GMIT Zoom fiasco

Mrs OBumble

Wombatman wrote: »

"Is there something WRONG with her?"

People who have an impairment do have something wrong with them. That is a simple biological fact: some part of our body is wrong.

It's appropriate to make allowances for that eg to not mark someone down for poor verbal presentation IF their impairment affects their verbal skills.

Bobeagleburger

The thing is, this was a supposed private conversation between adults. It's not as if it they were pointing at the person and making fun of them.

People talk about other people all the time. It's non of anyones business what others say about them really. By uploading and sharing a video it's made it a lot of people's business.

I hope the students who shared the video are caught and sanctioned.

crusier

I'll be very interested to see how this develops. In this politically correct society I can see GMIT throwing the lectures under the bus when in fact they should do the opposite and give them every support they need.

elefant

salmon1 wrote: »

Where do they say it's ok to see disabled people as wrong? They simply question that they checked to see if this individual was on a learning support system ,no where in the conversation do they make fun or reference disable people as wrong unless you see differently I'd love to see the quote where this happens...

I do think this was the main part of the recording that came across a bit poorly. It's good that they were thinking about the fact that certain psychological factors may make public presentations more difficult for some individuals than others, but any educational institute would generally take a dim view of the kind of language they used around the topic.

Absolutely not a sackable offence or anything like that, but I'm sure somebody will have a word with them. It's the kind of loose language around disabilities nobody wants creeping into their school.

MarkR

I've seen the videos, and while you may think it's harmless, or a simple fact that people say stuff like that all the time, the real issue is the GDPR breach. They spoke about named individuals, and also queried if a student might have a disability on a recorded broadcast.

Cancel culture says those teachers have to go, but that would be a bit pointless. Some diversity training workshops are likely to be scheduled, and an audit of how software like zoom can be used safely.

Panda5000

I defend against the inappropriate language around people with disabilities and get a warning for being "uncivil".

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

People should have an impairment do have something wrong with them.

All I'll ask is please educate yourself on appropriate language around this topic.

Anyone working anywhere near education should know better. I'd be surprised if the lecturers didn't already have training around this.

The majority in third level education are adults (not all, there are actually a lot of child protection procedures in place because of the 17 year olds). But it's still a time of personal growth and uncertainty for a lot of young people. Could be the first time presenting in teams with people they just recently met and on topics they're still discovering.

I've taught and corrected on some third level courses a few years ago and never came across that type of attitude.

The pile-on approach here seems to be to dismiss as they're only talking about students, "snowflakes", get over it. Two old school friends of mine never survived college when we were going though about 10 years ago, one was clearly from ongoing academic struggles and getting repeatedly dismissed and ridiculed by two lecturers.

For most it's a fun few years with pints, cans and house parties and they'll laugh this off if involved. For others it would be much more impactful. So it shouldn't happen, in private or public.

crusier

The pile-on approach here seems to be to dismiss as they're only talking about students, "snowflakes", get over it. Two old school friends of mine never survived college when we were going though about 10 years ago, one was clearly from ongoing academic struggles and getting repeatedly dismissed and ridiculed by two lecturers.

For most it's a fun few years with pints, cans and house parties and they'll laugh this off if involved. For others it would be much more impactful. So it shouldn't happen, in private or public.





Maybe your friends were out of their depth and wouldn't be able to survive in the career they studied. Many a student had to face hard facts and moved on in life with good outcomes, many tried to stay the course and were misfits. Hard honest conversations take place all the time and these ladies were genuine, professional and honest imo.

Mearings

Teachers should not employed by GMIT unless they show a proficiency the use of IT, turning off the sound & that sort of thing, you know.

Mrs OBumble

Panda5000 wrote: »

All I'll ask is please educate yourself on appropriate language around this topic.

There is not even agreement within the disability community / people with disabilities/ disabled people about what language is and is not appropriate.

I have something (very mildly) wrong with my legs There's nothing offensive about saying this .

I'm really trying not to give this thread any of my attention as to me, it's a non story. But I then I get annoyed reading peoples opinions on this.

Is the real issue here, not the eavesdropping?
Whoever stayed on the call, knew that they shouldn't still be on the call, and their presences was no longer required. Yes, the lecturers should have ensured that everyone left, but the student had a responsibility to disconnect.

Imagine this took place in a physical environment.
Lecturers and students in a classroom for presentations.
Presentations end, and students are excused.
Lecturers decide to stay in the room to mark the presentations, but never check under the desks to ensure all the students have left.
One student remained, and recorded the conversation. Presumably the student understands the context of the conversation that they have recorded, and decided to share this recording with their friends.
I think a lot more would be asked about the student in this situation

All this talk of making an example of the lecturers. Of people not sending their children to GMIT. Of being offended by a conversation need to grow up, and find something more important to worry about.

The lecturers made one mistake
They didnt check the room for stragglers.
We're in Year 1 of this pandemic, and this technical way of working. These mistakes are going to happen.

