Professor
Jill Goldsmith
1 of 1
AD
Most Helpful Review
Summer 2025 - Professor Goldsmith's approach to students with invisible disabilities is deeply concerning and, in my experience, shockingly outdated. She demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of disability rights, initially dismissing the legitimacy of an invisible disability and suggesting that providing accommodations would be "unfair to other students." This is an unacceptable attitude for a university instructor. Disability accommodations are not special privileges, and students should not have to defend the legitimacy of their medical conditions to receive basic respect. What made the experience particularly troubling was the inconsistency between her verbal assurances of academic flexibility and her subsequent grading decisions. After initially agreeing to provide flexibility, she later cited the very coursework affected by those discussions as justification for a lower grade. Her subsequent responses felt dismissive and defensive rather than accountable. I found her conduct discriminatory in its effect, her communication inconsistent, and her understanding of invisible disabilities seriously lacking. Academic rigor does not justify dismissing students' disabilities or creating uncertainty around agreed-upon accommodations. I have formally reported these concerns to UCLA's student disability grievance office and Civil Rights Office and requested an independent review of her conduct. I believe the seriousness of these issues warrants institutional scrutiny, particularly given the responsibility faculty members have to ensure equitable treatment of students with disabilities. Regardless of her expertise in screenwriting, I believe this approach to teaching is unacceptable in a modern university environment. I would strongly caution students with disabilities or accommodation needs against taking her course. Students deserve instructors who understand the difference between fairness and treating everyone identically.
Summer 2025 - Professor Goldsmith's approach to students with invisible disabilities is deeply concerning and, in my experience, shockingly outdated. She demonstrated a serious lack of understanding of disability rights, initially dismissing the legitimacy of an invisible disability and suggesting that providing accommodations would be "unfair to other students." This is an unacceptable attitude for a university instructor. Disability accommodations are not special privileges, and students should not have to defend the legitimacy of their medical conditions to receive basic respect. What made the experience particularly troubling was the inconsistency between her verbal assurances of academic flexibility and her subsequent grading decisions. After initially agreeing to provide flexibility, she later cited the very coursework affected by those discussions as justification for a lower grade. Her subsequent responses felt dismissive and defensive rather than accountable. I found her conduct discriminatory in its effect, her communication inconsistent, and her understanding of invisible disabilities seriously lacking. Academic rigor does not justify dismissing students' disabilities or creating uncertainty around agreed-upon accommodations. I have formally reported these concerns to UCLA's student disability grievance office and Civil Rights Office and requested an independent review of her conduct. I believe the seriousness of these issues warrants institutional scrutiny, particularly given the responsibility faculty members have to ensure equitable treatment of students with disabilities. Regardless of her expertise in screenwriting, I believe this approach to teaching is unacceptable in a modern university environment. I would strongly caution students with disabilities or accommodation needs against taking her course. Students deserve instructors who understand the difference between fairness and treating everyone identically.
AD
1 of 1
