Quick note about nepotism

First off, I've posted a few pics from this past weekend's reunion.

I'm about to get myself in trouble again.   As regular readers know, I helped develop PCC's consensual relationships policy last year.  (See here.)  Now, I've been asked by the Academic Senate to chair a related committee looking into revamping the college's "nepotism" policy.  The problem is that some of my colleagues don't want to prohibit what I consider to be one of the most flagrant examples of nepotism: having one's own children enrolled in one's classes, and grading their work.

I've been adamant about the issue of consensual amorous relationships.  I don't think it's possible for a professor to evaluate fairly the work of his or her spouse or lover.   Even if it were possible (and I don't think it is), the simple perception of wrongdoing that would arise in the minds of the other students is reason enough to consider such relationships between teachers and current students to be inadvisable and unethical.  In the years we spent developing the policy (between 2001-2004), my colleagues and I encountered some opposition to the idea of banning faculty-current student romantic and sexual relationships, but most folks on campus seemed supportive.

But here at the community college, I can think of several examples -- from within my own department -- of young people enrolled in a parent's course.  One of my colleagues has taught three of her four children in recent years.  This problem is much more common at a community college than it might be at a four-year school, where many students are living away from home.  At PCC, a large percentage of our students still live with Mom or Dad, and in more than a few instances, are being taught by Mom or Dad.

I've been making the argument for years that teaching and evaluating one's children is analogous to teaching and grading one's lovers.  I see no reason to believe that you can be fairer to your child than to your sexual partner.  What's more, while it is at least theoretically possible to keep one's romantic affairs a secret, it's utterly impossible to disguise the fact that one student is your son or daughter!  And again, there's the issue of perception: it doesn't ultimately matter whether or not you can separate family loyalties from the quality of a student's work; what matters is whether or not other students perceive a bias.

I've been candid about my own reasons for getting involved in developing a consensual relationships policy.  I've admitted past wrongdoing in this area, and I've made amends.  But a few of my colleagues are vigorously defending the idea that while it may be unethical to teach a lover, it is perfectly acceptable to assign grades to one's own children.  I am dumbfounded, failing to understand the reasoning that suggests that there is ultimately anything less offensive about having one's child in class than having one's sexual partner.  In informal discussions with other colleagues, I have found that the majority take my side and support the idea of a ban on PCC faculty members teaching and evaluating the work of their own children.  Such a ban, like the consensual relationships policy, would not involve any retroactive discipline for those who had taught their kids in the past.  But it would draw a clear and bright line for the future.

I'm curious to know what my readers think.   Do you agree with me that teaching one's kids is as unethical and problematic, both in terms of evaluation and perception, as teaching one's sexual and romantic partners?  If not, why not?  Am I missing something here, perhaps because I am not yet a parent?  In the meantime, while I await your responses, I'm going to work hard to make sure that the nepotism policy comes down as firmly as possible against the practice of profs teaching and grading their own children.

Comments

[mythago]

I don't think it's analogous to a lover or spouse, but it is wrong.

[Mr. Bad]

I'm with you 100% on this one Hugo. It's obviously not analogous to a lover or spouse, but it's wrong, and perhaps an even bigger conflict of interest.

[Oliver]

Frankly, I'm surprised that PCC doesn't have a policy on this. Even though here at McGill, with 600+ person classes, the odds of the prof even seeing your paper are slim, my friend has both his parents as profs and they make sure that it is the TA and not the prof who grades it.

[Jeff]

The one distinction I can see is that one's parentage is fixed, while one's status as someone's sexual partner is not. If you believe the policies exist to ensure fair grading, there really is no difference. If, on the other hand, you believe that the goal of the policies are to curb potential abuses of power (e.g., using one's power and authority to coerce a student into a relationship), then there's a big difference.

Honestly, unless it's a case of a required course only taught by the student's parent, I don't see the point of taking a class taught by one's parent (much less paying for the "privilege").

