"A discussion of teaching still gets people to kick up a fuss."

Re-read the comments (as closely as we read the essays). We were not reacting to a "discussion of teaching."

And if this was so instructive and the kids enjoyed the give-and- take so much, where is Part 3--the peach fuzz post? It seems to be unavailable.

Poor skills and bad research instincts, all in addition to tireless arrogance? You'll be a pretty member of the profession, LT.

The Peach Fuzz Essay is right where it always was, a click away.

When I was a very young faculty member, we had a department meeting at which the discussion was essentially a series of long, loud and (in my then-neophyte opinion) justified complaints about everything the chairman had done that academic year. Hardly anybody defended him, and when they did, it was brief and weak. At the end of the meeting, the chairman, gathering up his papers, smiled that stunned smile of the shellshocked, said, "One of the things that I like about this department is that we can all get together and voice our opinions so freely."

Which is about what Prof. Barreca's post here is to the reaction to the bad assignment and bad results that blew up in her face.

(And sure, her other students now want in on the action. We live in a culture where parading your idiocies in public--Nadya Suleman, Jon & Kate, and most "reality TV"--is considered preferable to hardworking, ethical anonymity. Hey, there's an idea--"Gina & Tim + Ten," a reality TV show in which Dr.-Phil-guest Gina and her band of snarky seminar students roam the campus looking for "weird-ass mannerisms," and moustaches on female faculty about the same age as Prof. Barreca herself. Good for 13 weeks on Oxygen, I'd guess.)

"The Peach Fuzz Essay is right where it always was, a click away."

Yes, my friend. It is there now, but it wasn't at 8:14.

In any case, I more than happily withdraw that complaint. I erred in haste, and I thank Literary Type for reminding me not just of my shortcomings but of how to operate the Internet.

"I never said I wasn't snarky. I am very snarky--a veritable Lewis Carroll wannabe I am--and very sarcastic, constantly trying my hand at zingers." This goxewu's line from another comments section. Maybe he just wants to join GB's band of roaming snarky students. They're having more fun than he is.

If you could get Staples or Mac to sponsor the academic reality t.v. show, it might well work and at 13 weeks it would count as a full semester.

The scary part of the academic reality show is that there are tuition dollars (and not a measly account by any standard other than, perhaps Greenwich Village, CT) involved in the process :-(

Hey, if I were Tim's mother who is paying for his education - I would have liked to know that my child is wasting my hard-earned money by following the fate of professor's "mustache" rather than listening to her talk about the subject?! What?!
He'd be paying for his education from now on from his own earnings.

Really, it is only fair. If you are old enough to have sex (see number (5) earlier))that means you are an adult with all the adult privileges - such as selectively listen to only those profs whose appearances* you approve or like
(*and did I mention adult responsibilities? a lot more
of those than privileges). And if he doesn't earn enough - well, too bad, perhaps, it would take him longer to save for his tuition. And at the end, not everybody needs to go to college. As a faculty member, I am in the classroom to share my expertise, and if you are not adult enough to pay attention to that, maybe, you shouldn't be there in the first place, taking place of somebody who will listen to me rather than contemplate the details of my next beauty appointment.

Dr. Barreca mentions "people in authority" - first of all, college is not a prison (at least not those I've been to, although I do admit UC is not among them). I am assuming students are there in the class because they want to learn something [very presumptions of me, I know]; and if they are distracted by my "mustache", perhaps, their true calling is a beauty school, and not a medical school as their parents wish them to go to?! As I always say to my students, go with your passion, not CNN or whomever ratings of "what the best profession is now", that's the only way to be happy.

I am pretty sure that Leon Trout and Literary Type, the Sam and Diane of the Barreca threads, are going to end up in a slapping match that turns into a passionate embrace and then the bumpin'-of-uglies. In fact, I am thinking of writing about it for my Red-vs-Blue fanfic page.

Can we please distinguish between the following:

1) The content of the student essays--however snarky or immature or sexist--which may be given a pass as a creative attempt at humor.

2) The subsequent attempts by the student writers and their supporters in the comments section to make serious arguments for elements of the essays that were previously defended as 'just humor.'

