<p>One thing we don’t know here for certain, is if the student may have been cautioned about electronic glitches. If so, documentation from IT is meaningless. Requests for extra time would be unwarranted. Many here have first-hand experience with current classes thsat do give such warnings, on syllabus, or verbally, or both. But we don’t know if this student had such warnings. If in fact, the student did get a warning, then a quiz due at 7 but still underway at 6.45, that got locked out would be unfortunate. However, IF that was the case, it makes it hard for people on the “flexible side” of the divide to have much of a case. Without such a notice, then it comes down to the experiences, common sense, and planning of the student, and I can see that might warrant consideration of flexibility of the student. My opinions do not assume student was warned; but they also do not assume student wasn’t</p>
<p>As for post 220, yes they are 2 different ideas. However, some see them as intertwined. So I think all agree this student made this quiz her absolute lowest priority of the week, starting at 6, and still underway at 6.45. Some feel the amount of consideration for granting flexiblilty is rightly tied to the student’s planning and effort. And although normally top-notch, this incident was not done well.</p>
<p>I have a slightly different take on the flexible/rules divide. My idea is not necessarily to change one to the other, but that both need to know both types exist; and to plan accordingly. Flexible people should not think a guy that sticks to rules is being unfair; so stay within rules or accept the penalty. A rules guy should know some don’t see rules as important as others; and should be careful what rules he sets. In this case, the one in charge, the prof, is a rules guy(or woman).</p>
<p>But, I think it’s a “value judgment” to say she made it her lowest priority of the week- she may have made what she felt was the best decision, all things considered. She just didn’t expect the snafu. “Live and learn” hopes she will consider tech issues in the future. And, good point about reading people.</p>
<p>Moreover, being a rules person or a flexible one may also depend on the situational context and the same individual could be the former in one context and the latter in another based on prior experiences with each of those contexts. </p>
<p>There’s a possibility the Prof. is a rules guy in this situation because he had plenty of experience with many previous students making flimsy excuses or otherwise whining about poor grades that were actually well-deserved because of poor planning for circumstances that should have been aware of through policies stipulated in the syllabi, college handbook, or common sense. </p>
<p>Another possibility is the Prof. had life/career in experiences in fields where deadlines are absolute and deviation from them would have serious negative consequences…such as the military* or dealing with many such supervisors/clients who are extreme “rules” folks. </p>
<ul>
<li>Recalled several military veterans in my old neighborhood recounting that in the military, “If you’re on time, you’re late.” IME, most who are teachers/supervisors tend to be exceedingly intolerant of missed deadlines due to poor planning and will not excuse someone except for serious sudden medical emergencies…such as getting hit by a car on the way to work/turn in the due assignment/exam.<br></li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>As someone who has friends in the arts & music world, I can agree with the above to a point. </p>
<p>However, even many of those friends tend to get very cynical about hearing someone spouting about “creativity” and how rules stifle it considering that’s often trotted out by fellow musicians in a band/gig setting who arrive excessively late on a gig night/practice session, don’t bother showing up at all, and display endless entitlement about how the whole world and everyone else must revolve around them. </p>
<p>It’s common enough in their community that it has become a theme for many sardonic inside jokes. Especially after they’ve had to fire bandmates and/or refuse to rebook a given band and then having to listen to long whiny/angry rants of how being held accountable for flakiness and negative behaviors reeking of entitlement is “stifling their creativity”. </p>
<p>It has also been my experience that if someone constantly goes on and on about creativity and how rules stifle it, there’s a high likelihood they’re little more than flaky self-absorbed BS artists.</p>
<p>This paragraph: "There’s a possibility… " really strikes a chord with me. I am much stricter on LL-tenant expectations now, than I was at the start. One reason(or excuse) after another from previous tenants has made me less tolerant of excuses in my current dealings. Some tenants have thought I was unfair because I expected rent in full, on time. I don’t consider that unfair. Yet, they like the homes I offer, and the prices I offer, and the quality/timeliness of necessary maintenance. I don’t ask from them more than our agreement says, but I don’t like getting less than our agreement says. Sometimes, I give more than our agreement says, but I never feel obligated to do so.</p>
<p>Perhaps this prof has had excuse after excuse before, too, as Cobrat suggests.</p>
<p>Like others, I’m with the professor on this one, but it is a great learning opportunity for the daughter. I’m sure she’ll learn to prioritize better, and maybe she’ll take “Murphy’s Law” to heart. Life isn’t fair and something will always go wrong. A missed test, the computer shuts down, the secretary with the key is sick, someone’s car breaks down, or you spill cranberry sauce on your white skirt 2 minutes before walking on stage. It’s a learning lesson. There will always be times when you fail, or you make a mistake, or someone else’s life interfers with your plans. Your daughter learned in this lesson that she can’t control outside events (computer networks and a professor’s inflexibility). Hopefully she’ll learn to adjust her life to plan for any unforseen circumstances by following Murphy’s Law and always having a plan B. Consider it a learning lesson!</p>
<p>Just wanted to update the thread. My D’s situation turned out as well as it possibly could. She never did pursue further discussions with the professor. She just became determined to bring her grade back up to an A after receiving a 0 on the online quiz.</p>
<p>Well, she did it! So… lesson learned and hard work paid off in this case. I’m glad it happened.</p>
<p>Compliments to the student! Took the penalty, learned, did better, will have a great life lesson from something in life that is a small thing.
It is wonderful when someone learns lessons so valuable with only such a small bump in the road! Well done! I think student has learned far more (in class and in life) by not taking this issue to prof, or higher up seeking special favors, and instead working extra hard to correct it herself.</p>
<p>After-the-fact, but to address the “value judgment” opinion in post 243: To say it wasn’t her lowest priority of the week, there are only 2 other alternatives that I can see to support this view. 1) That this was the only possible time the student could take the online quiz in the whole week she had available, and this was the absolutely only time possible for the student to take the quiz. But I don’t think anyone would believe that. Or, 2) For it not to be the lowest priority task of the week, that means there were still lower priority items yet to be done after the quiz, but before the quiz deadline at 7. That would show there were tasks of lower priority than this quiz. But, since the quiz was started at 6, was still underway at 6:45, and the deadline was 7, I doubt that the student’s plan was to finish other tasks before 7.</p>