I was some how shocked by a couple of things.
1. Character of my UOL HRM lecturer, Jackie (short for Jacqueline)
2. Expectations of Jackie in terms of marking of our paper
On Friday, I heard my friend's friends mention that Jackie really expects students to participate in the revision class. If not she will remain quiet for a very long time. My initial thinking was that she couldn't be all that bad, because somehow lecturers are trained to answer their own questions after a prolonged period of silence. Other than this, they did not really give a positive feedback about her.
Yesterday, I learnt more about her myself.
So far, none of the UOL lecturers gave me a really bad impression or any negative impression. Most of them are capable of delivering a relatively professional image OR at the very least, not creating not professional image. Apparently, Jackie kind of broke this record.
Most of the lecturers urge class participation. They adopt friendly attitudes and
give encouraging comments. This is different with Jackie. When students participate, at times, Jackie gave sarcastic and rude comments when we didn't give the correct answer. Shouldn't it be clear that correcting of wrong concepts and matching of examiners' expectations are the main objectives of UOL revisions? Examples given below.
note: dialog as per my memory/ hearing (coz some classmates spoke really softly)
Example 1
When asked why organisational justice is hard to achieve
me: I can only think of an example.
Jackie: Well, something is better than nothing.
me: For example, if companies keen to do a drug test on employees, it will be ethical for employers to inform employees beforehand (performing interactional justice), but the drug test will not be a fair one. (digress: example given by LOCAL lecturer)
Jackie: What do you mean?
Helpful Classmate: meaning there might not be justice if the employee is sacked because of positive drug test result.
Jackie: So.... You have a problem with that when you get fined $500 for throwing a cigarette butt here?
me and Helpful Classmate: *speechless*
Jackie: In the first place, it is the employee's fault for taking drugs. And I think drug consumption is legal here and companies should report the employee to police or something, instead of just sending him to rehabitation center.
me and Helpful Classmate: *TOTALLY speechless*
digress: Local lecturer told us that it will be good for the company's image or to gain employees' respect and commitment, by not reporting the employee but to send him for rehab instead.
Shock 1: How blunt and sarcastic Jackie was.
Shock 2: Apparently Local lecturer and UOL lecturer don't see eye-to-eye. Who kena? We the poor students.
Example 2
Trying to demonstrate justice is hard to measure
Jackie: Samantha, how could you judge if the prelim paper was marked fairly? *without waiting for Samantha's answer* Oh wait! Perhaps you didn't even sit for the paper! *laughs*
HUH!??!!??! Super question mark can! So she is trying to say that a lot of us didn't go for the prelims and she has a problem with that.
Firstly, it is not wrong to not sit for the prelim paper. She is in no position to judge.
Secondly, at the start of the revision, she informed the class that she has 200 odd more scripts to mark. IF there are so little scripts to mark, why haven she finished marking when the HRM paper is on the 8th March 2008? OR is she exaggerating that she still has 200+ scripts to mark?
Example 3
When she realised many students did not do readings
Jackie: Let me try to motivate you now. You will want to pass your HRM this year. We are consolidating the study materials this year, which means next year, students will be required to study more for the unit. It will be like studying for a whole new unit if you repeat next year. You know you don't want to fail.
Does she really knows the meaning of motivate?
======
Other instances whereby she demonstrates a lack of professionalism:
- she doesn't have the habit of waiting for students to complete their sentences or questions before inserting her opinions
- she constantly, throughout the 2 days, penalise students' language proficiency repeatedly, apparently not in a gentle way. Used words like "horrible", "crappy"
- she doesn't have the habit of repeating students' questions even if the students are very soft
My excuse would be that I was sitting in the first row, so more "exposed". I was late today, and she pissed me off so badly yesterday that I was already prepared to shot her back if she asked if I was late. Background: I was late and only went in for class during break. Jackie detest latecomers and had fussed around them (negative way) a bit on Saturday, saying they have disrupted her lessons. On the other hand, I've got to admit, even though she was annoying, I don't think she is a bad person. In fact, I got the impression that she is just cynical (sarcasm is a norm among cynics) and it has crept into her day-to-day life/ speech. Though I hate to admit, there are question-mark students who went up to Jackie to ask,"Is this question frequently tested?" and "For this topic what kind of questions will come out?".
I would say that she is really strict in terms of language. She doesn't even tolerate the use of "affect" to explain "implications". This shocked me a little too, as this implies that in my HRM exams, I would have to be really careful in my vocabulary. It seems that the expectations of Jackie were different from that of my local lecturer. These 2 days were like crash course for HRM students to retrain ourselves in essay writing so as to do better for the paper. HAIZ. I've gotta mug HARD!
(out of 5)
)
