Definition: Given a real-life anecdote of a complex ethical situation, generate a suitable title that describes the main event/root cause of the situation. Imagine that the given text is a social media post, and you have to write the title of the post, so the users can decide to read the main text or not.
Input: Sorry for the long post but tl;dr near the bottom.

I enrolled in a project course at my college back in May. The timeframe is flexible: you decide with your professor how long the course should be (up to 1 year), and that determines how much work must be in it, how harsh it's marked, etc. It's expected to at least be graduate level quality. I decided with my professor I only wanted to devote four months to it, as it corresponded to the spring/summer months and if it were longer, my other courses would interfere with it.

Part of these courses is you go in with a project proposal, it's accepted or declined, and if it's accepted, you do only what you defined in your proposal. To make it more manageable, you can define due dates for portions of the project and a proposed marking scheme. Everything was accepted and off I went.

Over the months and after updating my professor with my progress, demonstrating my work, and discussion meetings with him, he kept asking for more and more. He loved my work but thought I could make so and so adjustments to my proposal and implement them. I was keen on the idea as it could mean better marks. If he liked my work, surely encompassing even more would be better? He continually told me to not worry about the due dates so much and instead focus on adding abc or xyz to my project and just updating him with the progress.

I took his advice. I missed deadlines by weeks. It got to the point where the final due date approached and he told me again and again don't worry about it, just keep working. It worried me because I was soon starting a full courseload but still kept going anyways. It became difficult to manage what is basically a mini-thesis alongside a 15hr/week schedule of lectures and labs, but since I was assured to not worry about deadlines (I assumed my 4 months would end up being 8-10 months), I spread things out a bit.

On November 1st, I was abruptly told through e-mail that I have exactly two weeks to submit everything. At this point, my project was completely different from what I originally planned to do, and I wasn't finished. I mean, I finished what I set out to do originally but not the added stuff my professor convinced me to do. I had to rush things and admittedly submitted subpar work to my standards. In my summary paper, it was clear things were in disarray but I had a time frame all of a sudden when previously I didn't.

I ended up getting a 20%, not only failing but killing my GPA. I was told it had "no academic merit" and he was "embarrassed" to be part of it. He said he would never work with me again. How much this hurt me was indescribable: he was my favorite professor, an inspiring force in previous classes I had with him, and we were on a first name basis to top it off. He never replied to my e-mails.

#tl;dr

Signed up for a 4-month course with my favorite professor. He told me to not worry about the 4-months and take as much time as I need to add things to my project not originally in the project scope. I did my best until was abruptly told to hand it in and I submitted poor work. I failed.

#end tl;dr

WIBTA if I appealed his grade? Normal procedure is to hand in material verbatim, but since I got my mark, I've still been working on the project, even knowing I've failed. What I would have considered 55-60% grade material back then I firmly believe is 80-90% material. If I appealed, I would obviously hand in my revised work. The supervising professor left the country for sabbatical and would otherwise be unable to verify the same work was handed in. He's going to look bad and cannot defend himself.

Even if I was caught handing in different work, I have a strong case I think for a re-evaluation:

- I have documented proof of him stating to not worry about deadlines
- likewise I have proof of him expressing desire for project expansion, which AFAIK is allowed but should warrant extensions
- and I have proof he looked at my source code but I didn't even submit it. He marked strictly off my report

appealing a grade on a paper, but changing the paper for the second professor