Student sues university over grade

The theory that the college student is a consumer and therefore can apply consumer rights laws to attempt to leverage a college to give him a better grade. If a plaintiff could find an attorney to even file such a case, it would get laughed right out of court and more than likely the plaintiff would be stuck with paying the defendant's legal costs.

 

Hmmm... I've been saying that students have consumer rights that can't be waived or ignored. That's a simple point of fact. I also said that instructors determine the grades, not the students. Does that help? Let's chat more.

 

It is a human right to get what you deserve. If you deserve a B instead of a C, then it is your human right to get the B.

 

Amen to that.

 

Why is this the case?

 

I'm not sure the quote that you selected is "amen-worthy"...

The student is a consumer of educational services; that is a given in a society with laws. However, the degree being earned by the student is also an output of the institution (i.e., the product). The transformed student is both a consumer and a product. There are two dimensions to the educational process. Of course, negligence and fraud could exist in either the delivery of educational services or the transformation of the student into the final product.

It is lamentable though that the guild-like nature of professorship (as they see themselves) isn't self-regulated with a code of ethics or principles of professional practice... May I suggest inclusion of the DSM-IV-TR specification for Narcissistic Personality Disorder? And outpatient treatment guidelines?

With a code of academic ethics, incompetence, negligence, and fraud could be more easily processed. A modest proposal?

 

The fact that you say it's a human right doesn't make it a human right.

"Human rights are "rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled".[1] Proponents of the concept usually assert that everyone is endowed with certain entitlements merely by reason of being human.[2] Human rights are thus conceived in a universalist and egalitarian fashion. Such entitlements can exist as shared norms of actual human moralities, as justified moral norms or natural rights supported by strong reasons, or as legal rights either at a national level or within international law.[3] However, there is no consensus as to the precise nature of what in particular should or should not be regarded as a human right in any of the preceding senses, and the abstract concept of human rights has been a subject of intense philosophical debate and criticism."

Human rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please make your case. As you do so please define precisely the set of "human rights" and please define precisely the universal concept of "deserve." Hint: It's closely related to the concept of "obligation." Warning: You are about to step into a quagmire of morality and ethics argumentation from which there is no escape.

 

so if a criminal doesn't go to jail, is he being denied his human rights ?

 

You may be right that they are a consumer of a product, but the product isn't the grade, it is the education. The "consumer" isn't paying for the grade but the grade is an evaluation that results from the work the "consumer" puts forth. If the student feels that the education didn't meet their standards then they can drop the course within the allotted time after reviewing the sylabus, interacting with the instructor, and checking out the book. After this trial period, which is given by almost every college, the student waives their right to recourse. You can't "consume" the product, the education, and then sue when the end evalution of your work isn't what you want it to be.

Beyond that, their product in an accredited program is peer reviewed to meet the standards and one lone student isn't going to be able to sway any one of importance that the product is lacking.

 

Dave -

The student is a consumer of an active seat in a classroom in the subject he or she wants to study. Provided the school has admissions standards it's the responsibility of the student to determine if they have the talent, drive and time to be there and do well.

Other than that, the student is a product of the system. If the school provides a professor, a seat and a grade, the consumer contract is upheld. In the cases where a student could conceivably sue:

1. The school has open admissions.
2. The school makes promises of employment after graduation.
3. The school's administration acts in a negligent way that impacts the availability of seats after being paid for them.

However, there is none of this "I got a B or C and I want an A." lets sue nonsense, nor should it be allowed to stand without ridicule.

Regardless of the argument that making an education available to the masses is important, some people just don't belong in academia as a student. (and of course the same could be said for professors or any other part of academia, including schools themselves.)

As to ethical codes of conduct - there's a code of conduct applied to every single professor who attains tenure and a code of conduct to be upheld to remain eligible for tenure. These conduct codes vary from school to school, I have no idea what you're on about in context to the narcissistic personality disorder stuff, but it sure sounds like you have an axe to grind.

Your argument only makes sense in the for-profit, adjunct heavy school paradigm.

 

A code of ethics or standards of professional practice should apply to those in the profession of higher education, regardless of the type of entity in which the profession is practiced. Correct?