- Feb 27, 2013
- 926
- 56
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Another professor who has confused critical thinking with ingesting only his own views. Sad. Whether the specifics of this case prove the student right or not, the real story here is that so many who take his class will be tricked into believing that this is what critical thinking consists of: someone of authority setting the terms of a debate and penalizing any who do not come to the almost forgone conclusions set up by the terms that they themselves have set."Didn't follow directions" is a very easy defense against claims that the prompt was unprofessionally written and obviously leading, but having read it myself, that seems to be a fair description.
That said, I had professor like this in college (who would mock Christianity endlessly, even though it was supposed to be a class on linguistics...hmmm), and very nearly escaped failing the course due to the same stubbornness that the student, and for that matter the instructor, appear to be exhibiting. There is a time for taking a stand, and a time for recognizing when it would better to simply slog through whatever the assignment is...and I thank God that He placed enough people around me who were more level-headed than I was at that age, who were able to convince me to just shut up and do the work as assigned. Getting a failing grade doesn't make you a hero or a martyr. It just means you wasted a lot of money and time by being inflexible, which is just as lousy a trait to nurture in oneself as this professor's farcical pantomime of "free thought".
From:
In Real-Life Version of God’s Not Dead, Atheist Professor Accused of Failing Student for Being Christian
(Not a good source, but there seems to be a lack of good sources on the topic, and note that he starts of very critical of the teacher)
update:
1) The student took the class online and the 4 assignments were part of 15 overall.
2) Other professors looked at the students assignments and agreed she did not do what was required. In other words, they felt the 0% grades were justified.
3) The school justifies Russums rhetoric by saying he was clear that he would be challenging students beliefs.
4) The school doesnt give a damn about his Facebook page, as well they shouldnt.
5) The student self-plagiarized parts of her assignment, taking something she wrote one week and using it the next.
6) Most importantly, the school provides correspondence between Russum and the student. They show a much more empathetic portrait of the professor than Liberty Counsel suggested. He explains to the student what shes doing wrong and why its wrong. Its a bit dismissive of the student, alleging that shes in no position to challenge these scholars shes writing about, but it makes very clear that she will not be punished for her beliefs. She simply has to address the ideas discussed in class and in the text, and shes not doing any of that.