Nov 24, 2003 16:00
i've just returned from my first 'don rag,' a formal oral evaluation in which all one's tutors sit around a table and discuss the students' performance among themselves in the third person, as though he weren't there. the student then has a chance to ask questions and respond to criticism (or, i suppose, praise).
praise: obviously a driven, hardworking, and passionate student; exceptional and insightful writer, speaker, and thinker; realizes his faults (both personal and academic) and takes measures to improve them, often successfully; always prepared and entirely attentive; has the talents and makings of a professor himself.
criticism: perfectionistic to a fault; sometimes overbearing; clearly isolated from other students and in danger of alienating them; generally reflects a power-centric worldview; occasionally verbose; sometimes sacrifices style over substance in his writing; often expresses himself in a way that he can't (and doesnt) realistically expect other students to comprehend.
"is this student's work satisfactory in all regards? yes."
"should this student see the writing archon?" no."
"is this student qualified to continue at the college? yes."
so there you go.