sounds like the TA wanted
to be more lenient towards his students because there was no syllabus
policy about late grading and he thought it was unfairly punitive to take so
many points off of the first late assignments when there was no precedent
on the syllabus. Certainly, he probably should have asked the professor, but
it sounds like the issue was resolved satisfactorily from the point of view
of the professor and it sounds to me like the professor was the one being
rigid towards the students and negligent. The fact that this professor had
no late work policy on the syllabus is pathetic; it speaks volumes about his
priorities. Third, the exam was proctored smoothly by one TA as arranged--
why wouldn't it be? I proctored an examination for a professor of mine for a
class I was not even teaching so that the professor could do something else
that day. Obviously, that professor did not face disciplinary action. Why?
Because it is absolutely unimportant as long as the exam is proctored. If
the TA had been derelict in his responsibility and the exam had not even
been proctored, that would be more serious, even though frankly, any
professor who had a whit of sympathy for the TA would probably have resolved
the issue outside of disciplinary channels and forced them to reproctor the
exam; considering that no harm was done at all, at worst, this should have
resulted in some sort of probation.
So, if it is not about student perceptions of the TA, what /is/ it about? My
conjecture: a professor who was hyper insecure about the slightest
infraction of his arbitrary decisions and went ballistic when he was
disobeyed. In light of how mild these infractions are, the fact that there
was no probation, or warning, or anything is evidence to support this view.
In my department, or any reasonable one, when there are issues like this,
there would probably be a talk and there might be some sort of probation and
serious warning.
The union position that there should actually be transparent policies about
when you can destroy the life prospects of a graduate student is completely
reasonable.
The fact that the dean finds it legitimate to destroy someone's future for
arranging for someone else to proctor an exam should be understood for what
it is - horrific.
Only some sort of authoritarian sociopath completely lacking in sympathy for
a person who wanted to visit their home country during spring break would
take this sort of measure. Shame on that entire department for lining up in
favor of this professor to jettison a 1st-year TA and ruin their future
prospects over this sort of minute infraction.
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】
![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
n*o
3 楼
TA只是表面现象,估计是他的研究老板不想要他,就借坡下马户了。
h*g
4 楼
不可思议。
M*o
5 楼
开TA还好
英国大学随便开教授都正常。。。
Queen Mary两个教授2012年在Lancet上发表文章批评学校
后来这两位接连被学校找其他理由开掉了
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/dismissal-was-unfair-but-
然后号称开除和批评文章没有关系
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
英国大学随便开教授都正常。。。
Queen Mary两个教授2012年在Lancet上发表文章批评学校
后来这两位接连被学校找其他理由开掉了
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/dismissal-was-unfair-but-
然后号称开除和批评文章没有关系
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】
![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
a*u
6 楼
开除他确实太狠了
j*e
7 楼
Sanat Kumar的学生?
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
【在 g****l 的大作中提到】
![](/moin_static193/solenoid/img/up.png)
: http://columbiaspectator.com/news/2015/06/23/claiming-wrongful-
: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/23080/
相关阅读
入职之前的学历认证-麻烦死了咖啡&三氯化钾?Tenure in the Twenty-First Century关于申请funding的疑问NSF Panel 结束后 external review?请教negotiate 工科I just became a Master of Data!微信/Q313569337毕|业|证|成|绩|单,教|育|部|认|证|使|馆|认|证SCC这么回信还有戏吗?新AP的第一篇PAPER听老李的《贝尔加湖畔》 (转载)Re: 我觉得很搞笑的一句话 “我是top2毕业的” (转载)电话offer之后失联,已经10天了可以写信给conference chair 说自荐 invited talk?九个月了, NSF CAREER 还在pending, 有木有!我也总结一下某人真好笑以后不创业就是卢瑟 (转载)大学里的lab supervisor职位有人举报学生在www.freelancer.com上雇人做作业