Open letter to Substitute lecturer for CRJ4001W

Dear Madam Lecturer,

It is with great trepidation that I tackle this letter, but I soldier on as I think the purpose behind it is a pertinent one which requires urgent attention. You have acted as a worthy substitute lecturer for the better part of a semester this year and I must laud the manner in which you have confronted the difficult task and the temerity you have shown in persevering thus far.

I believe it not necessary to engage with how arduous the task is of lecturing a class of final year law students for a person of even the highest qualification but do deem it worthwhile to engage with your approach to the task.

We are blessed in our faculty in that the large majority of our resident lecturers are academic leaders in their chosen field but we are conversely also cursed with the resultant propensity of these aforementioned academic authorities to be drawn from our hallowed lecture halls to complete stints away from the faculty such as to be acting judicial officials, key research anchors on commissions of enquiry with significant legal importance and to take lengthy personal sabbaticals.

This logistical conundrum has obviated the need for dedicated, intelligent people, like you, to take over the reigns to the microphone and the bridle of the slide projector to lead the army that is our class toward the compulsory 2 grade points we need to graduate.

Your actions so far in stepping into the shoes of our unavailable lecturer have been invaluable. You have not simply just regurgitated the very precise and detailed course material our AWOL lecturer left you to the class but instead delivered it in clear and audible English language without compromising the cogent structure she laid it out in for you. I can attest that failing to do these things is usually the default position for people in your position. However, despite your commendable approach thus far, I do wish to share a few pointers.

Lecturing, like public speaking, requires the very hallmark of addressing a crowd; a confident and clear eloquences. However, lecturing extends beyond mere public speaking as it also requires the lecturer to interrelate with the multitude of expectant learners. This is by no means a simple task, and one you by no means have mastered.

I am sure if you cast your experienced mind back to the days before you became a successful trial advocate to when you were a mere law student yourself you will vividly remember the ‘type’ of student who attempts to complete an LLB. They are truly unique.

Unashamedly they will place themselves at the top of the academic pile. They will compare their astute ‘academicness’ with Actuarial Scientists, their ability for open debate and forum with doctoral politics students and their ‘hands on’ practical ability with community serving medical surgeons.

Alas, they are mistaken, as their academic ability transcends no further than a few undergraduate English assignments, their debating ability no further than domestic quibbles in the chicken burger queue and their pragmatism no further than their futile efforts for a fine reduction in the traffic department.

Unfortunately, their insufficiencies in these regards are far less glaring to themselves as it is to the rest of our university’s community. We should appreciate a lecturer who fields questions from confused students but allowing a law student to speak can be lecture suicide.

I candidly now refer to our double lecture last Friday. I urge you to beware of the student who, when permitted to speak, begins his 3 minute soliloquy with ‘I have two points, the first of which is a comment, whilst the second is a comment’. Now let’s remain mindful that a lecture is under no circumstance an opinion soapbox for which a student can air their mental conjecture on a whim. For that we have Facebook and tutorials. Secondly, I urge us to beware of people that introduce their questions two-fold: by raising their hand and then by beginning with ‘my question is’. They haven’t even got to the salient purpose of their question and they are already repeating themselves, from this it is blatantly apparent that they have no question and are rather using your affable demeanor in persisting to field their views as a platform from which they can tautologically voice their opinions before a crowd.

I implore you to sift through the sea of hands every lecture point of yours receives with a fastidious caution as there exists an overwhelming chance that that arm is vertical not for their own benefit to be taught a point but rather for their own benefit in hearing the sound of their own semi-retarded brain.

The more engaging you are with them the more they are encouraged to derail our lecture, please don’t allow them to continue unhindered.

Kinds Regards,

GH