NEW CASTLE —
Imagine a world where a student unhappy with a college grade could get a judge to change it.
What would that world look like? Academic chaos, we would argue.
So we are pleased to learn an effort to have a judge intervene in the grading decision at a Pennsylvania university has failed. Any other ruling would have been disastrous for education.
The specific case at hand involved a student at Lehigh University, Megan Thode, who filed suit seeking to have a C-plus grade she had received in a therapy internship course revised.
As a result of that grade, Thode did not qualify for the master’s degree in counseling psychology she was seeking. And, as a result of that, she argued in court that she was losing an estimated $1.3 million in lifetime income because she didn’t possess the desired degree.
In her lawsuit, Thode didn’t simply claim she deserved a higher grade. Instead, she said her C-plus was attributable to a zero grade she had received in participation in the program. She was given this grade despite a record that showed she had attended all her classes.
Thode said the participation grade had nothing to do with her classroom work. Instead, she charged it was because she is a strong advocate for gay marriage in her personal activities, and the instructor giving the grade is opposed to gay marriage.
Such an allegation sounds serious, but in court, Thode could not document it. And while Northampton County Judge Emil Giordano found it odd that someone could be given a zero for participation in the class — something that had never happened in the school’s history — he said he had no legal authority to overturn the grade.
That’s the way it should be.
In court, Lehigh professors portrayed Thode as an argumentative student who had difficulty taking criticism and relating properly with others. Supposedly, several professors conferred before the zero grade was awarded.
When it comes to giving classroom grades on subjective matters (as opposed to tests with specific answers), there will always be judgment calls made. But out of necessity, educators and schools need to be acknowledged as the final arbiters. Having a judge intervene would lead to horrible consequences.
Such a precedent would encourage other students to file similar suits. And the only real effect would be trying to replace the subjective decisions of educators with the subjective decisions of judges.
To put it simply, Thode is by no means the first student to be unhappy with a grade. Perhaps the professors involved could have handled her grading differently, or perhaps she could have conducted herself differently. Regardless, it’s a done deal and the courts should not intervene.
Editorials
Our Opinion: Court refuses to intervene in student’s complaint
- Editorials
-
-
Our Opinion: Lousy voter turnout is a missed opportunity
Tuesday’s primary in Lawrence County had its share of winners and losers. But — based on the numbers — the biggest winner has to be voter apathy. Countywide, voter turnout in the primary was a whopping 17.1 percent. In case you missed it, our use of the term “whopping” is sarcasm.
-
Our Opinion: Pennsylvania’s primary system is controlled by parties
Should Pennsylvania’s primaries be open to independent voters? That’s an interesting question and one we have explored in the past on this page.
-
Our Opinion: State audit says city school district failed to collect from non-residents
Audit information about non-resident students who didn’t pay tuition at New Castle raises more questions than it answers. At least so far. We expect more details when the Pennsylvania auditor general’s office completes its report and the New Castle school district provides its response.
-
Our Opinion: Make the most of your power to vote by casting ballot tomorrow
So what kind of turnout will there be for tomorrow’s primary? Recent history suggests somewhere between low and lousy. This year’s elections are devoted to local races, and there are few major ones being contested in the primary.
-
Our Opinion: Privatization of county jail is worthy of examination
Generally speaking, we support government efforts to seek more efficient ways to provide essential services. So we have no problem with the decision by the Lawrence County commissioners to solicit proposals for the private operation of the county jail.
-
Our Opinion: We endorse candidates for New Castle board
The New Castle school district is often a study in contrasts. There are complaints about the district on everything from taxes to nepotism, from test scores to ethical slights. Yet at the same time, plenty of students within the district excel. It’s a tribute to the hard work of those students, their families and the educators who support them.
-
Our Opinion: You should be frightened, outraged by IRS abuse of power
When people talk about government posing a threat to citizens, a common topic these days is unmanned drones. But a more credible threat may be the Internal Revenue Service. This agency, responsible for collecting taxes and enforcing related rules, has the ability to make life miserable for the average individual.
-
Our Opinion: Our endorsements for City Council race
The city of New Castle needs help. Financially distressed and operating under Pennsylvania’s Act 47, New Castle must find ways to reverse its population loss and fiscal challenges.
-
Our Opinion: Court frowns on gerrymandering, but only slightly
Pennsylvania legislators have received the green light to put their own political interests ahead of yours. That’s a key point in the latest Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling on legislative apportionment in the commonwealth.
-
Our Opinion: Study says distracted driving deaths are under reported
Suppose you operated a piece of heavy machinery at your job. And suppose it’s machinery that moves quickly with little effort. What would happen if you decided to take one hand off that equipment — while it was still in motion — and instead focused your attention on a telephone call?
- More Editorials Headlines
-
