Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 11366
Submitted: January 7, 2024 at 6:42:36 PM
First Name: Tessa
Last Name: McDonald
Pronoun: She/Her
Student Number: 20277213
Email: 20tmm2@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BAH
Plan: POLS
Level of Study: 3
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Code: POLS
Term: Fall
Year: 2023
Petition Category: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Instructor's Name: David Haglund
Component: Essay
Petition Letter
Petition Letter: During POLS367 fall 2023, instructed by David Haglund, it was made apparent to me that this professor was unprofessional and incapable of being objective toward me and my work. The class only had two items to determine the student’s work-an essay (50%) and an exam (50%).
On December 14, 2023, David Haglund sent an email to a Politics office administrator, requesting that she change the format of my essay from PDF to a Word Document. David Haglund CC’d me on this email. The email read, “Hi. Do you think you could convert the attached PDF to a Word file? I must have told the class seven times I would only be able to work from a Word document, but two of them did not seem to get this message, for some reason. One paper was converted by Sam the other day. Tessa's still needs to be converted. I do not have the software that lets me do this.
Sigh...
David.”
I was initially confused when I received this email. I did not understand why David Haglund would include me in an email discussing me, without asking me to provide any information. As I reread the email, I understood that the purpose of CC’ing me was to essentially to let me know that I hadn’t followed the instructions, but not provide me with the opportunity to rectify the situation. The email continued, “I must have told the class seven times I would only be able to work from a Word document, but two of them did not seem to get this message, for some reason.” David Haglund noted he told the class “seven times” that the essay should have been submitted in the Word format, however this is a grand hyperbole, as I was present at the time the essay instructions were being discussed, and unfortunately I was never told the format for this essay submission. Furthermore, the addition of the word, “sigh…” as his email send off is unprofessional, and I suppose is an attempt to make me feel like I have essentially annoyed, or aggravated David Haglund. By signing an email off with “sigh…” the blatant attempt to shame my mistake is evident. I feel strongly that David Haglund’s behaviour was very unprofessional, and intentionally aimed to insult me. I strongly believe that a professor who CC’s a student on an inappropriate email with the main goal of insulting the student is not a professor who is trustworthy, nor objective in terms of giving a fair grade. David Haglund’s goal when it came to sending this email was to inform me of my mistake, insult my intelligence, voice his exasperation with me, and then not give me a chance to fix said mistake. It is blatant that David Haglund was therefore aggravated with me before grading my work, and cannot be trusted to be objective. After speaking with David Haglund’s superior, however, we came to the decision to allow David Haglund to continue grading, and reevaluate the situation once the final grade was submitted. The final grade on my essay is a 48%, and my final exam grade is a 54%, bringing the final overall grade to a 51%, or a D-.
The next example of David Haglund’s lack of professionalism can be seen in the critique of my essay. David Haglund wrote,”YOU DID MAKE AN ARGUMENT, TESSA, AND THAT IS TO YOUR CREDIT. BUT YOU OMITTED TO SUPPLY THE REQUIRED SHARP AND SUCCINCT PRESENTATION OF THE TWO BOOKS' THEMES, A TASK THAT SHOULD HAVE OCCUPIED YOUR FIRST THREE PAGES. THEN, AND ONLY THEN, SHOULD YOU HAVE LAUNCHED INTO YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, DRAWING UPON WHAT WAS SAID (OR NOT SAID) BY THE AUTHORS. ALL OF THIS WAS POINTED OUT IN CLASS DURING WEEK 11, WHICH APPARENTLY YOU MUST HAVE MISSED. MOREOVER, YOU GAVE THE STRONG IMPRESSION THAT YOU DID NOT REALLY READ ONE OF THE TWO BOOKS (SAROTTE'S), SINCE IT ONLY HAD SUCH A CAMEO ROLE IN YOUR PRESENTATION. THE ASSIGNMENT WAS INTENDED FOR STUDENTS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAD READ, UNDERSTOOD, AND COULD COMMENT CREATIVELY UPON BOTH BOOKS.”
I would like to take this opportunity to point out a few things regarding these comments. First, David Haglund claimed that I “must have missed” week 11, as he supposedly explained the essay structure in detail during that week. I was, however, present during week 11, and David Haglund did not explain the essay requirements to the degree in which he is claiming. The accusation claiming that I missed class and that is why I did not meet the criteria is evidently false, and incredibly unprofessional, as it targets me personally and alludes to the idea that I am not deserving of a fair grade as I supposedly did not attend class. This accusation is not only preposterous, as David Haglund does not take attendance and has no actual proof as to whether or not I attended classes. It is also very clear that David Haglund maintains a bias toward me as he so evidently believes that I am undeserving of a good grade as he claims I did not attend class.
In addition to the repeated allegations that I did not attend class, it is also clear through his comments that his professionalism is questionable. He made claims that were unsupported; “you have given the strong impression that you did not really read one of the two books.” A professor accusing a student of essentially being “lazy” is simply unprofessional, and David Haglund's frequent attacks on my character and academic efforts should highlight the bias that he carries when grading my assignments.
During my three years at Queens, I have never received such unhelpful, condescending critiques on any assignments I have submitted. I have found professors to be generally helpful and respectful. David Haglund’s tone and his comments are unacceptable, and are not intended to improve my work moving forward. The focus of the comments highlighted all my supposed inadequacies, lacked constructive criticism, did not show respect to my time and efforts and were, frankly, insulting. David Haglund has shown obvious signs of bias. I strongly believe that the inappropriate email, combined with the disrespectful critique point to the fact that David Haglund is unable, or unwilling to provide me with a fair grade. I am, therefore, requesting a review of my final grade in POLS367. I am a student who believes in fairness and objectivity and I believe Queens University does too. I request this review of my final grade in an attempt to receive the grade I deserve, and not the grade that David Haglund thinks I deserve.
