Capitol bill aims to control ?leftist? profs (Florida)

[Sunbird]

So will the US tertiary education now become like the nancy pancy public school system, where a student shouldn't be made to feel bad on any level (like with the eval red penz!!11!!!)?

If so, I'm glad I'm not in the US system.

Unfortunately, the South African school system is slowly becoming like the US one

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Ah yes, the same tortured "logic" line supertool is trying to trot out...:roll:
No one is telling them how to do their job - protecting students from rogue "professors" is not telling professors how to do their job - quit being so dense.

Ignore reality if you wish DM but it is not left vs right - it is student vs "professors" abusing their positions.

If you read the site you wouldn't be asking for examples...

No one is claiming it is in every college or is every professor, but for you, the OP, others to claim it is targeting leftist professors is absurd - it equally protects students - from ANY side.
Also, I never said the professor was there to learn from the student - infact I have stated that the professor does have control in their classroom - however, that does not mean they can do anything they want. The issue here is accountability and the lack of recourses for students being wronged by professors. YOU seem to be the one with the misunderstanding since you(like supertool) have to twist and contort my statements into some bastardized position (I clearly have not taken) to argue over.

And as I stated, tax-payers need to hold those who receive gov't funds accountable. If the Uni system won't do it - the states can and must step in. Yes, big gov't sucks - however since we are stuck with it, I want to make sure there is some accountability for the taxpayer's dollars. Do you not think the University system should be accountable to those who fund it, whether the students or tax-payers?

CsG

I don't care how much you bleat the same arguments over and over, I'm convinced that legislation is not needed here. Furthermore, I've perused the FIRE site on several occasions and cannot find any evidence that professors are marking down students based on the student's ideology or political affiliations. If it were as widespread as you suggest, you could quite easily point me to some examples of this happening, and yet you keep ducking it.

Bottom line is I don't believe this is the problem you and the conservative club members at various schools are making it.

 

[SuperTool]

Typical GOP philosophy. If it's not broken, break it.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Ofcourse they don't pay for a grade -they pay for an education on the subjects they choose. This bill doesn't change any of that. Good for your Uni, if they really do have a good system for students to use for situations where "professors" are overstepping their authority.
If "professors" would teach the subject of the class and grade according to on-subject merit, then none of this would be necessary.

CsG

You know, it's funny, after this quarter i'll have accumulated 241 quarter credits (that's 5 1/3 years, roughly) at a large public research university, and I've never, not once, had a professor threaten someone's grade because of ideological differences.

I have, however, seen a professor threaten a student's grade because they couldn't back up their assertions with logic taken from class discussions, readings, or assignments.

Perhaps that's what you're referring to. Otherwise, I've seen no evidence to support your claims, and I'll continue to oppose this bill as unnecessary, at best, and dangerous and very frightening, at worst.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Ofcourse they don't pay for a grade -they pay for an education on the subjects they choose. This bill doesn't change any of that. Good for your Uni, if they really do have a good system for students to use for situations where "professors" are overstepping their authority.
If "professors" would teach the subject of the class and grade according to on-subject merit, then none of this would be necessary.

CsG

You know, it's funny, after this quarter i'll have accumulated 241 quarter credits (that's 5 1/3 years, roughly) at a large public research university, and I've never, not once, had a professor threaten someone's grade because of ideological differences.

I have, however, seen a professor threaten a student's grade because they couldn't back up their assertions with logic taken from class discussions, readings, or assignments.

Perhaps that's what you're referring to. Otherwise, I've seen no evidence to support your claims, and I'll continue to oppose this bill as unnecessary, at best, and dangerous and very frightening, at worst.

He only supports govt. intervention in his causes you notice.

That's the lie of todays conservatives Orsorum. They claim to want less govt. They claim they want less interference and cry for "Freedom". They decry the "nanny state", yet when they want their agenda promoted, government isn't interfering, it's rescuing. "Government IS the problem" really means when others use the government for the exact same thing in their view THEN it's the problem.

This is why I embrace neither ideology, but of the two what passes for conservatism today even less. I view all DC politicians as more or less corrupt, but it truly annoys me to see the corruption of the Republicans held up as a moral virtue, and even more that many who should know better choose not to. For them, the fact that Bush says he never got the buck is laudable.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Last time I checked, classroom was not a place for free speech, and a professor can tell me to shut up if I start yapping about my beliefs or anything else. He is the one running the lecture. The professor is the one who has the authority to speak and to allocate time for others to speak. The student has the option of staying or leaving.