Example: Ha ha, my female prof has a 'stache and it 'pisses me off.' Very well, I'm not the humor police. But then we have students trying to make a legitimate argument that if a woman were born with soem hair on the upper lip she is bound by codes of professional conduct to shave it off? This is obviously a ridiculous argument. The breakdown in judgment for some of these students between making a joke abouts omeone's appearance (not tasteful, but not absurd either) and then attempting to seriously justify such jokes in terms of classroom professionalism is very, very ugly.

Wow, some people are in need of some severe introspection. "If you can't laugh at yourself...". As I practically preach to my students in management classes, you have to know yourself to be able to be influence others well. While I think the essay project would be better suited to an introductory, rather than an advanced class, I think as a warm-up assignment to get the kids interested in writing, it works VERY well. Also, the students for the most part had decent grammar skills and a good use of vocabulary and explanatory sentences. And I was surprised, too, at the level and vehemence of the attacks by some of the commentators.

Pot, meet kettle. The students were asked to write about their professors, and they did...evidently some of us are so far out of touch with our students that we didn't realize that students do, in fact, talk about these things. (I distinctly recall that one of the first Facebook groups at our school was dedicated to logging how many times a professor said "whatever" in class). We should all be aware of the things we do that can take the attention of our students away from the topics we are trying to educate them about.

And some of us should really try to remember what we were like as students...I know my friends and I did the same things these students did, and now we are the ones being discussed. If you don't recall doing the same, you were either a very dull and not very sociable student; or your memory has been skewed.

Just my 2 (or 5 cents). I think it was a fun read and just re-affirmed some things I had noticed. It was an enjoyable experiment, and I do hope some more are coming. Take heart Ms. Barreca and students, not all of us are so full of ourselves that we don't get the humor involved.

Note to self: why do I keep writing here? Because I still believe that if I am not part of the solution, then I am part of the problem; if people do not see sexism and biases in those posts, then perhaps nobody explained it to them well?

To firstgeer: you do realize the difference between repeating
"whatever" (trait that one may theoretically change if desired) and having certain physical traits and characteristics? Seems not.
Perhaps, this is why Wall Street and other large businesses fail?
Because many of current managers were taught by - definitely not dull - people who have spent a good chunk of their own classroom experiences laughing about the "unsightly" features of the prof's face instead of actually listening? Just a hypothesis.

Me? I would take expertise of somebody 'dull' over that 'delightfully funny' and 'sociable' - but not really skilled - anytime. Hey, everybody can get distracted once in a while, but you do _not_ present this as a socially-acceptable excuse why you did not listen in the class and fail [i.e., not listening = fail].

I just can't shake the thought that, if these students had a chance to attend a lecture by Stephen Hawking, they would whine about his "accent," get nothing out of it, then follow the man home, throwing rocks and taunting him with shouts of "cripple!" all the way.

All the more unfortunate that their professor shows such a lack of interest in calling out such attitudes, instead dismissing the entire issue with so little introspection as she offers here.

I'm a pro at snark, not an amateur and I won't work for free, or even for scale, so I'm out of the reality-show cast. (A couple of season tix to the UConn women's basketball games might change my mind, though.)

Enough of this "why can't you people laugh at yourselves?" drivel. A joke attempted is not a joke made; an attempt to be funny is not actually being funny; essays dissing faculty are not automatically insightful; students "just expressing themselves" is not automatically admirable; an unconventional creative writing assignment is not necessarily a good creative assignment; a professor who's proud of her students' work doesn't necessarily have something to be proud of, etc., etc.

Bad assignment, bad results.

Thank you.

I'm amazed that Gina Barreca can't tell the difference between "I notice my professors" and "my old-lady professor is ugly, and that pisses me off." I also can't believe that a specialist in feminist theory, who pontificates about it regularly here, is not only going to bat for one of the most egregiously sexist remarks I've ever seen in the CHE, but also defending it as our misunderstanding, and as simply a student "noticing our physical selves."

So, Prof. Barreca, let's say my male colleague makes a remark to me about my skirt being really short, or that I'm wearing a great lipstick, or that he's glad that I'm the kind of woman who's still at the age in which I care about how I look, or he really appreciates it that he's not "distracted" by any extra weight I'm carrying. If I complain, can he trot out the Barreca Defense that he's just "noticing my physical self," and simply has "observ[ed] every detail" about the self I've been "parading in front of" him? Could he use the defense (amply deployed in the responses to these posts) that he's just "in jest" and I should "lighten up"?

