New York University’s (NYU) decision to fire former professor Maitland Jones after a group of his organic chemistry students petitioned for his removal set a dangerous precedent for academic institutions throughout the country. Jones was promptly dismissed from NYU after 82 students complained that Jones’ class was too difficult and their grades were too low. In an October 2022 editorial, the Wheel’s Editorial Board concurred that Jones — who is respected in his field and had been teaching at NYU for 15 years — should not have been fired by the university.
While it is important that students have a say in their own educational systems, we must also recognize that a professor with a 59-year track record of successful research, teaching and advising knows better than a group of undergraduates on certain academic matters, especially those pertaining to his own classroom. Administrators are thus tasked with determining where to draw the line between student influence and institutional oversight, and they must find a balance on the spectrum where neither side is given too much power.
While I agree with the Editorial Board’s conclusion that it was wrong to fire Jones, their suggestions for how to avoid similar situations in the future is unfeasible.
The Editorial Board argues for a “formal process” that would “require that complaints be lodged via petition signed by a majority of students.” Students should have an influence in the way their classes are structured, and it is important that students’ voices are heard by their academic institutions because they are “both the funders and recipients of their education,” as the editorial reads. But granting students too much control over their own education raises concerns. Had students had excessive amounts of control in Jones’ case, for instance, the structural integrity of the course would have been compromised.
The article concludes by stating that “faculty must be protected from unfounded mob mentality.” But that is hypocritical — formalizing a process by which students could petition against their professors behind their backs would enable this very “mob mentality.” It seems self-evident that angry, struggling college students would use such power to fight to make their classes easier, but college is supposed to be hard.
Certain “weed-out” classes, like organic chemistry, are widely known to be very challenging and for good reason. They are specifically designed by top scholars in the fields of science and medicine to sift through students who are prepared to become the world’s next generation of cream-of-the-crop doctors, researchers and professors — a brutal, albeit necessary, process. Not everyone can earn an A, and there is no group better equipped to determine who does than the current generation of professionals in these fields. Giving students too much power over how they are graded is a very slippery slope.
We must also not forget that students select which classes they take. A plethora of resources, including Course Atlas and Rate My Professor, exist to inform students about classes and professors. Jones’ students could have known what they were getting into by taking his class. Students could have avoided his section and instead taken the course with an alternative professor better suited for their learning style.
At some point we must surrender our frustration and recognize that we do not always know best. As students, we deserve to have a voice in many important academic matters; for instance, student-driven initiatives toward safety, inclusion and respect in the classroom are critical to creating a healthy learning environment. When it comes to course structure and evaluation, however, we just need to trust the experts.
Marc Goedemans (25C) is from Los Angeles, California.
