Chapter three, section two of the Professional Code of Conduct for BC Lawyers makes it abundantly clear what entity the lawyers actually work for. It also reminds its members that only legal opinions on legal matters are valid. The Code is a policy written in plain language so anyone can understand a lawyer’s limitations. It should be blatantly obvious to the Law Society that lawyers cannot advise officers to hold themselves to only the legal expectations not listed in the University Act. But they hold students to scholarly misconduct.
The scholarly integrity policy says all investigations must be open, fair, and timely. If only students are held to higher expectations, they cannot be fair. Again, that’s plain language policy any layperson on the street should understand as the expectation to earn institutional funding.
I spent the day listening to the testimonies of people trying to get their institution to understand that *if* a policy was violated by an officer, there is only one possible outcome. Each time. Every time. EVERY FUCKING TIME.
Director that Mattered told me that if I’d been discriminated against based on a protected characteristic, they would take my complaint seriously. But I’d been harassed for participating in protected activities, so I could go fuck myself. I had to get through my last year of grad school knowing my administration didn’t believe I had a right to a respectful environment because one isn’t legally required. But rather than fight the OBVIOUS academic freedom violation, I let it go.
Everything I went through, I went through because UBC did not bother to train their staff to know:
- Protected is a protected term. It’s the reason why characteristics are PROTECTED as much as PROTECTED ACTIVITIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN
- THE FUCKING RESPONDENT CAN NOT CLOSE A FUCKING INVESTIGATION ON HIS OWN FUCKING ASS
- A FUCKING PRESIDENT CAN NOT FUCKING DECIDE TO ASSIST A SUBORDINATE WITH HIDING HIS CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- FUCKING LAWYERS WORK FOR THEIR FUCKING INSTITUTION, YOU FUCKING SHITHEADS. NO OFFICER CAN TELL THEM, HEY! WORK FOR MY FUCKING INTERESTS INSTEAD.
- THE WORST FUCKING THING THAT CAN HAPPEN IN A FUCKING INSTITUTIONAL SETTING IS ANOTHER OFFICER SHITSTAIN VIOLATING THE SAME INSTITUTIONAL POLICY FOR THE SAME FUCKING ERROR. AND ALL BECAUSE NO ONE THOUGHT TO FUCKING CLOSE A FUCKING INSTITUTIONAL ERROR REPORT.
At least try to hide the corruption of what you’re supposed to stand for. But no, this batch of shitstains thought they could do it all in writing. Oh. I should add one more a bit calmer:
- A program that can’t pass an ethical board can’t be taught.
UBC’s program locks the fact that it might be wrong about the efficacy of the deliberate practice of the craft of writing behind its reputation as an academic institution. A student will have to realize the institution is wrong before realizing the methodology they learned — that confirmed everything they thought they knew — is what holds them back the most.
And those who could have taught the program are counted as the program’s successes.
It’s sick that the methodology had to destroy academic freedom to be unteachable. If it just sold a learner a degree that promised nothing more to learn, the method could be taught to UBC’s heart’s content. No law says a program’s methodology has to be effective.
The fact that Federal Guidelines for degrees issued in Canada state they must be at the forefront of academia and its industry is meaningless. There are no regulations for those standards. An instructor told me that their program was never intended for professional writers. I thought she meant the program existed to help writers better express themselves. I missed the red flag when she reacted with horror at the suggestion of a professional hearing what kind of “advice” could only be agreed with.
I was the only person who watched learners agree — over and over — that craft never needed to be discussed. There was only one permissible opinion in UBC CRWR classrooms: craft is never needed. And because I was the only person who understood that having only one permissible opinion could not be more of an academic freedom violation if it tried to violate academic freedom, I couldn’t even lodge a complaint.
And that was because I was the only person at UBC who understood that yes, students *can* make academic freedom violation complaints. Even if — through its own document mishandling errors — UBC had eliminated the pathway for a student to report one. Where I’m from, that’s called a massive training void. Among several other actions, UBC was required to create a system to track academic freedom violation complaints to clear the last institutional error. That’s textbook institutional negligence. It failed to train itself to catch this when everything was still a teachable moment. This was an action required at the institutional level to operate as an institution.
But I learned UBC believes an institution must never admit it is wrong, fuck the University Act. Five core values, who? Pedagogy is the science of learning. UBC turned its into a mockery of the concept.