yup... another rant

So in a previous blog post, I mentioned my disdain for my current professor.  It seems that my professor has yet again made me want to scream in frustration.  I have turned in 3 papers starting 5 weeks ago.  He has just NOW graded them this weekend and provided me with the following feedback.  In timeline order:

Friday night
first paper grade of 90 - He mentions formatting is not quite what he was looking for and tells me to look at Lieber Light Case as example.  Direct Quote "You earned a 90% on your Palladium case brief.  If you make the above changes to your next case it will improve the readability and flow of the case."
(The Lieber Light case is actually different than the handout he gave us in class.  I followed the example he gave us in class and I don't recall him EVER saying to follow the Lieber Light example.  AND i can't do it on my next paper because he took 5 freaking weeks to grade it and i'd already turned in 2 more papers.)
Then he emails entire class saying that a lot of us have done incorrect formatting and mentions the Lieber Case. (hey maybe if more than one of us has done it incorrectly, it's probably not us - it's probably YOU.)

Saturday
-  second paper grade of 89 - again mentions formatting issues and to look at Lieber Light case.

Sunday
-  third paper - not graded - direct quote from his email "When I grade case briefs 50% of the case grade is based on "does the student follow the case analytic format?" The second 50% of the grade comes from the completeness and depth of the stated alternatives/advantages/disadvantages and supporting quantitative analysis. That said, your current McNeil case brief does "not" follow the case analytic format very well. Since my primary goal is to assist your learning I'm going to give you a second chance on the McNeil case." 

At this point I am thoroughly angry.  I've drafted a response below.  I haven't sent it out yet.  I have already been called "aggressive" in almost every single class so I don't want to appear to be too "aggressive" yet again.

So what do you think?  Should I sent it? 

Dr. _________,

I just have a few questions:

 

When did you mention that the format that we should follow for our case briefs was based on the Lieber Light case? I don't remember discussing this case in class or it being said that we should use this as an example of the format. It is also not anywhere on the syllabus. I asked several classmates assuming that I missed hearing it in class, but none of my classmates remembered it either. When writing up both of my case briefs and our group presentation, I followed the format from the handout you gave us early in the semester titled “Written Case Preparation Format” and listed under "case analytic format" on blackboard. It lists the 7 things we should have in our case. This hand out says 1. major issue, 2. alternative courses of action 3. advantages 4. disadvantages. It does not mention that you should have it in your specific order of discuss option 1 and also the advantages and disadvantages, then discuss option 2 and also the advantages and disadvantages. This handout that you gave to us in class appears to have a different order than your Lieber Light case. They both cover the same information but in different orders. This is why I'm confused that my formatting doesn't follow your case analytic method. I thought that I was following your handout exactly. All of my headings are identical to this handout.

 

Secondly, you mentioned in the other 2 emails you sent this weekend that I received a 90% on Palladium Doors and an 89% on our group project of Augustine. In both emails you mentioned this formatting issue and suggested i use the Lieber Light Case. In the 3rd email you say that you grade 50% format and 50% content and suggest I should reformat my case and turn it back in to increase my grade. Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate the fact that you are allowing me to redo the format in order to increase my grade on this case brief, but I’m confused. I followed the same exact format for both of the other papers and was awarded a 90 and 89. Is this paper the only paper that needs to be redone? Do the other papers need to be reformatted for a higher grade? If not, then shouldn’t it receive a grade similar to the other two papers since the format is the only issue with this paper? I will happily reformat my McNeil Museum paper so that it meets your requirements, but I just wanted to clarify before doing so. 

 

Thank you for your feedback and your time.