“What aspects of the course could use improvement or change?”
This standard course evaluation question elicited a not-so-standard reply from University of Georgia student Brian Beck, who began with “Joe Disponzio is a complete asshole,” ended with “To hell with all gay teachers who are terrible with their jobs,” and included in the middle some remarks that make South Park look positively PC.
Beck’s brashness, while it certainly won’t win him a spot among my Top Friends, can probably be explained (though not excused) by the fact that course evaluations are — at least ostensibly — completely anonymous. As any stall in a public bathroom will demonstrate, anonymity can unleash the (often stupid) beast within. But anonymity, however scary, should be protected when it’s been promised.
The University of Georgia disagrees.
They went so far as to retain an alleged handwriting expert (an ‘04 UG grad, how cozy), to confirm Beck’s identity, which Professor Disponzio had suspected all along. (You in the back? With the Pat Robertson tattoo?) The University’s paper reported that, in a letter to the dean, Disponzio wrote: “Though the evaluations are ‘confidential’; such pointedly directed hate removes all rights to confidentially [sic].”
Really, Professor? Is “confidential” in facetious quotes on the top of the course evaluation forms?
Beck was charged with violating a handful of provisions in the University’s Code of Conduct, given “a formal reprimand” and tasked with writing a reflective essay and an apology letter - a fittingly vacuous punishment for an absent crime. Star student that he is, Beck completed both writing assignments the day they were assigned, clearly taking the needed time to reflect upon his prejudices.
But back to the Penn bubble: could this really happen here, home of the sacrosanct grey course evaluation envelopes? Dan Strigenz, a College senior and Editor-in-Chief of the Course Review, wrote in an email that — to the best of his knowledge — “professors can see the data and comments before PCR sees them.”
So if you hate your professor enough to call her some names from Beck’s rich vocabulary, just remember that she just might hate you back enough to report you.
I’d call foul on that move, but I’d probably hate you too, Anonymous.
Tags: course evaluations, free speech, homophobia, University of Georgia
An RSS feed of The Spin is available
January 25th, 2008 at 9:59 am
That’s pretty ridiculous yo. Anonymous should mean anonymous. By going to those lengths, the professor ends up looking thin-skinned at the least, and I’m sure eliciting a false apology brings little satisfaction to him.
January 25th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Haha, this was great!
January 26th, 2008 at 1:48 am
I agree that anonymity should be “protected when it’s promised.” Without anonymity, the course evaluation will not have candid comments, and then, what’s the point. As Lauren says, with anonymity, the remarks may be stupid or scary, but that’s the nature of free speech too. The words might be obnoxious but we still respect the right of the speaker to say them. On the other hand, like free speech, the protection for anonymity should have some limits. Where do you draw the line? I’m not sure. Certainly if the anonymous statements are threats of violence, Great writing!!!
February 1st, 2008 at 9:38 am
What’s the best way to make legal actions illegal? Create your own phony collegiate legal “Code”! And let the kids have some fun enforcing it! They do this everywhere to make overly-self-entitled college kids feel like they are in control of their fate. Fake crimes are sent to fake courts to receive paltry punishments that the greater college community doesn’t care about.
Wait. This is anonymous, right?