I'm genuinely interested in how a professor of feminist theory would distinguish these cases.

This series of "5 things" has just served to remind me of how mind-numbingly dull adolescents and young adults can be, with their juvenile obsessions and ludicrously facile attempts at wit and humor. This makes me even more grateful for those students who, while perhaps still several years away from the full-flower of maturity, are serious and dedicated to learning.

Firstgeer -- the point isn't that professors aren't aware that students talk about them this way, it's that these students really have very little to offer in the way of constructive feedback. They are, in fact, simply revealing a very shallow engagement with learning by perseverating, publically, over minor details such as mustache hair and perspiration. Sure, people talk about other people, but most of us have the good sense not to do so obnoxiously in highly public forums.

It just isn't very interesting, and it certainly isn't "funny."

elena--I apologize for not directly mirroring the example of the student and actually mentioning a real-world example that I knew of personally. And, I don't recall it saying that students were laughing at it, I was just quoting a famous saying referencing the fact that people need to have a sence of homor (which, obviously you have quashed under your Rhode Island-sized chip). Noticing and being annoyed by something doesn't mean you aren't still paying attention. It is a distraction that sometimes drags your attention away from what you are focusing on.

virmundi-Youth lack are still learning and growing. It is a skill that takes time to learn and master. The first step in doing so is to be made aware of the fact that you are doing it. In my opinion, this exercise would do just such a thing. now you may have sprung forth fully cognizant and wise like Athena from Zeus, but I was still a teen and learning a lot during th 4 years I attended undergraduate school. (In fact I still am, or I wouldn't be int he profession I am.)

Thanks for re-inforcing the steryotypes!

OOPs--I mis-keyed there--stereotypes.

You mis-sed a lot there, firstgeer.

I'm still eager for a response from Prof. B along the lines of what #15 is asking for. And I'm still waiting for someone to comment fruitfully on the difference beteween making a series of bad jokes and attempting a serious argument to justify the premises of a set of bad jokes.

Perhaps all hot female professors should dress and undulate like Shakira, and all 'unqualified' should leave the profession (I call this the pharma-rep model of higher ed.)?

Professor B. seems to think that her students' tormentors just happened onto the idea of looking them up on the Internet. But the one whose physical appearance was (briefly) libeled is the young man who brought up the issue of "peach fuzz." And the student who was ridiculed for being into _Castle_, fanfic, and _Twilight_ is the one who criticized her professors' weird-assedness.

That's not "Stranger Danger." That's "What Goes Around."

Thanks Leon! I was in a hurry and made the mistake of not re-reading as I typed, to check it over for typos and the last line was the only one showing on my screen. I often forget that my keying skills have degraded quite a bit since my high school typing class. It is one of my many flaws that students would, I am sure, point out to me.

I have fixed it for you, Leon, in case my typos made it illegible for you.

"elena--I apologize for not directly mirroring the example of the student and actually mentioning a real-world example that I knew of personally. And, I don't recall it saying that students were laughing at it, I was just quoting a famous saying referencing the fact that people need to have a sense of humor (which, obviously you have quashed under your Rhode Island-sized chip). Noticing and being annoyed by something doesn't mean you aren't still paying attention. It is a distraction that sometimes drags your attention away from what you are focusing on.

virmundi--Youth lack are still learning and growing. It is a skill that takes time to learn and master. The first step in doing so is to be made aware of the fact that you are doing it. In my opinion, this exercise would do just such a thing. Now you may have sprung forth fully cognizant and wise like Athena from Zeus, but I was still a teen and learning a lot during the 4 years I attended undergraduate school. (In fact I still am, or I wouldn't be in the profession I am.)

Thanks for reinforcing the stereotypes!"

Darn, missed another one! :)

Youth lack tact; they are still learning and growing. It is a skill that takes time to learn and master. The first step in doing so is to be made aware of the fact that you are doing it. In my opinion, this exercise would do just such a thing. Now you may have sprung forth fully cognizant and wise like Athena from Zeus, but I was still a teen and learning a lot during the 4 years I attended undergraduate school. (In fact I still am, or I wouldn't be in the profession I am.)

firstgeer: you're all right (just like the song says). You're reasonable and relaxed and add you more to the conversation than the muttering and fuming the rest of Barecca's funny posts seemed to have called forth. Thanks!

