I’m taking an accelerated asynchronous Calculus I course, and I’m looking for honest advice about whether my concerns are reasonable and what I should do next.
The course mainly relies on crappy lecture slides, WebAssign, and YouTube videos (not made by the prof, these are general videos). We understood that an asynchronous class would require a lot of independent work, but many of us expected more direct teaching, instructor-created explanations, or worked examples connected to our assignments and exams.
As the course progressed and the material became harder, several students started feeling increasingly confused and unprepared for the proctored midterm. It often feels like we are teaching ourselves Calculus I through outside videos and WebAssign in a very short course.
The grading categories are:
It makes sense that students earn higher scores in homework, quizzes, and discussions. During those assignments, we have more time to work through problems, check notes, rewatch videos, and use permitted learning resources. A timed and strictly proctored exam is a completely different environment.
I’m not arguing that earning 100% on homework means someone should automatically earn 100% on an exam. My concern is that we were not given enough instructor-led preparation to transition from supported, open-resource coursework to proctored exams that determine half of the final grade.
According to Canvas, the midterm mean was 23.74 out of 47, or approximately 50.5%. The median was approximately 54.3%. The professor also acknowledged that most of the class performed poorly.
The syllabus says the final-exam score can replace the lowest regular-exam score. However, the entire regular-exam category is only worth 14%, while the midterm and final category is worth 50%. This means the replacement provides a relatively small opportunity to recover from a poor midterm, even if a student improves significantly on the comprehensive final.
Communication and access to support have also been problems. The syllabus says students should normally receive a response within 24–48 hours, but questions have not always been answered within that timeframe. My own communication with the professor was through Canvas, and I had to send a follow-up before receiving a response.
Before the midterm, a tutor held a recorded review session. However, the recording was never posted for the class. Because the course is asynchronous, that recording would have been especially useful for students who could not attend live or wanted to review the material again. Students asked whether the video could be uploaded, but they did not receive a response, and we never received access to it.
Canvas and WebAssign have also displayed different due times for some assignments. Some deadlines were extended, but the conflicting information between the two official platforms was not always corrected.
After the midterm, I sent the professor a Canvas message explaining that a close friend had died during the week of the exam. I understand that I contacted him only after taking it, so he did not know beforehand and could not have offered an accommodation before the exam. I accepted responsibility for my score and asked for advice or an opportunity to improve.
His response did not acknowledge the loss. Instead, much of it focused on students using “shortcuts,” suspected AI use, and students he said he caught cheating during the proctored exam. I had not been accused of cheating, so the emphasis surprised and discouraged me. He did say he would provide review homework and a study guide for the final. I followed up with another message asking if there are any extra credit opportunities or if he could review earlier. That was three days ago. I have not gotten a response.
Some students have also told me that 10% was deducted from their original exam scores because the professor suspected them of cheating. According to those students, the stated reasons included “looking at the screen for too long” and “writing for too long” during the Zoom-proctored exam.
I was not personally involved in these deductions and cannot independently verify every detail, so I’m sharing them as student accounts rather than established facts. However, those explanations concern me because the exam required students to carefully analyze graphs displayed on the screen and show written work. Both activities can reasonably take time.
I completely understand that professors have a responsibility to prevent cheating and enforce academic-integrity rules. I am not asking anyone to excuse cheating or inappropriate AI use. However, I also believe that a cheating-related deduction should be based on clear evidence, explained to the affected student, and include an opportunity for the student to respond.
From a student’s perspective, the overall emphasis has sometimes felt more focused on monitoring and penalizing suspected AI use than on teaching, answering questions, or making review materials accessible. Better instruction, course-aligned examples, accessible recordings, and timely responses could help reduce students’ reliance on outside resources in the first place.
When a class is asynchronous, a recorded review exists but is not shared, questions go unanswered, and students are heavily penalized based on behavior that could also be consistent with carefully completing an exam, it creates the impression that enforcement is receiving more attention than student support.
I contacted the college’s ombudsperson for confidential guidance. I am also waiting on a response. I’m not demanding an automatic grade change or trying to punish the professor. There are only about two weeks left, and I’m considering asking the department whether it can provide more instructor-led review, align the deadlines, offer another course-wide opportunity to demonstrate improvement, or review whether the category weights are appropriate.
My questions are:
- Is it reasonable to request a course-wide remedy when the weights were disclosed in the syllabus?
- Should a recorded review session for an asynchronous course have been made available afterward?
- Is it reasonable for students to ask what evidence and appeal process supports a cheating-related deduction?
- How can I raise these concerns without sounding like I simply want points because I performed poorly?
- Has anyone dealt with something similar in an accelerated asynchronous STEM course?
I’m willing to study, complete additional work, and prepare for the final. I’m mainly looking for advice about how to address this fairly and professionally.
TL;DR: I’m in an accelerated asynchronous Calculus I course that relies mainly on WebAssign, textbook material, and YouTube videos. The midterm and final are worth 50% of the grade, but the midterm average was only about 50.5%. A recorded review was never posted, responses have sometimes been delayed, and Canvas and WebAssign have shown conflicting deadlines. Some students also report losing 10% for suspected cheating based on behaviors like looking at the screen or writing for too long. I contacted the school’s ombudsperson and want advice on whether asking the department for more support or a course-wide remedy is reasonable.