[NancyP]

Possibly not a problem in courses with team teaching and not a whole lot of subjectivity, eg medical school basic science courses.

[Armagh]

As a parent, and as someone who long considered academia as a career path, I have to agree that teaching one's own children is inherently problematic. This is not, however, because I think a parent would necessarily be easier on their own son or daughter. Quite the contrary. I think it is more likely that a parent would be harder on his or her child than on other students. (Whether that is inherently unfair to the child is an issue for another day.)

Even if there is no actual favoritism, however, I think the potential for the perception of favoritism is far too strong for this sort of nepotism to be allowed in the university setting.

The only time I can see making an exception to such a policy is in the case of institutions that engage in anonymous grading.

[Armagh]

As a parent, and as someone who long considered academia as a career path, I have to agree that teaching one's own children is inherently problematic. This is not, however, because I think a parent would necessarily be easier on their own son or daughter. Quite the contrary. I think it is more likely that a parent would be harder on his or her child than on other students. (Whether that is inherently unfair to the child is an issue for another day.)

Even if there is no actual favoritism, however, I think the potential for the perception of favoritism is far too strong for this sort of nepotism to be allowed in the university setting.

The only time I can see making an exception to such a policy is in the case of institutions that engage in anonymous grading.

[Armagh444]

As a parent, and as someone who long considered academia as a career path, I have to agree that teaching one's own children is inherently problematic. This is not, however, because I think a parent would necessarily be easier on their own son or daughter. Quite the contrary. I think it is more likely that a parent would be harder on his or her child than on other students. (Whether that is inherently unfair to the child is an issue for another day.)

Even if there is no actual favoritism, however, I think the potential for the perception of favoritism is far too strong for this sort of nepotism to be allowed in the university setting.

The only time I can see making an exception to such a policy is in the case of institutions that engage in anonymous grading.

[Rad Geek]

Well, I think it's obvious that there is some problem to be considered here, but I'm a bit puzzled that you treat "teaching and evaluating" all of a piece. I took a class in statistical methods that my father taught several years ago; the arrangement that we worked out was to ask the Department Chair, as a favor (since it concerned a single student only, and the course was in his area of specialty, it wasn't that big of one to ask) to grade the exams that I took. It may not be possible to arrange something of the sort in every situation; but if it's not possible to arrange a third-party auditor for the kid's grades, well, that's as good a reason as any to have the kid enroll in somebody else's section.

It seems likely to me that there are some parts of the student-teacher relationship that are worth taking a harder line on than others.

[Rad Geek]

Well, I think it's obvious that there is some problem to be considered here, but I'm a bit puzzled that you treat "teaching and evaluating" all of a piece. I took a class in statistical methods that my father taught several years ago; the arrangement that we worked out was to ask the Department Chair, as a favor (since it concerned a single student only, and the course was in his area of specialty, it wasn't that big of one to ask) to grade the exams that I took. It may not be possible to arrange something of the sort in every situation; but if it's not possible to arrange a third-party auditor for the kid's grades, well, that's as good a reason as any to have the kid enroll in somebody else's section.

It seems likely to me that there are some parts of the student-teacher relationship that are worth taking a harder line on than others.

[Patr]

I will actually go along with this. Profs should not teach their own children. It is fraught with potential problems and is unfair to the student.
I also don't think profs should use books they have written themselves as class material. They may fnd themselves grading a paper that includes disagreement with content in their book.

[Caitriona]

This is a tough one for me, Hugo. As you know, not only have I been a high school teacher, but I also home educate my children. However, you are looking at the next level of education.

The community college I attended (actually a local Baptist college) was very small. It was inevitable that the students whose parents taught there would eventually have their parents as teachers. The only problems I recall ever occurring were perhaps the parents being tougher on their children than they were on the students who'd not grown up around them.