The students should get over it. The students are adults who have made a decision to attend college. If they're not able for the course they are undertaking, or not making an effort, well that's on them and no one else.
If a conversation, recorded without the participants agreement, calls the students out for not been capable, or trying hard enough, then it might be the kick up the backside that they need to find a course that they are capable of completing, or pulling up their socks and improving.
The lecturers are not responsible for holding the students hands, and ensuring they finish their course.
The issue should be dropped immediately. Imagine the impact all of this is having on the lecturers.

MrMusician18

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm really trying not to give this thread any of my attention as to me, it's a non story. But I then I get annoyed reading peoples opinions on this.

Is the real issue here, not the eavesdropping?
Whoever stayed on the call, knew that they shouldn't still be on the call, and their presences was no longer required. Yes, the lecturers should have ensured that everyone left, but the student had a responsibility to disconnect.

Imagine this took place in a physical environment.
Lecturers and students in a classroom for presentations.
Presentations end, and students are excused.
Lecturers decide to stay in the room to mark the presentations, but never check under the desks to ensure all the students have left.
One student remained, and recorded the conversation. Presumably the student understands the context of the conversation that they have recorded, and decided to share this recording with their friends.
I think a lot more would be asked about the student in this situation

All this talk of making an example of the lecturers. Of people not sending their children to GMIT. Of being offended by a conversation need to grow up, and find something more important to worry about.

The lecturers made one mistake
They didnt check the room for stragglers.
We're in Year 1 of this pandemic, and this technical way of working. These mistakes are going to happen.

The students should get over it. The students are adults who have made a decision to attend college. If they're not able for the course they are undertaking, or not making an effort, well that's on them and no one else.
If a conversation, recorded without the participants agreement, calls the students out for not been capable, or trying hard enough, then it might be the kick up the backside that they need to find a course that they are capable of completing, or pulling up their socks and improving.
The lecturers are not responsible for holding the students hands, and ensuring they finish their course.
The issue should be dropped immediately. Imagine the impact all of this is having on the lecturers.

I've read elsewhere that the students had gone off the call when this happened. Seemingly classes are posted to their intranet afterwards so it looks like they didn't remove this section when they uploaded the recording.

According to reddit anyway

jk23

I have a funny feeling rightly or wrongly that if the two lecturers were male there would be uproar about toxic masculinity etc....

The conversation itself doesn't seem too sinister just two lecturers who are too relaxed around each other giving their personal opinions on the students

gordongekko

No allowances should be made if they have access issues. The degree should be of a certain level. If they can't reach that level then thery shouldn't be on the course.

SqueakyKneecap

I've been told it was uploaded as one whole video to their Moodle (the student course resources) and then taken down swiftly after. Not a case of students still being logged in on the Zoom, which would still be very easy to check.

Was it a stupid move on the specific student to put it on Snapchat? Yep. But the lecturers should have been more professional. Not something requiring anything further than an apology either side and to be more careful in future but perhaps additional training is required for the lecturers to avoid similar instances in future.

In my job if I recorded a scrum call and then intended to have a separate feedback section of the call it would be 100% my own unprofessional conduct and negligence if that feedback was to get back to an individual who wasn't intended to hear it in the tone it was delivered. But I most certainly use similarly coarse language in reviews and clean it up a lot when addressing the colleague 1 to 1 after.

duffman13

gordongekko wrote: »

No allowances should be made if they have access issues. The degree should be of a certain level. If they can't reach that level then thery shouldn't be on the course.

I'd agree 100%, however if one of the students has for example, speech issues or something which may affect a presentation they shouldn't be penalised for this. Usually presentations are scored on content and actual presentation so I think that's what the conversation seems to have been based on

Ficheall

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

I'm more than a little surprised that they'd, apparently, routinely boost the marks given to a special needs student. I don't see that as helping anyone, really.

They routinely boost everyone's marks. Students not passing their exams is bad for business. Hopefully employers will eventually realise this and stop insisting on a degree/postgrad for their jobs.

duffman13 wrote: »

Currently studying a masters and the level of hand holding and baby sitting is incredible from what I've seen. There seems to be a prevailing attitude if someone tries there best then they will pass regardless of actual ability. Might sound harsh but the leaving cert is a better indicator from my experience in hiring.

The lecturers are a huge issue in this problem but the universities (from experience lecturing) seem to encourage lenient marking particularly within fee paying cohorts. This might be hard to hear but its happening in college and universities across the country.

It's not the lecturers' fault. Some lecturers like being nice and not failing people, but also uni higher-ups will tell departments to revise marks to pass people. People don't want to hand over money to a uni where they might not get their degree.

But on topic - massive overreaction. Technologically braindead lecturers, but that's about it.

Mrs OBumble

duffman13 wrote: »

I'd agree 100%, however if one of the students has for example, speech issues or something which may affect a presentation they shouldn't be penalised for this. Usually presentations are scored on content and actual presentation so I think that's what the conversation seems to have been based on

You'd agree that no allowances should be made, except if allowances should be made.

Yeah.

