U of G student demands formal policy for student complaints against faculty
After multiple alleged altercations with a sessional lecturer last semester, a fourth year student at U of G, who has asked to be referred to as Emma for privacy reasons, has called into question the university’s policy for investigating faculty misconduct.
Emma first approached her academic department with complaints about a sessional professor’s classroom conduct in late September 2017. Emma told The Ontarion that the professor in question was consistently late to lectures, wasted lecture time on non-course related material, and failed to post a course outline until six weeks after the start of the course, in direct violation of the undergraduate degree regulations and procedures (Resolution 4, Part B). He also failed to give a midterm date until one and a half weeks before the midterm, and frequently changed assignment deadlines. Two of Emma’s classmates, who have asked to remain anonymous for privacy reasons, gave similar accounts of the course to The Ontarion. One of these students told The Ontarion that she found the professor’s marking process to be inconsistent and completely arbitrary, resulting in very poor grades and a negative academic experience for most of the class. She had also approached the department about the professor’s behaviour. According to Emma’s account of the events, she had been in contact with the associate director of undergraduate studies in her department seven times throughout the semester to express concern about the instructor’s behaviour. This first formal complaint was spurred by the sessional instructor’s unprofessional behaviour during their midterm.
In the middle of her midterm exam in November, Emma explained to The Ontarion, she got her period. Before beginning the midterm, the professor told the class that if they needed to use the restroom, an invigilator would accompany them. When Emma got up and asked to use the restroom, she was told that she would have to hand her midterm in early if she wanted to leave as there were no female invigilators to accompany her.
Although this would have put her at a disadvantage, Emma handed in her midterm early in order to use the restroom. Emma once again contacted the associate director of undergraduate studies with her concerns, and was advised to submit a formal complaint to the director of the department. In addition to the first formal complaint, Emma wrote a letter to the department’s director, which she had signed by 20 of the approximately 30 students also taking the course, affirming their shared negative experience with the sessional instructor in question.
Shortly after this complaint was filed, Emma had another altercation with the professor. While working on a group project on campus late one night, Emma indicated to one group member that she and another student might need a ride home once they were done. The sessional instructor, who had been assisting the students with their project, offered to drive Emma home several times. Emma declined the offer each time, and one of her group mates even told the professor that she already had a ride. The professor then asked to speak with Emma alone in the hallway, where he confronted her about the complaint that she had filed against him.
According to Emma, the professor told her during this conversation that it was her fault that she had problems with the course, and that the midterm incident she complained about was untrue. Emma told The Ontarion that his actions that night made her feel very uncomfortable, and one student present that evening told The Ontarion that his behaviour was not only unprofessional, but also creepy. “I started feeling victimized by the prof when I found out he was spreading rumours about me to other students during his office hours. I didn’t feel unsafe until he tried to get me in his car at 1:30 in the morning [the night of the project],” Emma said.What struck her most about the professor confronting her about her complaint was that “there was no evidence that the [department] did any proactive measures after my first formal complaint to prevent the second incident from occurring,” she explained.
After this confrontation, Emma filed another formal complaint with the director of her academic department, and soon after, filed a complaint with Diversity and Human Rights (DHR) on campus.
After meeting with Diversity and Human Rights regarding her complaint, Emma met with Jessica Westlake, the student case manager in Student Affairs, to come up with interim measures to ensure her safety on campus. These measures included no contact with the professor, an alternative faculty member to mark her exam and final project, and advance notice should the professor be on campus next semester.
According to Emma’s account of the subsequent emails that she received, these measures were forwarded to David Gibson from Diversity and Human Rights and Daniel Draper, manager of academic staff relations, to be considered under the CUPE 3913 process. To Emma’s knowledge, none of these measures were actually implemented. Not only did this professor mark her final exam and project, but when he returned to campus over the winter semester to tie up administrative loose ends, Emma had no idea that he would be around.
In early December, Gibson advised Emma about a CUPE complaint process that would be disciplinary in nature, rather than the remedial DHR complaint process. Based on this counsel, Emma withdrew her human rights complaint and opted for the CUPE process. Charles Cunningham — assistant vice-president (communications & public affairs) — however, told The Ontarion via email correspondence that the University would never pass an investigation off to CUPE to be handled, demonstrating that this point was not made clear to Emma when she was advised to drop her DHR complaint. Cunningham was unable to comment on this particular case as the investigation is still open. Emma has since received an email from Draper, stating that he represents the university, not CUPE, further confusing the process for the student.
When opting for what she thought was the “CUPE process,” Emma explained that she was ensured via email by Gibson that the interim measures would still be considered in this process. Cunningham explained that interim measures are implemented when appropriate, but he was unable to comment on this particular case at this time. He was able to confirm via email however, that the professor is no longer employed with the university. “I feel like the only person that had concern for me as an individual would be [the associate director of undergraduate studies]. Everyone else met with me, and they seemed genuine when I talked to them, yet no action was ever taken, leading me to believe they were just trying to appease me,” Emma explained. She told The Ontarion that at the end of this investigation, she would like to see a formalized policy that indicates how student complaints against faculty members will be handled. “I want it to be very visible for any student that needs it, on how to file a complaint against a faculty member,” she said.
Associate vice-president (student affairs), Brenda Whiteside, told The Ontarion via email correspondence that if a student would like to file a complaint against a faculty member, they should take it to the chair of their department, so that an investigation can begin. However, how does a student know this is what they are supposed to do, and how can they ensure their complaints are handled properly? Cunningham and Whiteside both confirmed that there is in fact no written policy for this type of issue: “community members know to direct students to the chair of the department if there are issues with a faculty member,” Cunningham stated. Emma also told The Ontarion that she would like to see, “accountability for the school… to prevent them from trying to sweep issues under the carpet and just to make sure this doesn’t happen to any other students in the future.” One of Emma’s classmates told The Ontarion that the academic department made no attempts to rectify the situation for students. Not only was this professor permitted to finish teaching the course, but based on the accounts of the above mentioned students, no measures were taken to help students whose marks suffered or who faced significant hardship because of their negative experience in the course.
Since the end of the fall semester, and the beginning of her formal complaint process, Emma has received very few updates regarding the state of the investigation. According to emails that Emma shared with The Ontarion, she has recently reached out once more to the director of the department, the dean of the department, and the associate director of undergraduate studies to check in on the process, but has received no response.
Prior to reading week, The Ontarion reached out to David Gibson with Diversity and Human Rights, as well as many members of the academic department for comment. Instead, Cunningham, assistant vice-president (communications & public affairs), reached out to The Ontarion to respond on behalf of the university.
Photo by Alora Griffiths/The Ontarion
I am astonished that the individual went through so many formal complaints and still no action was taken. I deeply disappointed about how this matter was handled. I thought I was in a fair environment at the University of Guelph, but I guess the system is corrupt no matter where you go.
The entire account is distressing to read — and the professor is a sessional so without the protection of tenure and yet the university still failed to act. Sessionals are the norm and as a potential sessional instructor and a former public school occasional teacher — at some point good teachers need to be rewarded and bad teachers need to be weeded out of the system. If the bad ones are protected it brings the value of the profession down.