I find myself dealing with this same sort of issue, even when it comes to the exchange students living in our home for the school year. I don't expect them to "know" the same things I expect my own children to "know." I've also run into this when I've taught co-op classes that my children have taken.

Because of this, when we're doing classes where the children have a choice of a teacher other than me, they often take the other teacher. Of course, this is dependent upon my authorization of the particular teacher. There is absolutely no way I'll allow them to study math under the teacher with whom I have deep math education philosophical disagreements. (I posted about that on my blog.)

It's a balancing act. I'm not sure I would be comfortable teaching in a facility that didn't allow me to teach my own children, if my children wished to take a course I was teaching. But I do believe that it is good to have guidelines in place such as were mentioned above - having a TA do the grading, etc.

[Hugo]

Having a TA do the grading, if that TA ranks beneath the professor whose children are the issue, is no help. TAs may feel unspoken pressure, as will handing the grading off to an untenured faculty member.

The whole "tougher on their own kids" bit smacks of elitism, doesn't it? It's all very well to go easy on other people's children, but mine better be top notch? I don't think that's an acceptable defense of the practice.

[Caitriona]

I'm not saying it's an acceptable defense, but it *is* a reality. And it's not a matter of "mine better be top notch." For me, it's more along the lines of "Mine should know this" or "mine should behave better." (Of course, *on*occasion*, my children have thanked me for being strict with them.)

[La Lubu]

Hmmm. I think where practicable, that kids shouldn't be taking classes taught by their parents. No sense in having any perception of impropriety when there doesn't need to be, right?

But let's face it...you live in a very populous area. I'm kinda with Caitriona here; sometimes it's unavoidable. I went to high school in a city of only 40,000-some people (translation: one public high school); some of my classmates were taught by their parents. I don't think the better solution is to not allow a student to take geometry or American Lit or whatever, because their parent is the only instructor for that course! And out here in flyover land, it's not feasible to ship the kid off to a different city to attend school. For one thing, public transporation isn't available between small cities, or between a larger city and a nearby small town.

TAs? Are you for real? They have those at community colleges where you live? They sure don't in downstate Illinois! Hell, here in downstate Illinois (i.e., south of I-80), you're lucky to be taught by a full-time faculty member. The cost-cutting trend here is to replace a retiring professor with a couple of part-timers, for a much lower scale (and no benefits). And the part-timers are glad of it, because it beats the hell out of working at Wal-mart.

The whole "tougher on their own kids" bit smacks of elitism, doesn't it? It's all very well to go easy on other people's children, but mine better be top notch?

I don't think it has anything to do with elitism ("my kids are better, because I'm a teacher") as much as it does with egoism and fear ("if my kids don't know twice as much, then I'm a failure as a teacher and as a parent"). I think the tendency for instructor-parents is to see their kids not as students for a semester (or a year, as the case may be), but as an ongoing, lifetime work-in-progress! And the instructor-parent is well aware of the potential negative publicity of their kids turning out to be the Class Clown, or Zombie, or Dumbass, or whatever. I think in this scenario, it's not the kid that needs the break (by being taught by someone else), but the parent.

[Hugo]

La Lubu, some good points -- my comments are about college, not high school. Yes, we have TAs, but only for classes with only 100 students. I don't have TAs, as I refuse to teach the super-large classes, even though we get bonus pay for doing so.

[Caitriona]

40,000-some-odd people? Wow!! That's a large town!

Chewy and I were discussing this and had vastly different PsOV. Our perspectives where influenced by the following:

His high school graduating class - 1500+

My high school graduating class - 44

The population of the town outside of which I grew up has finally grown - to 387.

[james]

Surely the big difference here is that the consensual relationships policy bans relationships between two people (which I think it a gross invasion of privacy), while a nepotism policy would prohibit a person from being a member of a class.

I don't think either is unethical in the slightest. The problem is (potentially) unfair marking and this can be countered by allowing people to challenge their grades, assessing teachers marking and punishing them for marking badly - although academics aren't really interested in opening this pandora's box.

