Whose side are you on? [assignment edition - mod edit] (2 Viewers)

[guidomerkinsrules]

I don’t want to hear crap from anybody on hear about millionaires and billionaires using loop holes to pay less taxes than everyone because you are essentially agreeing with them.

this is ... not a good analogy

 

[RazorOye]

I'm reminded of this situation. Nothing wrong with students in going through previous test banks to get ideas on types of questions, and if the teacher is too lazy to come up with original questions, or even just modify test bank questions, and they don't state that those are off limits at the beginning of the semester, well, I don't think the students should be punished.

I remember a teacher getting incensed that a student had a previous copy of her "pop quiz" and using it to study

The original was the old mimeograph purple quiz that she'd been using for 20+ years... and this was in 2004ish.

I mean, at that point, you're practically inviting that. That quiz was anything but "pop"

 

[efil4stnias]

I’m with the teacher. He emailed the teacher and we all know what the teacher meant, at least I hope we did. It’s pretty evident that he wanted the work done. It didn’t have to be A worthy but putting you name and title is doing nothing. This kid knew better but decided to test the teacher.

Your company has insurance, right?

So you know why you have a "policy" that comes with every endorsement, exclusion, definition etc.

Because if the insurer didnt, while they may have INTENT to NOT cover a particular loss, if it aint excluded, its included.

Words matter.

IM sure your bids dont go out with 1 line scope of work saying " RENOVATION"

Right?

 

[Hoodoo]

I’m with the teacher. He emailed the teacher and we all know what the teacher meant, at least I hope we did. It’s pretty evident that he wanted the work done. It didn’t have to be A worthy but putting you name and title is doing nothing. This kid knew better but decided to test the teacher.

I agree. From a business perspective there is a difference between following the letter of the contract and thumbing your nose at the contractee. It sets the stage for a contentious business relationship and will likely cost you in the future.

 

[efil4stnias]

I agree. From a business perspective there is a difference between following the letter of the contract and thumbing your nose at the contractee. It sets the stage for a contentious business relationship and will likely cost you in the future.

the student followed the "contract".

The teacher attempted to "amend" the contract, after initiating the contract.

If the teacher advised "subject to change at any time..." then maybe id be more inclined to say well, caveat emptor.

But that didnt happen here.

 

[Dago]

I agree. From a business perspective there is a difference between following the letter of the contract and thumbing your nose at the contractee. It sets the stage for a contentious business relationship and will likely cost you in the future.

You are bringing in a variable that does not exist. This is a student-teacher relationship that will likely end after the semester is over. It is not a business relationship where one person has to make a choice to kowtow to an idiot who doesn't know how to write a contract for his own business just to ensure future business. Your caveat doesn't apply here

 

[Hoodoo]

Can you explain how a contractor “shirk” responsibility due to technicalities in an insufficient contract?

If they aren’t contracted to do something, what is the reasoning behind thinking they should do it for free?

I'm not a contracting officer, nor do I think it would be proper for me to give specifics on our contracts. A good portion of my job deals in making certain the contractor adheres to specifications and contractual requirements. These requirements sometimes come down to interpretation, which I think you could imagine.

 

[Hoodoo]

the student followed the "contract".

The teacher attempted to "amend" the contract, after initiating the contract.

If the teacher advised "subject to change at any time..." then maybe id be more inclined to say well, caveat emptor.

But that didnt happen here.

Which, again, is why I side with the student from a technical perspective and the teacher from a moral perspective. The teacher wrote a bad contract, the student took advantage of it. Case closed, teacher learns his lesson. Hopefully that student never needs anything from that teacher again, because I doubt he'd ever stick his neck out for him.

 

[Optimus Prime]

The teacher attempted to "amend" the contract, after initiating the contract.

and tried to amend the contract after the student confirmed the details of the contract

 

[Hoodoo]

You are bringing in a variable that does not exist. This is a student-teacher relationship that will likely end after the semester is over. It is not a business relationship where one person has to make a choice to kowtow to an idiot who doesn't know how to write a contract for his own business just to ensure future business. Your caveat doesn't apply here

Which is why I said IF the student makes a habit out of looking for loopholes then it could come back to bite him.

 

[Dago]

the student followed the "contract".

The teacher attempted to "amend" the contract, after initiating the contract.

If the teacher advised "subject to change at any time..." then maybe id be more inclined to say well, caveat emptor.

But that didnt happen here.

No accrediting body would approve "caveat disciplulus" anyway.

What this teacher is doing would actually be cited in a re-accreditation audit. You also don't even realize what kind of slippery slope you are creating by placing more gravity on intent than what the actual rule is. It's arbitrary and capricious

 

[Dago]

Which is why I said IF the student makes a habit out of looking for loopholes then it could come back to bite him.

What ever happened to 'work smarter, not harder'?

I would have loved having an employee that could think around corners like this.

 

[SWJJ]

I don't understand how ANYONE can be siding with the teacher unless they are just an authoritarian bootlicker.


How is what the student was trying to do different than someone who turned in a sheet paper and got a sheet grade for one of the earlier assignments?

I absolutely had senior level classes in college where my professors had a similar policy.

We had 5 exams (4 during the year and a final.) The professor let you drop your lowest test score and each of the other tests counted for 25% of your grade.

If you were happy with your grade, you could skip the final and drop the "0" from that test.

This is NOT a "loophole." The teacher is trying to make it so that the policy is not equally applied to better students, and makes it so that it only benefits poor students.

There is a GOOD REASON that the Department Chair made the teacher honor his policy.



Y'all siding with the teacher is wild to me.

 

[Krodwhodat]

you're salaried or hourly?

Salaried

 

[jboss]

I don’t want to hear crap from anybody on hear about millionaires and billionaires using loop holes to pay less taxes than everyone because you are essentially agreeing with them.

The most common mention of the whole "loophole" thing is how they should be closed.