La Résistance lives on

Last year, Peter Craddock decided to write his lecture notes electronically, using the MacBook his parents had offered to him for his 20th birthday. And one day, coming back from university, two girls gave him the idea of putting his notes on the web, accessible to all the other students.

He did it, and was rewarded by a hugely positive response. Over the course of two months, many of the 400 students downloaded the notes over and over again, amounting to over 3000 downloads by Christmastime.

But then came the exams.

By some curious twist of fate, the professor in one course (and his assistants) asked a question to the students at the oral exam. And the answer to this question came out wrong. For so widespread was the use of Peter’s lecture notes among certain students that, rest their souls, they had based their studying on them alone, and these notes contained one huge mistake.

The professor noticed that the same mistake was to be found among students, and guessed that some fool had tried to make his notes available, notes which contained the glaring error. It seems he thoroughly disliked the distribution of notes, and took upon himself the task of destroying the credibility of these notes. He did so after the exams, and he did so the next year.

This sounds like an over-dramatisation of facts, but it isn’t all that far from the truth.

Today, the professor in question told the students in the year below me that a student had made some notes available that contained many mistakes, huge contradictions, blablabla.

Now, why does this annoy me?

1) I fixed the mistake in question
2) I apologised to him and to the students for the mistake
3) I sent an e-mail to all the professors whose courses I had followed saying that I had made my notes available, and inviting them to take a look, either for their information (i.e. “how did I explain this to the students?”, …) or in order to find other mistakes. I asked them to tell me what mistakes were in there, in order not to penalise the students of “future generations”.

Now, Mr Pierre d’Argent, whom I shall not name, what is the source of your frustration and lack of communication?

Is it the fact these notes are available to all, where you have not made anything available (no syllabus, no student material, …)? Is it because my notes offer an alternative to taking notes during your classes? Is it because these notes can enable some students to focus on what you mean rather than what you are saying?

Well, Mr d’Argent, let me tell you something: your second attempt to discredit me has only served the purpose of strengthening my dislike of your person. This, dear Professor, means war.

I now have agents within the year to which you teach who shall use the lecture notes to eradicate every single element with which you might disagree. I have agents ready to improve the notes in order to bring them closer to the quality of a real syllabus.

And the notes are just the beginning. I made many compilations of laws and case-law for the students to bring to the exams. You even commended me for the compilation of case-law made for your exam, Mr d’Argent, and I shall remember the compliment. However, they were not perfect. The next generation shall be.

Your choice to strike a second time has made the need for the student underground movement all the clearer.

Though I no longer follow that class, though I am now in the year above, la Résistance lives on.

Other posts:

« iTunesque updated for iTunes 8

Combining Leopard themes your way »

Tags: University

This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 September 2008 at 21:42 and is filed under Random. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.