Civilities and Incivilities

By Alan Jacobs • November 13, 2012, 8:59 AM

A psychology professor at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario has instituted a “civility clause” in her syllabus, warning students that “Discriminatory, rude, threatening, harassing, disruptive, distracting and innappropriate behaviour and language will not be tolerated. The first offence will result in a 10% reduction in your final mark.”

The professor, Jill Jacobson, says that her primary reason for adding this clause was to protect the course’s TAs from being “bullied” by belligerent students. However, the university authorities are not pleased. One official said, “The inclusion of a civility clause, especially when it threatens a student’s academic standing, would actively discourage the exchange of critical inquiry and free speech which are foundational to a quality undergraduate education.”

I leave it to my readers to formulate their own judgments about this contretemps.

Posted in Ethics.

12 Responses to Civilities and Incivilities

Daniel says:

November 13, 2012 at 10:24 am

Since this publication isn’t the North American conservative, it’s worth pointing out that many Canadians take a different view on these matters. Free speech isn’t valorized in the same way as it is in the US, for example. In Ontario in particular, witness the work of the Ontario Human Rights Commission.

I have doubts about the effectiveness and appropriateness of Jacobson’s policy, but as an educator I also feel protective of my TAs. I have seen that students don’t always treat them as well as they ought.

Then again, I have another set of misgivings about grades, about how they are used and perceived. Late penalties are about the only punitive aspect of grading that I accept, and I work hard to keep my feelings about classroom citizenship out of my assessment of a student’s work.

Alan Jacobs says:

November 13, 2012 at 10:40 am

Daniel, many Canadians take a different view than whose?

Sp. Bee says:

November 13, 2012 at 11:04 am

Did she really misspell “inappropriate”?

Alan Jacobs says:

November 13, 2012 at 11:09 am

That might have been the journalist, Bee. I copy-and-paste, you decide.

TC says:

November 13, 2012 at 11:58 am

Anyone that repeatedly communicates in a belligerent manner may find a prof failing to give them ‘the benefit of the doubt’, in the same way one would find in the workplace. Apprising students that their conduct will have a real and tangible impact on their grades just may help them realize the same communications will impact them for the rest of their lives. . .

EB says:

November 13, 2012 at 12:13 pm

I take the US view of free speech, but have no problem with Jacobson’s clause, with one caveat. She is not telling students that they cannot honestly state their views and opinions, only saying that they cannot be abusive in the way that they do it. It’s a good skill for students to learn: say something that others may disagree with or even be offended by, but do it in a measured way that doesn’t shut down debate.

I’m a bit troubled, however, with her inclusion of the word “discriminatory” because in general, it is actions rather than words that can be discriminatory. I hope she does not mean that students may not make statements or state opinions, even quietly and in an inquiring way, that might be taken as controversial by sensitive members of historically oppressed groups. Well intentioned though that stricture might be, it would not be appropriate in a university setting. As a woman who heard plenty of questioning of the tenets of feminism in classrooms in the ’70′s, I was made uncomfortable plenty of times. But I would not have wanted the speakers to feel muzzled.

Daniel says:

November 13, 2012 at 12:33 pm

Than Americans. It’s part of the national narrative, best as I can tell. What I mean is, it makes sense to me that this happened in the province Ontario, and it’s somehow less imaginable in the neighboring state of New York.

Alan Jacobs says:

November 13, 2012 at 1:27 pm

Thanks for the clarification, Daniel. For myself, I wonder if there is a standard Canadian or American view of this particular issue. I don’t know whether Jill Jacobson, who sought to restrain uncivil behavior in her classroom, is Canadian or not, but she got all her degrees in the U.S.; and some of the people protesting against her policy in the name of free speech and free inquiry seem to be Canadians. And most U.S. universities still have speech codes, though not as draconian as the ones that reigned twenty years ago. I think academic institutions are generally puzzled about how to maintain civility in situations where one would never expect there to be incivility in the first place. E.g. the “bullying” of TAs!

Chris Atwood says:

November 13, 2012 at 3:23 pm

Speak for yourself, Daniel. The classroom is not a “free speech” arena. If speech doesn’t contribute to education (and I as the trained professional hired to guide that process decide what does and does not contribute) it stops. And if it doesn’t, it influences the speaker’s grade.

Any other situation means whether education happens or not is at the mercy of one student’s inner problems.

J. Srnec says:

November 13, 2012 at 8:43 pm

I’d prefer if the clause simply said that TAs have the discretion to reduce a student’s mark on any pertinent assignment for verbal abuse. Everbody would know where the line is then. I don’t see the TAs abusing this power, since the prof can unilaterally change the grades the TAs gave.

EliteCommInc. says:

November 14, 2012 at 6:17 am

Class instruction is fun, challenging and in the frontline of human intellectual, and social development. It’s tough work and the the timid need not apply. For it requires skills beyond providing academic information.

I am a little concerned that a professor felt the need to add a clause about behavior to enforce effective communication skills. I would think that each TA’s syllabi contain a breif commentary about appropriate behavior as to communication with the instructor and one’s fellow students, sspecially as to lab sessions.

The process of education is by its very nature a identity searing experience. I have no doubt that a psychology course would be rife with such content. Reaching new levels of understanding via new knowledge can be frustrating for anyone. How an instructor manages the educational environment is a learning process. Since no insights are given into whether the professor provided mentoring for her TA’s managing communication in such environments it’s hard to comment.

I would add, if any TA is so bullied (depending on one’s perspective) that they need the professor to intervene on their behalf, maybe (just maybe) they shouldn’t be assisting in the classroom.

ElitecommInc. says:

November 14, 2012 at 2:03 pm

Caveat: Though a profesor who seeks to enhance and protect a TA is prefereable to professors who undermines the relationship between a Teaching Assistant and their students.

Alan Jacobs

MORE IN THIS BLOG

Civilities and Incivilities

MORE FROM THIS AUTHOR

12 Responses to Civilities and Incivilities

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Subscribe to our newsletter

Help Us Grow

State of The Union

BLOGS

CATEGORIES

ABOUT US

THE MAGAZINE