When a poor student needs help and not a scolding

 

The video clip which showed a UiTM lecturer being rude and offensive to her student for failing to use a laptop during their online lesson revealed a number of things about human behaviour.

An interesting aspect is how the incident is a mirror of what happens in society as a whole, in particular the lack of interaction between the haves and the have-nots.

Reactions on social media were mixed. Some people criticised the lecturer for her lack of sensitivity, but others claimed that she was right to admonish the student. One person commented that “scolding is the only way these students will ever learn”.

However, during the 1-minute and 45-second clip, we were also shown how the lecturer had belittled the B40 group. Surely being personal and judgmental are not traits of what one would want in a lecturer.

There are also others who said the student was lying and deserved to be scolded. A few even said that if he could afford a smartphone, then there was nothing to stop him from purchasing a laptop.

Strangely, very few, if any, questioned the role of the university, in particular, the tutor(s) to which each student is assigned at the time the student first enrolled at the university.

A student will normally have access to a tutor to guide him or her through the academic requirements. In some universities, an additional tutor is provided to give all-round support and guidance on any aspect of a student’s life, including personal welfare, available financial support, health issues, and also to provide links to appropriate additional support resources.

The issues they discuss are confidential but the tutor will be the student’s first “port of call” when he or she has issues about life on campus. So, what happened to this tutor for the student in the video clip?

The other puzzling thing about this incident is the failure of the lecturer to assist the student. At the very least, a considerate lecturer would have brought this matter to the attention of the dean of the faculty and help the student acquire the necessary learning tools.

She should have questioned the failure of the tutor to help the student. Perhaps, the tutor had tried to intervene, but the university looked the other way.

Whatever transpired, the lecturer need not have belittled or insulted the student.

She could have urged the university to play a more proactive role in assisting poorer students. If that one student failed to have the necessary tools to do his work properly, then one wonders how many other students may have been excluded from receiving help, through no fault of their own.

It is also odd that the lecturer did not notice the student’s lack of a laptop for the previous four semesters. To be fair, she could have just started teaching him this semester, but that then begs the question, how come the other lecturers failed to detect that he was missing a laptop?

The lecturer was wrong to insist that a laptop costs only RM800 and paint a negative picture of the student. What if any money he has is used to help his family? His father is unemployed and his mother, we are now told, is “not around anymore”. Perhaps he has many younger siblings, or disabled or elderly people in his immediate family whom he is helping to provide money for their meals, and a roof over their heads.

In a reflection of life in our society, this lecturer appears to be disconnected from the suffering of poorer students. As a whole, it would be good for the more fortunate half to understand how the other half lives, and how members of the B40 carry on with their lives.

The student is probably trying to get an all-round education at the university to provide for himself and his family later on. If his case is genuine, he should get all the assistance possible to help him achieve this. - FMT

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.