Bredabe

duffman13 wrote: »

Currently studying a masters and the level of hand holding and baby sitting is incredible from what I've seen. There seems to be a prevailing attitude if someone tries there best then they will pass regardless of actual ability. Might sound harsh but the leaving cert is a better indicator from my experience in hiring.

The lecturers are a huge issue in this problem but the universities (from experience lecturing) seem to encourage lenient marking particularly within fee paying cohorts. This might be hard to hear but its happening in college and universities across the country.

I would agree regarding online learning being more difficult from both points of view BTW

I'm in a course aimed at adult learners who have experience in a particular type of work, as a result, it's a course of mostly mature adults.

Just returned for the second last year and the handholding in some aspects means that we are expected to just parrot off information. So far, most sub courses are easier now than they were in the first few years.

That said, halfway through and the majority of the lectures unwilling to answer questions generated from their assignments or their lectures. In fact, I would say its a competition to be the most unhelpful in the year.

As for finding our own sources to answer the questions, they won't, met with atttitudes which to me seem to border on fear.

Paddico

6 pages in and people still talking about this non story

Fair slow going with news in Galway these days

Geuze

crusier wrote: »

I'll be very interested to see how this develops. In this politically correct society I can see GMIT throwing the lectures under the bus when in fact they should do the opposite and give them every support they need.

I don't know anything about the staff, but I have heard that the student may be sanctioned somehow, I presume for the distribution of the recording.

Bobeagleburger

Geuze wrote: »

I don't know anything about the staff, but I have heard that the student may be sanctioned somehow, I presume for the distribution of the recording.

Was that announced, or where did you read it/hear it?

Geuze

6 wrote: »

Was that announced, or where did you read it/hear it?

I heard that from staff of another IoT, who had communicated with several staff from GMIT.

Bobeagleburger

Geuze wrote: »

I heard that from staff of another IoT, who had communicated with several staff from GMIT.

Ok, nothing official so. I'd hope it is true tbh.

biko

Please refrain from speculation and forwarding gossip.

Daisy78

salmon1 wrote: »

No problem if that's how you think society works then fair play,I just know that if my conversations I've had with colleagues all ready this morning were recorded I'd be all over the media by lunchtime,no of our comments were that bad but just not politically correct.

Just another point from reading twitter the most people who seem to be outraged and want people fired seem to have #benice to everyone ect but it must only apply to them when it suits them.

Anyway I hope the students and staff involved are ok and that nothing happens to the staff members in terms of there mental health or even worse as I can't imagine seeing you face on every media outlet and social media group

Just because it happens doesn’t make it right. Expecting people to do their jobs with some level of integrity isn’t asking much? And yes some of those comments are very inappropriate, speculating if one of the students is slow?!! These are people in positions of influence, supposed to be setting standards as role models for their students. While at the same time the college probably has anti bullying and mental health policies in place.

Daisy78

crusier wrote: »

Sometimes the truth hurts, too often the wrong people are Selected for positions based on who they know. This was clearly not the case here. Great lesson for students to up their game.

So you think it would be perfectly fine for the lecturer to provide this feedback to the girl in question, face to face? You think the language used was professional and appropriate? As one poster said, they are not down the pub with their mates, they are in a place of work. Shouldn’t be any problem providing negative feedback in a way that’s professional and respectful.

Daisy78

Daisy78 wrote: »

So you think it would be perfectly fine for the lecturer to provide this feedback to the girl in question, face to face? You think the language used was professional and appropriate? As one poster said, they are not down the pub with their mates, they are in a place of work. Shouldn’t be any problem providing negative feedback in a way that’s professional and respectful.

Interesting to see this non-drama is still being dragged out.

Sorry to break it to you, but people talk about other people all the time, all over the world. Bosses talk about staff and vice versa, players talk about coaches and vice versa, teachers talk about students and vice versa etc etc etc etc

All that has happened here is you were exposed to this reality. Take the life lesson and move on

Daisy78

Deleted User wrote: »

Interesting to see this non-drama is still being dragged out.

Sorry to break it to you, but people talk about other people all the time, all over the world. Bosses talk about staff and vice versa, players talk about coaches and vice versa, teachers talk about students and vice versa etc etc etc etc

All that has happened here is you were exposed to this reality. Take the life lesson and move on

Don’t need any life lessons thanks. Like I said doesn’t make it right.

Quantum Erasure

Daisy78 wrote: »

Just because it happens doesn’t make it right. Expecting people to do their jobs with some level of integrity isn’t asking much? And yes some of those comments are very inappropriate, speculating if one of the students is slow?!!.

Dont see the problem with that, tbh. Maybe the student in question is 'slow', better to be sure and make allowences than mark them unfairly harshly

Amazed anyone is defending the lecturers. I've worked in a professional career for years and never heard that type of language used. I've also taught modules on occasions and never heard that sort of discussion behind closed doors.

As for the bizarre way the marks were reached, did the lecturers just pull the figure from thin air or were they actually following an objective marking scheme? If the lecturers are just marking based on "gut feeling", I can easily foresee a free-for-all where students query every mark these two lecturers have given over the years.

It's not a firing offence but it does portray GMIT as a fairly poorly run organisation.