University's Bizarre Move: Banning Caps To Appease Students

In November 2018, Leeds Trinity University in the UK was accused by various media outlets of banning capital letters to avoid scaring students. This claim was based on a leaked internal memo that instructed staff to write in a helpful, warm tone, avoiding officious language and negative instructions. While the memo did suggest that capital letters could emphasise the difficulty of a task and generate anxiety, it did not amount to a ban on capital letters. The university refuted the claims, stating that the memo was guidance based on national best practice teaching guidelines.

Leeds Trinity University's memo

In November 2018, a memo from Leeds Trinity University in the United Kingdom advised lecturers in the journalism department to avoid using all-caps when communicating with students. The memo did not ban capital letters but suggested that using uppercase letters may 'scare students into failure'.

The memo included tips on how lecturers should address their students, such as writing in a friendly tone and avoiding overbearing language and negative instructions. It also stated that a lack of clarity can generate anxiety and even discourage students from attempting the assessment.

Course leaders suggested that capitalising a word could emphasise "the difficulty or high-stakes nature of the task". The memo recommended avoiding the overuse of 'do' and 'don't', especially in all-caps.

The university clarified that the memo was based on "national best practice teaching guidelines" and referred to the "'unpacking sessions' teachers have with students when handing out assignments". The purpose was to ensure students were "clear on what is expected" for the assignment.

The university's vice-chancellor, Margaret House, stated that the memo was about "sharing best practice" and not a new policy intended to sideline capital letters. She added that it is "best practice not to write in all capital letters regardless of the sector".

The response to the memo was mixed. Some critics slammed the idea, claiming that it indulges the 'snowflake' generation. One lecturer at the university expressed concern that it treats students like children and is not doing them "any favours". However, the university stood by its advice, insisting that it is in the best interest of the students.

The media's reaction

Piers Morgan, writing for Mail Online, expressed his disbelief at the story, stating that "the world's gone nuts" and criticising students for not living in the "real world". Other commentators expressed similar sentiments, arguing that students were being treated like "snowflakes" or "little kids". One lecturer at the university agreed with this assessment, saying that the guidance was "nonsense" and that the education system was "treating students like children".

However, some journalists and commentators attempted to debunk the story, pointing out that the university had not, in fact, banned capital letters. The i newspaper published an article titled "No, Leeds Trinity University hasn't banned capital letters to avoid frightening anxious students", which included a scathing critique of the national media's coverage by a journalism lecturer at the university, Rebecca Whittington. She wrote:

> "Our students are not 'snowflakes' – that's a derogatory term which shuts conversation down and fails to give credit or respect to the voices of young people. It's a bullish label which belongs in the playground and minimises reasoned debate."

The university's vice-chancellor, Margaret House, also issued a statement clarifying that the memo was about "sharing best practice" and was not a new policy. She said that the university followed "national best practice teaching guidelines" and that the memo was "guidance from a course leader to academic staff".

The university's response

In November 2018, Leeds Trinity University in England issued a statement refuting claims that it had banned capital letters. The university's vice-chancellor, Margaret House, said that the memo was about "sharing best practice" and was not a new policy intended to sideline capital letters. She emphasised that the university follows national best practice teaching guidelines and that the memo was guidance from a course leader to academic staff, based on the latest teaching research.

Leeds Trinity clarified that the memo was referring to "unpacking sessions", which are meetings between academic staff and students to ensure that students understand what is expected of them for each assignment. These sessions are common at universities and promote clear communication and a consistent style. The university stated that it is standard practice not to write in all capital letters, regardless of the sector.

In response to the media coverage, Leeds Trinity journalism lecturer Rebecca Whittington wrote a blog post criticising the portrayal of students as "snowflakes". She defended the university's students, stating that they are "bright, intelligent, interesting people" who can differentiate between a genuine story and non-story. She also pointed out that the media's focus on this non-story could be attributed to "some kind of Brexit-fatigue".

The university stood by its advice, insisting that it was in the best interests of the students. Professor Margaret A. House OBE, vice-chancellor at Leeds Trinity University, emphasised that the university supports its students to achieve their full potential and offers a personal and inclusive university experience.

The lecturer's perspective

The Lecturers' Perspective

As a lecturer, I can say that the idea of banning capital letters to avoid scaring students is ridiculous. It is patronising to students and undermines the very purpose of higher education. While I understand the intention behind the suggestion, which is to reduce anxiety and encourage students to engage with their studies, it is not the right approach.

Firstly, the very notion that capital letters are scary is absurd. Yes, certain words or phrases may trigger negative emotions or memories, but the use of capital letters for emphasis or to highlight important information is a standard practice in writing. Banning them will not magically eliminate the challenges or difficulties that students may face. Instead, it treats students like children who need to be shielded from the real world, which is counterproductive to the goal of preparing them for it.

Secondly, this suggestion implies that we, as lecturers, are unable to properly support and guide our students through their academic journey. It assumes that we are not capable of creating a warm and inclusive learning environment without resorting to such extreme measures. In my experience, building a positive and encouraging relationship with students is crucial to their success, and it can be achieved without banning basic elements of the English language.

Additionally, this idea seems to stem from a misunderstanding of the role of education. Education is not just about imparting knowledge; it is also about equipping students with the skills and resilience they need to navigate life's challenges. By shielding students from capital letters, we do them a disservice by implying that they cannot handle minor stressors or develop their own coping strategies.

Furthermore, the implementation of such a ban would be impractical and confusing. How would it be enforced? Would all capital letters be banned, or just those used for emphasis? What about proper nouns or the first letter of a sentence? The very act of defining and regulating the use of capital letters would create more confusion and complexity than it solves.

Finally, this suggestion reflects a broader issue in society, where there is a growing tendency to indulge and accommodate every perceived need or sensitivity. While it is important to be mindful and respectful of others, we must also recognise that life is full of challenges and that true learning often occurs when we confront and overcome these obstacles.

In conclusion, as lecturers, our role is to educate, empower, and prepare our students for the future. Banning capital letters to avoid scaring students is not only impractical and unnecessary but also undermines the very essence of our profession. Our time and energy are better spent creating engaging curricula, fostering a positive learning environment, and providing the support and guidance that our students truly need to succeed.

The impact on pedagogy

On the other hand, others argue that this decision is based on "historical-cultural recognition" and an attempt to resist acknowledging the power structures that oppress. It is also suggested that avoiding capital letters is a way to improve clarity for students and reduce anxiety, especially when it comes to understanding assessment tasks. By having "unpacking sessions" with students, lecturers can ensure that students fully understand what is expected of them and reduce the potential for confusion.

The debate around this issue highlights the dynamic nature of pedagogy and the ongoing discussions about how best to teach and learn. It also brings up the question of whether universities should be making recommendations or outright bans when it comes to pedagogical practices. Some argue that while recommendations are common and based on best practices, bans may be an overstep and a form of censorship.

Overall, the impact on pedagogy of banning capital letters is multifaceted and depends on the context and intentions behind the decision. It is essential to consider the potential benefits and drawbacks of such a decision and how it may affect both students and lecturers.

Frequently asked questions