After perusing — or, more accurately, skimming — approximately 33 syllabi during my tenure at Dartmouth, I have always gotten stuck on a few recurring components: an emphasis on in-class participation and the assertion that medical exemptions be voiced early in the term, with some professors even mandating doctor’s notes excusing an inability to perform classroom duties. I believe that the former has sexist, ableist and classist implications, while the latter has classist and ableist implications. Though these are clearly not the intended results of the policies, professors should consider the disproportionate burdens these requirements might impose on their diverse student body when structuring a course.
Class participation — meaning here in-class participation — assumes academic confidence. The assumption of confidence, however, is inherently problematic. A May 2014 article in The Atlantic titled “The Confidence Gap” cited several studies, with subjects from different professions and geographic locations, showing that, all else being equal, men exhibit increased levels of confidence compared to women. Compared to those from elite public or private schools, many students from lower socioeconomic classes likely do not have the same level of education as more privileged members of their class. Being surrounded by classmates with higher levels of factual knowledge, despite comparable intelligence, could cause disadvantaged students to remain silent, intimidated by both the confidence and education of their fellow classmates. Likewise, some cultures and family situations unequally favor or disfavor outspokenness. As students from diverse backgrounds attend Dartmouth and its peer institutions, it is important to work to mitigate the impact that individual upbringings can have on classroom performance. Beyond the question of a student’s background, an uncomfortable feeling with actively participating in class can be a medical issue, as those who have anxiety disorders, particularly social anxiety, may be reticent or unable to speak in class.
As a way to overcome these issues, professors could require online or other non-public ways to measure participation. For example, online discussion boards can be an effective way to acknowledge various communication abilities. Undeniably, in-class participation can help forward the goals of the entire class by encouraging open dialogue. Those who feel comfortable speaking in class, however, can continue to do so without disadvantaging those not so inclined. This is not to say there is no value in expanding one’s verbal communication abilities and confidence. Students, however, can still learn this skill without their grade depending on it. On the contrary, if students are under less pressure to conform to new standards immediately, it might encourage development at a similar pace.
Similarly, policies regarding excused absences or late papers usually rest on ableist and classist assumptions. They are ableist in the sense that those some students with mental illness may not count themselves among those excused. This is partly due to society’s recent acknowledgement of the medical reality of mental disorders, and partly because some syllabi require a doctor’s note to constitute a legitimate excuse. Aside from the Dick’s House policy against writing excuse notes, many of those suffering with mental disorders cannot simply go to a general practitioner to obtain a correct diagnosis, as treatment of mental health issues is typically provided by licensed therapists, psychologists or psychiatrists. Requiring medical services has obvious class implications, as many students do not have sufficient insurance or the financial means to provide for insurance discrepancies.
Professors should be more open about their excuse requirements, either by outlining them in the syllabus or discussing open-minded policies in person. Though professors should not be required to act as a therapist or medical professional, they should be sensitive to reasonable demands from students. One in four adults between the ages of 18 and 24 suffer from a diagnosable mental illness, half of Dartmouth students are women and nearly half of Dartmouth students receive financial aid. It is time syllabi took the needs of these students seriously.
Overall, professors could work to improve syllabi so that they reflect the needs and abilities of all of the student body. Rather than loosening standards, this could open students and professors to a variety of learning and communication styles. It is important to recognize that inequalities persist in society through subtle as well as overt means. Some academic requirements can perpetuate systems of inequality, whether intentionally or not. Updating syllabi to reflect inclusionary measures would be a progressive move forward.