Thank you,
Tessa M. McDonald
On December 14, 2023, David Haglund sent an email to a Politics office administrator, requesting that she change the format of my essay from PDF to a Word Document. David Haglund CC’d me on this email. The email read, “Hi. Do you think you could convert the attached PDF to a Word file? I must have told the class seven times I would only be able to work from a Word document, but two of them did not seem to get this message, for some reason. One paper was converted by Sam the other day. Tessa's still needs to be converted. I do not have the software that lets me do this.
Sigh...
David.”
I was initially confused when I received this email. I did not understand why David Haglund would include me in an email discussing me, without asking me to provide any information. As I reread the email, I understood that the purpose of CC’ing me was to essentially to let me know that I hadn’t followed the instructions, but not provide me with the opportunity to rectify the situation. The email continued, “I must have told the class seven times I would only be able to work from a Word document, but two of them did not seem to get this message, for some reason.” David Haglund noted he told the class “seven times” that the essay should have been submitted in the Word format, however this is a grand hyperbole, as I was present at the time the essay instructions were being discussed, and unfortunately I was never told the format for this essay submission. Furthermore, the addition of the word, “sigh…” as his email send off is unprofessional, and I suppose is an attempt to make me feel like I have essentially annoyed, or aggravated David Haglund. By signing an email off with “sigh…” the blatant attempt to shame my mistake is evident. I feel strongly that David Haglund’s behaviour was very unprofessional, and intentionally aimed to insult me. I strongly believe that a professor who CC’s a student on an inappropriate email with the main goal of insulting the student is not a professor who is trustworthy, nor objective in terms of giving a fair grade. David Haglund’s goal when it came to sending this email was to inform me of my mistake, insult my intelligence, voice his exasperation with me, and then not give me a chance to fix said mistake. It is blatant that David Haglund was therefore aggravated with me before grading my work, and cannot be trusted to be objective. After speaking with David Haglund’s superior, however, we came to the decision to allow David Haglund to continue grading, and reevaluate the situation once the final grade was submitted. The final grade on my essay is a 48%, and my final exam grade is a 54%, bringing the final overall grade to a 51%, or a D-.
The next example of David Haglund’s lack of professionalism can be seen in the critique of my essay. David Haglund wrote,”YOU DID MAKE AN ARGUMENT, TESSA, AND THAT IS TO YOUR CREDIT. BUT YOU OMITTED TO SUPPLY THE REQUIRED SHARP AND SUCCINCT PRESENTATION OF THE TWO BOOKS' THEMES, A TASK THAT SHOULD HAVE OCCUPIED YOUR FIRST THREE PAGES. THEN, AND ONLY THEN, SHOULD YOU HAVE LAUNCHED INTO YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, DRAWING UPON WHAT WAS SAID (OR NOT SAID) BY THE AUTHORS. ALL OF THIS WAS POINTED OUT IN CLASS DURING WEEK 11, WHICH APPARENTLY YOU MUST HAVE MISSED. MOREOVER, YOU GAVE THE STRONG IMPRESSION THAT YOU DID NOT REALLY READ ONE OF THE TWO BOOKS (SAROTTE'S), SINCE IT ONLY HAD SUCH A CAMEO ROLE IN YOUR PRESENTATION. THE ASSIGNMENT WAS INTENDED FOR STUDENTS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAD READ, UNDERSTOOD, AND COULD COMMENT CREATIVELY UPON BOTH BOOKS.”
I would like to take this opportunity to point out a few things regarding these comments. First, David Haglund claimed that I “must have missed” week 11, as he supposedly explained the essay structure in detail during that week. I was, however, present during week 11, and David Haglund did not explain the essay requirements to the degree in which he is claiming. The accusation claiming that I missed class and that is why I did not meet the criteria is evidently false, and incredibly unprofessional, as it targets me personally and alludes to the idea that I am not deserving of a fair grade as I supposedly did not attend class. This accusation is not only preposterous, as David Haglund does not take attendance and has no actual proof as to whether or not I attended classes. It is also very clear that David Haglund maintains a bias toward me as he so evidently believes that I am undeserving of a good grade as he claims I did not attend class.
In addition to the repeated allegations that I did not attend class, it is also clear through his comments that his professionalism is questionable. He made claims that were unsupported; “you have given the strong impression that you did not really read one of the two books.” A professor accusing a student of essentially being “lazy” is simply unprofessional, and David Haglund's frequent attacks on my character and academic efforts should highlight the bias that he carries when grading my assignments.
During my three years at Queens, I have never received such unhelpful, condescending critiques on any assignments I have submitted. I have found professors to be generally helpful and respectful. David Haglund’s tone and his comments are unacceptable, and are not intended to improve my work moving forward. The focus of the comments highlighted all my supposed inadequacies, lacked constructive criticism, did not show respect to my time and efforts and were, frankly, insulting. David Haglund has shown obvious signs of bias. I strongly believe that the inappropriate email, combined with the disrespectful critique point to the fact that David Haglund is unable, or unwilling to provide me with a fair grade. I am, therefore, requesting a review of my final grade in POLS367. I am a student who believes in fairness and objectivity and I believe Queens University does too. I request this review of my final grade in an attempt to receive the grade I deserve, and not the grade that David Haglund thinks I deserve.
Thank you,
Tessa M. McDonald