Apologies in advance for any typos or misspellings. I am typing this on my iPhone at 10.26pm NZST.
Sometimes I really hate uni. Today was one of those days. Last term, for my Language in Society class, we had to do a class wiki. 2000 words minimum. That's what I did. Each week for 6 weeks I worked on a new post about one area of sociolinguistics. I followed the brief. I worked hard. My lecturers saw me working hard. They knew how much reading and how much research I was doing. I did high quality posts about many linguistic terms.
So how did I manage to only get a C-? Or as my lecturers put it, "too weak to pass."
I'll tell you why. Because there is some cockamamie rule about not using any more than 3 Wikipedia links. And guess when they announced this? That's right, the day we get our grades back.
This is so unfair!
When I got my results back, they mentioned that in my first post alone I had 6 Wikipedia links. So what? I had references to other websites too! But because of this stupid rule, none of my hard work over the first half of the semester mattered. All of it was discounted.
All because I had more than 3 references to Wikipedia.
I could contest my grade with the university. But who would they believe? A student? Or a lecturer who has worked there for years?
A third of the class failed this assessment, all because they used more than 3 Wikipedia links/references. Who cares about the quality and quantity of he work they've done, when they've used more than 3 Wikipedia references?
I am so mad right now that I have no qualms naming my lecturers: Lynn Grant and Allan Bell, from AUT University.
I've had no problems with other lecturers while doing my Bachelor of Arts. They have all been happy with my work. My lowest grade has been a B.
Something needs to be done about the flippty-floppity attitude of those two lecturers. They shouldn't be teaching a paper, or they shouldn't be allowed to suddenly change the rules after the assessment has been handed in.
All of my hard work, wasted because of "too many" Wikipedia references.
I now need an A+ on the other assessment to pass the paper. The next assessment is an oral presentation. I SUCK at presenting. How do they expect me to pass?
I won't be taking this paper again if I do fail. They can go and shove this paper where the sun don't shine.
A friend of mine, he is the most analytical person you will ever meet. He was so obsessed with his posts that he put even more effort into the assessment than I did. Yet he got a D. That's right, a D.
I'm calling shame on Lynn Grant and Allan Bell (although to be fair, Allan did most of the marking - Lynn is quite a nice lady outside of the classroom). Allan Bell is a sociolinguistic author. He's written a book on sociolinguistics. Shouldn't he be more concerned with the content of the posts, rather than one too many Wikipedia references? He should be, but he's such a know-it-all prick and his head is so far up his ass that he can't see anything but his lower intestines.
So screw you Lynn. Screw you Allan. You can keep your smarmy attitude, I really don't care. I know what I did was good quality work. I know I worked hard on it, and I know I did my best. If you can't see that, then that's your problem.