Student activism crushed the Administration’s recent attempt to install a Student Code of Conduct: SEE LINK (video)..
At that time, some argued that an Executive Code of Conduct was needed because of the potential for abuse of power: SEE LINK.
.
Recent and ongoing unethical abuse of power by U of O President Allan Rock is reported HERE (video).
.
The aggressive and abusive treatment by a seasoned executive officer and former federal minister of a mild-mannered undergraduate student is inexcusable. Mr. Allan Rock appeared to have the clear intent to intimidate, with disproportionate use of force.
.
In his “apology”, Rock went on to defame and blame the student: SEE LINK. The “apology” describes an event that is in sharp contrast to the voice recording.
.
Bring on The Code!
.
[Photo credit: University of Ottawa]
.
Context of Thuggery:
.
Thuggery in the Upper Administration
Thuggery in Physics
Department of Physics DTPC - video
26 comments:
"[..] potential for abuse of power"???
No. Just "abuse of power", plain and simple. Name your administrator.
''Mild-mannered''...these words were also used by colleagues and friends of several notoriously famous people: Valery Fabrikant, Kimveer Gill, Marc Lépine, before they became (in)famous.
comparing student activists to these people is just as bad as comparing the administrators to Pinochet and the like.
unless of course your goal is to foster violence.
Not at all. The goal is to point out the obvious: that Rancourt and his disciples are all a bunch of nutbars that are perhaps one stamp away from going postal.
Have a nice day...or not, I really don't give a shit.
The person who justed posted the above comment doesn't exactly sound like a bastion of sanity him/herself.
sane sane sane sane sane crazy sane sane sane sane sane
You forgot one other word: immature.
Marc went to Mr. Rock's office after being told that he would NOT get a face to face meeting because of his history of disrespectful and "Michael Moore" style showmanship. He showed up and rudely barged (without permission) into the office, and started badgering Mr. Rock; it was a deliberate provocation with the intent of getting something to smear Mr. Rock with (hence the recorder). Naturally Mr. Rock would be affronted by this "breaking-and-entering" (which is itself the most violent thing that occurred), and I think his anger is wholly justified.
And you know what? I would have sympathy if this action occurred under a truly repressive institution and the cause was just. Instead we have an idiot physics student who is so arrogant to suppose he has the right to be evaluated on a political rant, and is somehow surprised to find out that not every paper is worth a mark. Furthermore, we have an administration who's only claim to "oppression" has been disliking Prof. Rancourt's equally silly endeavors, and his cheapening of the University's reputation with his obviously biased climate-change-isn't-happening B.S.
The admin may not be perfect, but I would think that real progress here would occur through respect and co-operation, rather than through confrontation that can only serve to push us apart. Trying to turn this into some kind of battle-of-the-people cheapens the real fights against oppression that have occurred and continue to occur everyday. What a luxuriant culture we truly live in, when "fighting the man" is not confronting a murderous dictator, or a fundamentalist government, but getting the right to publish a beer-and-peanuts argument as a 4th year paper. Grow up.
Without free thought, where would Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato be? In modern usage, a tyrant is a single ruler holding absolute power over a state or within an organization. The term carries modern connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his or her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which the tyrant governs or controls. In contemporary usage, dictatorship refers to an autocratic form of absolute rule by leadership unrestricted by law, constitutions, or other social and political factors within the state.
@ art student:
Congratulations! You are now the proud owner of a degree in Know-Your-Place-ology. You have truly demonstrated your superior skills in knowing your place. You've aced the exams and you're well on your way to knowing your place in society and staying exactly there. If you continue to cooperate and respect, you will be rewarded with our patented uOttawa Brand Luxuriant Culture. The secret ingredient? Oppression! Don't worry, you won't even notice it's there... so long as you cooperate and respect, that is.
Cough.
Cough.
Cough.
...Here's a funny story: this one time, at university, I had a prof call my work stupid in front of the whole class. Then she called someone else's work stupid, and that person broke down and cried. I ran to comfort the person who was crying and was told to get back to my seat or fail the class. I returned to my seat, but from that day on, my grades dropped lower and lower, and the verbal abuse became more and more severe. What could I do? I sought help from the appeal centre, the administration, everyone. NO ONE would help me--ME, the RESPECTFUL AND COOPERATIVE student. The student council kid. The sweet quiet one. I never got loud and Michael Moore about it. I was constantly respectful and cooperative. And nothing happened. I barely passed the class and came out with a bruised ego or maybe a bleeding heart... I don't know for sure. But the moral of the story is cooperation just makes you complicit in your own oppression. At some point, you get hurt enough to disobey--and I hope that if you ever get to that point, people won't tell you to grow up.
...quit buying into the notion of "real oppression." Oppression is all around you, and if you don't believe it's bad enough now to take action, then don't worry: good things come to those who wait. You'll get your REAL oppression. It's coming.
Sorry but this sounds completely implausible. A professor threatened you with failure because you went across the class? Come on, this sounds like fiction. If it isn't, then be specific rather than making it sound like a story designed to make you sound heroic and martyred.