[Hugo]

No, James, the problem is the perception of a conflict of interest. I could never, ever fairly grade my own child, my sibling, or my wife. I would either be far too hard on them or far too easy, and neither is acceptable.

The policy we are proposing will have a clause in it that will allow extraordinary situations (such as a student's parent is the only one on campus teaching a needed course) to be approved by the administration on case by case basis.

[La Lubu]

Hugo, I caught that your reference was not to high school, but mentioned it anyway, because around here the geographic and/or financial constraints are similar----just like a public high school student doesn't have the choice of which high school to go to, the typical community college student here doesn't have a real choice of which community college to attend---there tends to be only one within a driveable radius (especially considering that the folks who attend a community college rather than a four year institution are trying hard enough to balance work/family/school). Perhaps in Pasadena this isn't the case.

Who defines "needed" courses? Are you only referring to graduation requirements? What if a student wanted to major in a subject and his or her parent taught several of the core courses in that subject----even though those courses were not a graduation requirement? See, I don't know how your contract reads, but most of those teachers' kids are probably attending there because of free tuition. That's pretty much standard in the contracts here, anyway---free tuition for spouses and dependent children. That's a major benefit---or at least here it is, because of the relatively low pay (community college professors in Illinois tend to earn significantly less than high school teachers of the same educational level and experience...but your mileage may vary).

I agree with you, it is something that should be avoided. But I'd hate to see a student shortchanged.

We have this occur in apprenticeship, too. Sometimes it works out well, sometimes it doesn't. The times that it doesn't are the times when the old man gives the kid too many breaks, and everyone else is afraid to be "tough" on the kid or suffer the wrath of the old man---who is almost always in a position of power to lay off journeymen who are hardliners and insist that the kid say, show up on time for work, etc. Sigh. We've got a couple of journeymen who are positively not worth a damn because they were protected in this way! But the typical scenario is that these apprentices have a tougher road to travel---and are better off for it. High expectations have a way of building character.

[Ted]

While I agree that professors teaching their children is at best problematic, I don't think it's on the same level as professors teaching their lovers. I'd say the biggest problem with professors teaching their lovers is that it introduces a power dynamic into the relationship that would not otherwise exist and can force people to make relationship decisions they are unhappy with to get a good grade in a course. With a parent teaching a child, the only issue is the potential bias and the perception of the potential bias (though I guess there are some rare cases where the addition of a teacher-student power dynamic to a parent-child relationship might cause problems; consider a child who doesn't depend on his/her parents for any financial support making the decision to come out of the closet to a conservative parent, and how the parent still having a form of power over the child might make it much more difficult).

[mythago]

I don't think the better solution is to not allow a student to take geometry or American Lit or whatever, because their parent is the only instructor for that course!

Absent that dilemma, there should be no reason for a parent to have his or her child in the class--and while Rad Geek's solution seemed to have worked, it doesn't necessarily eliminate the problem. (How objective is a close friend going to be?)

Anonymous exams help if that's the only criterion for the grade. Otherwise, even if a parent is 100% fair, there will always be the perception that the grade was not fairly earned.

[Anthony]

I agree that there are two issues - perception and reality of bias, and the power relationship. But both issues are present in both cases. A parent can not cease to be his child's parent anywhere nearly as easily as a person can cease to be another person's lover or spouse, but especially if the child is still living with the parent, there are plenty of relationship issues where the teacher/parent can potentially use grading as a tool with which to coerce desired behavior from the student/child.

I think this is less of a problem with younger students, as a parent has far more potent leverage than grades over elementary-school age children, for example. But with adult children, it's situation best avoided.

[Charlie]

But a few of my colleagues are vigorously defending the idea that while it may be unethical to teach a lover, it is perfectly acceptable to assign grades to one's own children.

Interesting. I wonder how much of this has to do with our society's views on sex? When sex isn't involved, suddenly people aren't so negative.