Suing for Not Learning

Most education majors suffer in silence through dull required courses about "teaching methods." But Mrs. II-ene lanniello, a senior at the University of Bridgeport, has decided to stage a one-woman revolt. Claiming that the "Methods and Materials in Teaching Basic Business Subjects" course she had to take last year was "worthless," she sued the school to get her tuition and expenses back.

"I've had bad classes before," says Ianniello, "but this was ridiculous. The only thing I learned was how to use the overhead projector." The lone requirement was to hand in a book report. All 14 students in the course, which is required for secondary education majors, got A's last spring semester.

Ianniello, 33 and a mother of three, is suing the university for $400, which represents $150 for tuition plus the cost of books, driving expenses and the legal fees she will incur. She is arguing that the school did not provide the course described in the catalogue and that she did not learn anything.

Assistant Professor Clair Garmen is incredulous, noting that other students in last year's class had no complaints. He admits that he was never "totally satisfied" with giving students A's simply for completing assignments, but "students now need good grades on their records to get jobs."

The Bridgeport administration is frankly worried about the suit and won permission to have it moved from small claims court to the state's court of common pleas for a better test of the principle. "I'm not worried that the professor might not have taught exactly what was in the catalogue," says Vice President for Academic Affairs Warren Carrier. "That's common practice. But if students sue because they say they did not learn anything, that's a different matter. If we lose this, every university in the country will be in trouble."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.