Absolutely not fiction. It happened to two other people too, and there's a class full of witnesses to back me up on this. Okay, let's switch "ran" in "ran to comfort" to "walked" because that's more accurate (I didn't run, that does sound all martyr-like... I rushed, at best). Anyways, the story is true, even if I sound like I'm writing for Reader's Digest. I don't know if she ended up failing the person who cried or not. And, like you Anonymous, I choose not to share my name or the names of those involved. I don't want any of us to have to deal with this sociopathic prof again.
Also, it should be noted that this happened BEFORE Mireille Gervais took over at the appeals centre. BEFORE the report on student abuses. I suspect that if this same thing happened now, I would have a lot more support from appeal centre and from the SFUO. Still, it's people who tell you to "grow up" who retard the process of getting help, getting heard, and getting serious about abuses of power. Those people who wouldn't believe me still exist, as do those people who think that if I had been more respectful and cooperative things would have been better. I was respectful and cooperative. Those words defined me in my early undergrad. And R&C gets you nowhere but more firmly under the thumb of the people who want to keep you down. Not all administrators are evil people, don't get me wrong, but they're still serving a system that has no meaningful place for you and your voice. Some admin abuse their power knowingly, some feel trapped in the system, some are "just doing their job" and some just think life is unfair in general and want to impress this important lesson upon you before your youthful idealism gets the better of you.
Oppression is real. Students get hurt in this system. Believing in the system is a flimsy defense against it. That's all I've got to say.
it's easy to just say you "don't believe" something happened, just to avoid thinking again about your views.
Sure whatever. But you are still offering nothing that sounds plausible. Specifics, not repetition.
Are you arguing that, if this instance is true, that is evidence of systemic problems? That would also show nothing of the kind.
You have to be careful about generalizing from an instance to a rule: this is a mistake of reasoning and widely known to be so. The former physics professor who runs this blog probably would know this.
systemic problem or not, an individual which is mistreated deserves support.
Against what? The professor? The University?
Did anything actually happen?
Why would we believe this, when so much else here is flat out untrue? It's a propaganda site, not a newsroom.
Does anyone actually believe a professor can get away with failing a student for standing up and walking across a room? Gimme a break. Demonizing someone so obviously is nothing more than incitement.
And here it is everyone:
"Why would we believe this, when so much else here is flat out untrue? It's a propaganda site, not a newsroom."
>>>Remotely associated with Denis Rancourt, therefore obviously lying!<<<
maybe not get away if it's in a full classroom.
but many professors HAVE got away with sexual or psychological harassment. obviously, because there is no witness.
It can happen in a full classroom too: look up bystander effect. It applies to "emergency situations" but I recall that it can also apply to injustice situations. Why don't you speak out when you hear someone tell a racist joke? Plenty of reasons. Why might you not speak out against a professor? Plenty of reasons.
Don't assume that the presence of many people guarantees intervention.
The Pirate: good point
if you look at the report the University recently released (by Pr. Joanne St. Lewis of the Common Law faculty) on academic appeals it is mentioned (Case Study #3) that even when there was a witness who corroborated the version of the first student, the university might rule against the student.
so sometimes (as acknowledged by the university's own report) the word of two students is worth less than the word of a professor.
Hey, is any of this supposed to be real? Citing a sociology principle does not constitute evidence. Try showing some evidence that something actually happened. And avoid the out-of-context quotes from the real human rights person, it just makes you look shallower.
So, lemme get this straight, you are arguing that professors misbehave sometimes? That's news?
Students misbehave a lot more. That's not news either, but it's a lot more systemic. Where do profs go when they get the shaft from crazy students?
None of the crud spewed out here is real, any more than Carletons claims that cystic fibrosis is a white man's disease can be defended.
Put on your thinking caps, kids, and stop inventing things to suit your own twisted reality. Or at least pretend that evidence also matters and present some. Alternatively, stop the slander.
Unless, that would mean former physics prof Rancourt stopped having a fan club of course. That's all that matters.
"So, lemme get this straight, you are arguing that professors misbehave sometimes? That's news?"
AND get away with it. I think that's the key part.
"Students misbehave a lot more. That's not news either, but it's a lot more systemic. Where do profs go when they get the shaft from crazy students?"
Actually there are disciplinary measures for students (from failing up to expulsion of the school). And all the people who apply these measures are professors. Yes, the President, Vice-President Academic, Deans, Vice-Deans, are also professors. The Senate Appeals Committee has 6 professors to 2 students.
So there are individual professors, and committees of professors, with the power to sanction students. There are no committees of students with the power to sanction professors.
Whether you think it's right or not, this is the nature of the hierarchy. Don't try to claim it's the other way around.
To the disbelieving anonymous: I stand by my story, I believe Marc's story, I don't know you and it is obvious that my responses are encouraging only your bitter and abusive speech, not anyone's understanding of student oppresssion. I consider this exchange over. Goodbye.
If you had said anything credible, you would have had my support. Pity. No one likes bullies. But no one likes liars either.
Post a Comment