Getting fired for helping students?


When you’re teaching a class and students are having trouble understanding the textbook, usually the responsible thing to do is provide them with some form of clarification in the form of a handout or some web links to additional resources. But apparently that’s a firing offense if you’re an adjunct faculty at Indiana’s Ivy Tech Community College:

Pejman Norasteh — like many adjuncts — didn’t have much control over the material he was supposed to cover [in his statistics class]. But students started to send him e-mail saying that the textbook was unclear. One student said he was getting “depressed” and giving up when he didn’t understand the required assignments. Another student wrote: “As usual, our textbook does a poor job of explaining concepts. I am adding this chapter to my list of examples of how poor our book is….”

In response to the e-mail messages and personal requests, Norasteh started handing out supplementary materials to cover the same subject matter as the textbook, but with his own explanations. While the students who complained were happy, some others were not. They sent e-mail messages to the division chair saying that they were being asked to do extra work on top of the syllabus because the supplementary materials were not mentioned on the syllabus as required reading. That of course was true, since Norasteh didn’t start the course thinking he would add to the reading beyond the textbook.

At that point, Norasteh received an e-mail from Mark Magnuson, division chair for liberal arts and sciences, and general education at the campus. Magnuson wrote that it was clear to him that “you are not using or following the syllabus or textbook,” adding that “all instructors, adjuncts and full-time, are required to use the syllabus and textbook in each course to meet the statewide agreed upon course objectives. Individual instructors do not have the option of straying from the syllabus and/or textbook.”

Ultimately, Noratesh was not kept on at the college. Never mind the fact that Noratesh was not “straying” from the textbook but merely doing his job as an educator to clarify the textbook and maximize the students’ learning experience.

There are actually two appalling things about this story. Perhaps foremost is the fact that Noratesh lost his job because he was doing his job, which is to teach students and give them the best learning experience possible. Apparently, according to Ivy Tech — which here in Indiana serves mainly as a transfer institution where students take courses and then transfer the credits to four-year colleges — the need for consistency in coursework trumps the need for clear exposition of the course content, which might (and frequently does) involve the instructor using his or her best judgment and creating materials of his or her own to supplement the standard materials. What’s more important here, Ivy Tech?

The other appalling thing is the reaction of those students who got upset because they were “having to to extra work”. God forbid that you should have to work harder than the absolute minimum to understand the course content — even if the absolute minimum, which involves using an impenetrable textbook, gets you nowhere. Will these same students be raising the same objections on their jobs after college if their bosses give them “extra work” to do or if they have to do “extra work” to make their clients happier? Shame on that attitude.

Final note for full disclosure: Jeff Fanter, Ivy Tech’s communications director who is mentioned in the original article, happens to be my next-door neighbor. He’s a good guy.

9 Comments

Filed under Higher ed, Life in academia, Teaching

9 responses to “Getting fired for helping students?

  1. Pingback: Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e28v3

  2. That’s egregious. I would have loved having a math teacher like that!

  3. I NEEDED a math teacher like that–but alas never got one!

  4. It’s too bad that he was let go. And students are going to complain about everything. I would think the administrator’s could have examined what he was doing and seen why he was doing it and made a better choice than they did.

  5. As an adjunct I have not yet run into the situation where the syllabus is more important than the education, but I have heard of it happening.

    I will be teaching at a new college in the fall and hope that this is not a situation I will have to deal with.

  6. Pingback: What’s wrong with curricular uniformity « Casting Out Nines

  7. More than once in my experience as an undergrad I’ve seen my peers complain directly to the highest channels to force professors to suspend their commitment to teach thoroughly. They want answers to their questions, but they seem to prefer a direct and explicit verbal explanation to anything that requires a physical or intellectual flex on their part.

    Ultimately, when asked what I want to do with a math degree, I always say I want to ‘be an academic,’ but this is just one of what’s becoming a multitude of reasons I’m afraid I either won’t make the cut or will get locked out when I do.

    I won’t go into why in such short space, but I blame the mindset of industrialized America for a lot of this kind of disastrous thinking.

    Thanks for getting the word out on this, Robert– I hope someone in a position to affect change sees it.

  8. See what else teachers are getting fired for every day at http://detentionslip.org! Voted #1 for crazy education news.

  9. elementaryteacher

    I HAVE run in to this problem (about six years ago). As an elementary teacher with a good science background, I was told that we were NOT to supplement classes with ANYTHING not in the text book (even though the text book was considerably out of date in terms of modern developments in biology and astronomy). This policy applied to every subject I taught! It was in place for three years. Now this policy has gradually fallen by the wayside (happily). But when it was in place, we did not have access to a decent library (being overseas in a non-English-speaking country, but in an English-speaking American school), and the internet was our only source of additional information. We were not even allowed to mention current events in class!

    Looking back several years later, I think the main reason for this policy was because there was a very lazy teacher/administrator who both had some religious objections to modern scientific developments, AND who did not want to supplement his own lessons with outside material. The teachers who did, I believe now, were making him “look bad.” As soon as that teacher/administrator left the school, this policy began to be ignored, slowly at first, and then completely.

    In the example above, I feel there is some piece of information that is unknown to us as outsiders, which has to do with the feelings, experience, or personality of the administrator (Mark M.) He might be a lot more concerned with something like being a popular ADMINISTRATOR (doing everything to soothe “complaints,” as opposed to placing student understanding FIRST). Unfortunately, we can’t get inside his mind from this information.

    Eileen
    Dedicated Elementary Teacher Overseas (in the Middle East)
    elementaryteacher.wordpress.com