Letter to Dean of Student Affairs

Dean Ko,
Dean of Student Affairs
National Cheng Kung University

26 June 2003

Dear Dean Ko,

I hope you understand why I have lost patience with your
department's handling of my complaint against a student named
Lily Chen (Chen An-chuan). I have sent countless emails and faxes to
your office and received only vague responses about
"trying to do something," "gathering facts," etc.
The case is simple and should be simply handled: A student wrote a
secret and spiteful letter accusing a professor and
should be punished, whether a student then or now.
A student with an honest complaint will do so in proper, not
spiteful, language.
Second, there are acceptable means of complaint, subject to formal
controls and time limits.
But this student claimed in secret and without evidence that she
unfairly failed a course eight years before.
Third, soon after her exam, I pleaded with her over the telephone
to take back her exam and she refused, saying: "I see
no point. It's history. I don't want to talk about it."
In 1994, hearing gossip I unjustly failed her, I phoned her. She
denied she was behind the rumor, saying, "Why would I
say something silly like that?"
To be sure, I sent her a five-page letter and suggested I look for
her exam in my office.
Next day, a friendly colleague, acting as a go-between, told me
that this student said if I followed the matter further she
would contact a lawyer!
This student claimed in court she failed unjustly and that I told
the chairman I destroyed the exam. My letter of 1994
disproves both claims.
Why, if I had destroyed her exam and told the chairman so, would I
say, in writing, that I had the exam? (No professor
is required, or expected, to keep exams indefinitely.) Why would a
student who claimed she failed unjustly refuse a chance
to prove her claim?
The answer is clear to any reasonable person. This student ignored
my letter because,

1. She believed I had her exam (disproving her claims); and
2. She believed the exam would show she failed with reason.

With many chances to complain, this student on purpose and
therefore with malice made a secret complaint, so I couldn't
defend myself and her word would be final.
There is more evidence of this student's habit of speaking falsely.

First, she hid important facts, such as receiving three high passes
from me the year of her failing grade.
She denied taking these classes. After I showed grade records, she
claimed she forgot. Can a student forget passing
one class but remember failing another the same year?
In court she claimed she avoided me by sitting in the back of the
class. But she asked at the time if she could call me by
my first name! She received high passes in my conversation class that
same year. But students were separated in small
groups (about four) and there was no "back of the class"! Why sit in
the back of one class but not in the back of another
with the same teacher?
In court, she said she was a superior student. Her grade
transcripts don't show this:
She received several just-passing grades of low 60s and many grades
in the 70s. As a graduate student, she received a
minimal passing grade of 70 in at least one class.
Indeed, I gave this student among her highest grades as an
undergraduate, including a 90+. But she accused me because
of one failing grade, as if students never failed before. (I failed
one-third of her classmates that year, and my colleague failed
another third in the make-up class the following year.)
This student claimed in court, under oath, that nobody asked her to
write her letter. But talking to Vice-Dean Tsai, she
admitted a university official asked for her letter. Either she lied in
court or she lied to Professor Tsai.
Now usually the person telling the truth seeks a formal hearing.
In this case, Ms. Chen has tried to avoid one, even
saying so to the Vice-Dean!
Worse, the dean's office has allowed this student to dictate policy
of student discipline? That's the dean's job, according
to laws and common sense. Ms. Chen's letter was formally accepted and
it must be formally rejected.
University officials accepted her letter; they kept it secret and
circulated it; and they used it at my dismissal hearings. The
fact that my dismissal was reversed is no credit to Ms. Chen, who
recently repeated her accusation. Moreover, gossip
continues that I unfairly failed a student.
Therefore, this matter must be resolved at a formal meeting. I am
requesting this meeting for next Monday, 30 June. The
meeting should include me, Ms. Chen, one dean, and at least one member
of the Faculty Union.
At this meeting, unless Ms. Chen can prove her accusation and
explain why she wrote a secret and spiteful letter eight
years later, I will ask that she be formally censured and write a letter
of admission and apology. Only then will I consider
this case closed.
Please respond as soon as possible. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Professor Richard de Canio
Department of Foreign Languages and Literature
National Cheng Kung University
(06) 237 8626