Subject: Misconduct of an NCKU student, in
TainanTo: moe
From:
"mengli_2"
To:
"¨f¥Ì·ç"
CC:
"¹p¤j¦P"
higher@mail.moe.gov.tw, em50000@email.ncku.edu.tw, "¾Ç°È³B³B¥»³¡"
Subject:
¾Ç°È³B¦^ÂШf¥Ì·ç±Ð±Â«H¨ç_92.7.21
Date:
Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:03:50 +0800
Office of the Dean of Student Affairs
Dean of Students
Ko Huei-chen
21 July 2003
Dear Dean Ko,
The substance of your email has been translated for me. But your
arguments are still invalid and unacceptable.
A student wrote a secret, malicious letter, accusing a teacher of
failing her eight years before. There was no basis for her accusation
but her own claim that it was true.
Incredibly, officials at our university then accepted and
circulated this letter to insure my dismissal in 1999. That dismissal,
as you know, was canceled. But the rumors that I failed a student
unfairly continue. Just recently a woman on the street asked if it was
true I failed a student unfairly. For this reason, this case must be
resolved with a formal apology and retraction. This case will never be
closed until this formal apology and retraction is made.
You give three reasons for why you think this case is closed.
The first is that there is no new evidence. But the old evidence
would have been enough for other universities to have acted on this case
long ago.
Second, you refer to a court decision. A court decision is a
judicial, not a moral, decision. It's a decision about legal codes, not
ethical codes; about acts, not behavior. Driving a car drunk is a
criminal act; getting drunk is bad behavior. A court may find a student
did not drive a car when drunk, but that does not prevent a school from
disciplining the student for being drunk.
In addition, the court decision merely ruled on the issue of
whether this student's letter was directly responsible for my
dismissal. It did not rule on the ethics of the student's behavior nor
does it prevent the university from ruling on this issue; no more than
being acquitted in court of theft prevent the defendant's mother from
punishing her child for stealing.
A court does not judge moral behavior but criminal acts. Breaking
a window may not be a crime in a court's eyes but may be punished as
misconduct by a child's parents.
No responsible parent would use legal definitions as moral guides.
In the same way, no responsible university official should use legal
definitions as moral guides. This student engaged in misconduct by any
reasonable standard and should be punished for doing so.
Finally, your argument that she was not a student at the time is
wrong, since she repeated her claim to your vice-dean, insisting that
what she said was the truth. When she repeated her claim (last year)
she was (and is now) currently a student.
Consult with your vice-dean about this matter. By repeating her
claim she no longer falls under the umbrella of protection that you have
opened for her. I would not be so determined to have this student
punished if she had disowned her letter when spoken to by your vice-dean
recently.
If she had simply said, "I never wrote that letter and disclaim it"
or "I wrote the letter then, but I wasn't a student and I do not now
repeat my claims," that would be a different matter.
But she did not do so. Indeed, she insisted that what she said was
the "truth"; and, indeed, this was the very basis that your vice-dean
used as an excuse not to punish her: "She insists she was telling the
truth," as I recall your vice-dean saying.
You seem to want it both ways, or many ways. First I was told your
office could not handle such a complaint. Then I was told the FLLD
department must begin the complaint. Then I was told the student
insists she was telling the truth. Then I was told the court case was
pending. Then I was told the student was not a student. Then I was
told the vice-dean was gathering evidence. (Why would he gather
evidence if he thought the student was not liable in the first place?)
Then I was told it was my word against hers. (Apparently the
evidence convinced your office that it was not only my word but strong
documentation). Then I was told the student's mother did not want her
to go to a meeting. Finally I was told that God would punish the
student.
Now there's a famous French film with a very famous line:
"The terrible thing is that everyone has his reasons."
But we know that reasons are not excuses. There are many good
reasons to steal or murder; in fact, there are hundreds of them. You
can find them out by talking to those confined in the nearest jail or
prison. But these people found out the hard way that reasons were not
excuses.
But now there are other issues I wish to address in this email.
First, when a professor requests a supervised meeting with a
student, that seems to be a reasonable request to make. In universities
all over the world professors request such meetings and these are
usually set up within a day or two, or a week at most.
But you have delayed this case now for about two years. This kind
of delay should not be acceptable at a university.
In addition, a question that officials outside the university
should reasonably ask is why officials are protecting this student and
why would the student avoid coming to a supervised meeting with the
professor she accused? One would think she would pursue such a meeting
rather than the other way around.
The answer is simple: She knows her claim is unbelievable on the
face of it. Moreover, officials who conspired with her know this to be
the case.
None of this matters, really. I have long since lost confidence in
administrative remedy at our university. I will continue to pursue this
case within the university as a matter of principle. But my main avenue
of remedy will be far outside the university, to Taiwan lawmakers, the
Taiwan press, and to international human rights organizations, who
already know the details of this case. I assure you, once this case is
exposed, all parties involved in obstructing remedy at our university
may wish the case had been handled differently from the first.
Sincerely,
Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
Tainan, Taiwan
No comments:
Post a Comment