The coal break has ended. A while ago. Let it be forgiven that the reckoning was delayed until now, but it took me some time to comprehend the things that happened in the last few days.
I owe a huge confession to my self and everyone.
I do not understand until this day why the notion of the coal break has been called into existence by the university, and I believe it to be an abysmally stupid idea to keep 24-25 degrees Celsius in buildings with modern heating controlled by computers (which, for me, who rather likes chill and is not that sunshine-and-palm-trees type - and who could drown all the little meteorologist girls in a spoonful of water who dare to say that a temperature over 30 degrees Celsius is "nice weather", as no, that is not nice for me, but rather hell itself - results in all-day discomfort), then shut the whole thing down for 2 weeks, and then neatly reheat everything to that good old 24 degrees.
In fact, I am certain that if they would set 19 or 20 degrees for the whole heating season, it would be cheaper, but actually there's no one at the economic directorate who would calculate this, and maybe, if the gods let them, subtract the two numbers for each other, and see which version is cheaper. No, instead of this, we heat everything like hell, then we don't for two weeks, then let's heat everything up like hell again. Oh, and meanwhile, arbitrary decisions are made regarding the leaves of the professors and other staff, as during this, they must not work, they have to go on vacation. So democratic. But however, I still think that this causes the biggest problems for the students.
Why can't those who want to pass an exam between Christmas and New Year's Eve go on with their studies? Or those who want to pass an exam during the week after New Year's Eve? Just. Because they can't. Because it's coal break. Why do they end up still having the Summer exam period in the middle of July? Just. Because it's coal break. And not to stick with the generalities and put a personal experience here as well: why do we have to move the neatly oragnized weekend appointments of tests for correspondent students, and squeeze them into one single weekend in the middle of January, just because the period of the coal break was defined so badly (as we can't use the weekends around Christmas and New Year's Eve, just because)?
I wouldn't drop a tear for the correspondent students because they have to come for the retake test right on the next day if they fail, what is rather problematic is that without any fault on their own, they only have the chance to get a signature in the middle of January, and then they still have to pass an exam. Now this is a nuisance both for professors and students. At least in my opinion.
All in all, based on the above, it can easily be figured out that I'm not really into the coal break, neither the ones who invented it, I think it is a highly faulty concept, and that those who say that "there is no other way to save money" do a standing jump off the demagogy scale. Nevertheless, let there be the confession I promised at the beginning below.
[intentional pause]
The thing is, I have to admit that the coal break comes with some tiny blessings as well. Namely, it provides isolation from the unreal requests of students that pick up strength as Christmas fever approaches. Well, not completely, but let's face it, it's far easier to handle emails than personal contact when facing people who are free from any sign of rational self-criticism.
Namely, there came a student, and on Monday on the last week of the term, he wrote his test nice and neatly. But oh God, the test was considered successful if at least 6 of the 10 points were acquired, and he got only 5. At his point, I got an email in which he literally told me that he "knees before me", but without any real argument, he asked just based on this to let his test get 6 points. Well, it didn't.
So on Friday, he came to the retake test nice and neatly again, on which he successfully under-achieved himself and scraped together 3 and a half points. I wasn't that naive to think he'll let go after this, and oh how right I was, as he broke into the next group taking the test and demanded the reason for his result, but what happened after this exceeded all my expectations.
We went over his mistakes, the tasks, and of course the facts, that this is it, it's over, end of story. Then I got a great big withering look, and he left without a word. It was a dumb thing to sigh in relief, as he turned up again five minutes later and without even minimal decency, he managed to squeeze out the words asking to give him the test of the other group. It wouldn't be true if I said I took pity on him, it's just that I didn't want to tilt at windmills, so he was allowed to start writing his second retake test.
2 and a half points. At this point I managed to dismiss him along with his other insistent partner in the battle, who used the following argument in order to get me to improve his test of 5 points: "But I need this signature like... eauuuuuuu", and meanwhile pointing at the table of results wildly.
Oh stupid me, I thought this would really be the end of this story. I even got the kindergarden-style sullen exodus and return scene. But no! The end of the story is that on 23 December, I got an email, I guess to put it under the tree...I won't expand on the heart-breaking depiction of his bitter fate, the ending is what matters. Among the lines of the letter, there is "I knew among who fail I am the only one who worried about it", which indicates and unbelieveable amount of arrogance on its own, but right after this comes the stroke of grace: "you are like a brother to me you can help".
Seriously guys, what the hell is this, Emotional Terror for Numb-skulls, the introductory course? Emotional Blackmail for Dummies? So, to sum things up, this is the level I might have found difficult to put up with in person. But this way, I simply didn't reply. Thank you very much, coal break, at last you could be put to some use.
Nincsenek megjegyzések:
Megjegyzés küldése