|
|
|
|
|
|
by scottlamb
1788 days ago
|
|
|
You're making my point with every sentence. The University doesn't want headlines like "U of WTF condones classroom screaming" or "Student Sues U for Abusive Workgroup". When it comes down to it, the other student's parents likely don't want his name and behavior in any of these stories either. Bad for job prospects. The person acting with integrity is the one with the least to fear from press or the legal system. Again, I'd first try explaining the rules to the other student as another commenter suggested. But the University has a responsibility to step in if that doesn't work. I would remind them they have more to fear from failing to act than from acting properly. I likely wouldn't actually sue—as another commenter said, students don't want to deal with that. A private threat is likely enough, and certainly a story in the press would do it. |
|
|
No, I'm not. You're treating your own ethics as being universal and absolute. I don't agree with all of your implied premises.
In a vacuum, defending the harassed students would be ethical. But it isn't a vacuum, and the university has a responsibility not to burn cash (or brand value) on lengthy legal battles that only affect a small minority of students. A large public school in the US could harm literally 100,000+ people (with degrees completed or in progress) just to spare a few students from an unpleasant project.
> But the University has a responsibility to step in if that doesn't work.
Yes, they do. That's a much milder assertion than your original one. "Stepping in" does not immediately mean a lawsuit, disciplinary action, or expulsion. It probably means the professor would just ask the student to complete the project alone.