Firstgeer: Is this _really_ how far you have lowered the bar for student achievement: "the students for the most part had decent grammar skills and a good use of vocabulary and explanatory sentences." In that case, you odd way with language is okey and also dokey.

Or is it this: "I was still a teen and learning a lot during the 4 years I attended undergraduate school. ... In fact I still am ..." ?

My God, man! (Or Fuzzy-Lipped Woman). You're a teenager and also a professor of Management?! Your mom and dad must be VERY proud of you.

Much love,

Leon.

Or, as you would write, sarcastically" :)

(The previous was because comment-posting wasn't working for a bit. No, it's not a final exam.)

If we critics of Prof. Barreca's assignment and its results are--in spite of having the forensic evidence, not to mention reason, decorum, academic standards, etc., on our side--going to have to put up with our comments being labeled "muttering and fuming," then the obliviously cheery, "kids say the darndest things," Panglossian exculpators should have to put up with their weak, Montessori-school defenses of Prof. Barreca's debacle being called what they are: naive, permissive, rigorless, sentimental and more or less blind to some really nasty sexism, ageism, and philistinism on the part of Prof. Barreca's creative writing class students (or at least two of 'em).

It would have been one thing if Prof. Barreca had kept her cheesy exercise in-house. Professors try out all kinds of exploratory assignments and students do their imperfect bests to complete them. But this kind of stuff is best kept in the classroom--discussion of papers, etc.--or, at most, let out into student literary publications and on-campus newsletters. But Prof. Barreca, astonishingly blind to the offensiveness of a student being aggressively condemning of a female faculty member's facial hair, and to the jejeune writing in such phrases as "weird-ass mannerisms," chose to publish the papers, with the students' real names attached, on a higher education blogsite. It's as if she thought the papers would generate the kind of warm 'n' fuzzies that accrue to letters-to-the-editor from nine-year-olds asking Obama to bring about world peace.

Big mistake. And bigger mistake not to admit to big mistake, and to retreat instead into a kind of pastel briar patch where, "Gee, I didn't anticipate all the fuss...," and "All this fuss is really good because its gets people express themselves...," and "Hey, these are just kids, trying out their wings...," and "Nobody really meant any harm...," and so on are meant to keep critics from following. Train wreck is no longer the most accurate metaphor. Try giant sinkhole.

There will be more of these, right? Don't let the trolls and their miserableness scare you away. I was very much looking forward to hearing more of what your students had to say. You have an avid readership for this grouping of essays, and I can attest to the point that they are being widely discussed during this lull on many campuses. WE do hope you'll not just stop now.

Me, too. I am hoping for lots more from these adorable scamps.

Will the cheerleaders (#23, 24, 27) please address some of the very reasonable points made by those who have been critical of the assignment and some aspects of the student essays? I'm not trying to trash Prof. B or the assignment; but obviously some problems have come up, which you're sweeping under the rug to be supportive. Just saying 'don't listen to the grumps' and their 'fuming' and rah rah rah is a total cop out. Seriously, can you speak to the legit gripes about sexism in Tim's essay; how this squares with Prof. B's prior writings on attitudes toward women; how some students moved from 'it's just humor' to making serious justifications for their cruel jokes, etc.

Or will you continue your attempts to shoot down arguments with sunbeams?

It's kind of funny actually: the ones praising these catalysts for discussion are the ones offering words and avoiding discussion.

Aren't literarytype and dgrieves "trolls," too?

And "adorable scamps." And Michael Savage is such a cuddly gadfly.

Let me clarify: I am hoping for more because this debacle is more fun than it ought to be, and it would be educational for Tim, Michelle, and the nearly forgotten Alana, too, if only they and the rah-rah crew would really engage. And "adorable scamps" was sarcastic.

I do not recognize the name "Michael Savage"--he'll always be a Weiner to me.

I find this so discouraging -- a supposed feminist scholar sweeping such misogyny under the rug -- trying to reframe it just to defend her assignment gone awry. If you are to have any credibility at all, you need to answer #15 in a thoughtful way.

[crickets] chirp chirp chirp [/crickets]

Still waiting for that response to #15....

The crickets died waiting for a response.