DOC 3-A

Student's Reply

Student Response to K Craft

Kim Craft, J.D.
Department Chair
Entertainment Business Master of Science Degree Program
Full Sail University
3300 University Boulevard | Winter Park, FL 32792

April 03, 2014

Greetings Ms. Craft,

Your opening statements, wherein you state I have reviewed Ms. Searles' Student Concern
Form and discussed the matter at length with her instructor, advisors, and our program
director. Based on this, I will allow Ms. Searles the option to rewrite her post, as
requested, indicates that there may be a miscomprehension of the issues documented in the
Universitys Student Concern Form completed by Student. Student never requested to rewrite
the Student Study Lounge Post, that was taken down by Stewart and Replaced with Stewarts
own post. Full Sail Universitys educational philosophy includes a commitment to delivering, a
real world educational experience that is engaging and exceptionalThere are initiativesto
instill professional protocol, attitude and a mindset for creativity and success (FS Catalog,
2012).

You state that your offer to allow Student, the option to rewrite her post, which Student
did not request to do as you indicate, was based on your review and your discussions between
advisors, Tarragon Horn, Sean Donovan, instructor, Kristin Stewart, Program Director for the
Entertainment Business Master of Science Degree Program, Ron Cook, and yourself, Kimberly
Craft, Department Chair. Since Student was not privy to these meetings, Student kindly
requests written and/or audio transcripts of said discussions.

It is most unfortunate that your response disregards the significance of the issues addressed in the
Full Sail Universitys Student Concern form completed by Queen Searles, hereinafter referred to
as Student. Upon the counsel of Student Advisor, Tarragon Horn, hereinafter referred to as
Advisor, Student completed said form, which is the protocol, established by the university to
commence a formal complaint, according to Advisor. This form was sent to all parties addressed
herein, via electronic mail on Monday March 31, 2014. These concerns include disrespectful
communications, impersonation of a student, deceptive teaching practices, and the overall mean-
spiritedness of Full Sail University instructor, Kristin Stewart. For your convenience, they are
reincorporated herein:

1. Stewart removed a student post from the Student Study Lounge without communicating with
student and affording student an opportunity to discuss the issues and revise their own post.

2. Stewart knowingly and fraudulently impersonated Student by placing Stewarts own post in
conjunction with Students photo, using the word Hello in the salutation. Student, like Oprah
Winfrey, over-stands the power of attraction, thus, refrains from using said word. Student remains
extremely appalled at seeing students post replaced with Ms. Stewarts dialogue attached to
Students face, a form of plagiarism. As stated in the Week 1.1 Dashboard Important section,
Academic dishonesty can be cheating on tests, projects, papers, and homework. This includes,

DOC 3-B
Student's Reply

Student Response to K Craft
but is not limited to plagiarism, misrepresentation, and unauthorized (not cited) use or possession
of material (2008, pp. 26-27). Stewart misrepresented Student in a post and is unauthorized to
use Students picture in her post.

3. Stewart engages in deceptive teaching and learning practices that promote negative learning
experiences for students. This includes, but is not limited to, making unjustified point deductions
from student discussion posts that are not in accordance with course rubrics. Stewarts practices
could, subsequently, rob students of achieving their maximum earning potential.

4. Stewarts overbearingly rude and unduly mean-spirited attacks are causing student to experience
excessive stress, and associated serious periodic physical pains.

The Student Concern Form platform is complicated; extremely time consuming and uploading
supporting documentation is very arduous. This form could discourage students from even
initiating a formal complaint. Your lack of response to these very serious allegations sends the
message that instructors are exempt from exercising professional protocol when interacting with
Full Sail University students. Furthermore, it sends the message that Full Sail University
instructors, who may not engage students in exceptional learning experiences, can be confident
that their immediate administrators will uphold, condone and justify unprofessional
communications, conduct and attitudes. The most devastating message this exemplifies is that
any student who dares to seek amicable resolutions, through established university protocol, has
little recourse and may, in fact, face added humiliation, written reprimand and an ungodly
ultimatum. Student must now choose between paying to be taught by a supported unprofessional
instructor, who engages in provocative inappropriate communications and behaviors, and
completing the prestigious Entertainment Business Masters of Science degree program.

Additionally, the tone of your statements, Ms. Searles will write a post that complies with
the requirements of the forum; namely, that it relates to class assignments, business-related
matters, etc. and uses a professional and business-like tone in accordance with our GPS
policy, is insulting as it is an admonishment to Student and indicative of wrongdoing on the
part of Student which could affect Students GPS score. Moreover, a Student Study Lounge
forum is for students to discuss whatever concerns the students, what is considered personal
information is subjective. Student considers issues of injustices revolving around a students
living arrangements, which are financed with government funded financial aid, and could destroy
a students opportunity to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, a societal issue as opposed to
a personal issue. And further considers experiences of blatant acts by professionals, in various
industries, that devalue and desecrate online education worthy of discussion among online
degree candidates, as well as among online pedagogical professionals.

Your assurances of Stewarts intentions, actions or inactions are inconsequential. They are not
issues raised in the Student Concern Form. However, Ms. Stewart did intend to remove Students
post to the Study Lounge Discussion Board, and replace it with her own post next to Students
Photograph. Stewart also intended to abruptly disconnect Student when Student was speaking.
While the Study Lounge post is not a course assignment, and therefore is not graded, the
Discussion Board Posts are graded assignments.

You also state that you are not aware of any other complaints regarding Ms. Stewart's
grading and handling of other assignments; thus, Ms. Stewart will grade this assignment,

DOC 3-C
Student's Reply

Student Response to K Craft
as well. It is incomprehensible to Student that because you are not currently aware of other
complaints regarding Ms. Stewarts grading, that you would disregard Students concern about
Stewart deducting three points from Students Discussion Post without explanation.
Notwithstanding that Stewart sent Student an email wherein Stewart indicates that she does not
keep records sufficient enough to provide constructive feedback. In the ideal resolution section
of the Student Concern Form, Student specifically suggested an audit of Stewarts practices.
Such an action could possibly assure University Administrators that student concerns
expressed herein are isolated issues or could possibly make them aware of other inappropriate
acts or grading practices by Stewart that may be deemed unprofessional.

The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Since,
with the exception of student Advisors, thus far all communications have be among University
personnel, there appears to already exist a breach in your offer to assure [Student] of fairness
and impartiality.

As always, Student is delighted to work with Advisors, Horn and Donovan. While it is clear to
Student that the course in question is required for graduation, on the other hand, it is
inexplicable that University Officials do not have a Plan B for Student who has paid and who
has demonstrated ability to competently complete degree requirements. The University heavily
advocates having a Plan B. It is a requirement for all students to complete an effective
BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Deal). Student contends that if the University has no
Plan B, that as Steve Harvey suggests, they should create another Plan A

Whether Stewarts mean-spiritedness is grounded in malice against Student is also not a
concern addressed. As expressed in the Student Concern chronicle, Student simply refuses to
pay any instructor who is mean-spirited beyond reason and who engages in unprofessional
student communications and grading practices. Rest assured that Student would not have
deviated from Students prior plans to embark on a journey that Student believed would be
anything less than, personally exciting, intrinsically gratifying and lucrative beyond Students
vivid imagine.

Respectfully,



Queen Searles, M. Ed., EBMS Student