On the first day of class your professor distributed a syllabus that promised to base your course grade on a series of unannounced exams and a massive group project

As you scanned the room that day, you noted that many of your classmates did not share your enthusiasm for the subject and many were C students at best. You felt that your perfect 4.0 GPA was at stake if the professor's almost diabolical grading scheme were to be implemented. You decided right away that it was up to you to negotiate a grading scheme of equal parts class attendance, open book quizzes, and trivial homework assignments. How should you prepare for the negotiation and how should you proceed?

The three beginning questions are how much power you have, what are the time pressures, and can the opponent be trusted. A student's power may be a function of the importance placed on end of term professor evaluations and the tenure status of the professor. The time pressure here is extreme — the syllabus would have to change early in the semester or the first exam might be distributed. Obviously, professors are the most trustworthy people in the world. The elements of principled negotiation might be referenced in the answer — the student negotiator should put himself in the professor's shoes, avoid deducing the professor's intentions from his fears, avoid blaming the professor for the class makeup, listen actively, build a working relationship, and recognize and understand emotions. As far as actual negotiating points are concerned, the student might point out that the material could be best learned using his proposed assessments than the professor's. The student might also point out that there would be far less burden on the professor using the attendance-quiz-assignment scheme than grading a massive project and several exams. These options for mutual gain might influence the grading scheme articulated in the original syllabus.