This applies to professors as well...perhaps they should stick to the subjects they are entrusted to teach, rather then transform the classroom into their own personal soapbox.

Students should be free to express their beliefs and opinions so long as their comments are aligned with the subject or topic being taught at the time...for instance, it would not make sense for a Pro-Life student to raise his political agenda during say a calculus class, but it would be appropriate during any number of classes that relate to social issues, particularly if the topic raised by the professor is abortion.

Some, and I emphasize the word "some," of these professors are just as fanatical about censoring dissenting opinion and free speech as the Republican lawmakers pushing this bill.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Last time I checked, classroom was not a place for free speech, and a professor can tell me to shut up if I start yapping about my beliefs or anything else. He is the one running the lecture. The professor is the one who has the authority to speak and to allocate time for others to speak. The student has the option of staying or leaving.

This applies to professors as well...perhaps they should stick to the subjects they are entrusted to teach, rather then transform the classroom into their own personal soapbox.

Since when? I don't think there is an expectation that professor won't talk about anything outside of class, nor should there be.

Students should be free to express their beliefs and opinions so long as their comments are aligned with the subject or topic being taught at the time...for instance, it would not make sense for a Pro-Life student to raise his political agenda during say a calculus class, but it would be appropriate during any number of classes that relate to social issues, particularly if the topic raised by the professor is abortion.

Unless he has the professors permission to speak, he has no right to disrupt a class, even if it's on subject. The other students are there to hear the professor speak, not hear some uneducated punk's opinion.

Some, and I emphasize the word "some," of these professors are just as fanatical about censoring dissenting opinion and free speech as the Republican lawmakers pushing this bill.

The students don't have free speech in the classroom. Just like you don't have free speech rights in a theater. You can't stand up during a performance and give a speech. The other students there are there to listen to the professor.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Since when? I don't think there is an expectation that professor won't talk about anything outside of class, nor should there be.

True, although there is not much value to a professor who is so distracted by his own political agenda that it detracts from the course subject...for instance, I had a Finance professor who incessantly complained about the war in Iraq...what was the relevance to the subject?

Unless he has the professors permission to speak, he has no right to disrupt a class, even if it's on subject. The other students are there to hear the professor speak, not hear some uneducated punk's opinion.

Well it then becomes subjective as to what you consider disruptive...if a student, in a mature and articulated manner, raises an issue that contradicts or disagrees with the opinion posed by the professor, should the professor have the right to censor that which does not fall into his own political worldview? You often hear colleges and universities advertise their diversity programs, stating that diversity provides a more value added education experience...well diversity includes political ideology.

And it disturbs me that you dismiss any student who disagrees with a professor as being an uneducated punk...education is not a prerequisite for intelligence.

The students don't have free speech in the classroom. Just like you don't have free speech rights in a theater. You can't stand up during a performance and give a speech. The other students there are there to listen to the professor.

Apples and oranges...a theater serves the purpose of entertainment...the classroom serves the purpose of education...if students and teachers are prevented from sharing and exchanging ideas, even when not in agreement, then the forum of education loses its value.

 

[piasabird]

So what if some liberal student is flunked because they have a Conservative minded instructor and they dont like the liberal point of view of the student?

 

[Starbuck1975]

So what if some liberal student is flunked because they have a Conservative minded instructor and they dont like the liberal point of view of the student?

It would be equally inappropriate...educational forums and classrooms should be protected from any form of ideological controlling influences.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Since when? I don't think there is an expectation that professor won't talk about anything outside of class, nor should there be.

True, although there is not much value to a professor who is so distracted by his own political agenda that it detracts from the course subject...for instance, I had a Finance professor who incessantly complained about the war in Iraq...what was the relevance to the subject?

That's for his department head, not courts to decide.

Unless he has the professors permission to speak, he has no right to disrupt a class, even if it's on subject. The other students are there to hear the professor speak, not hear some uneducated punk's opinion.

Well it then becomes subjective as to what you consider disruptive...if a student, in a mature and articulated manner, raises an issue that contradicts or disagrees with the opinion posed by the professor, should the professor have the right to censor that which does not fall into his own political worldview?

during class, the professor has the right to sensor everything and anything. It's his class, he gets to pick what is and isn't discussed. If the student disagrees, he can complain to the dean or head of department, but he should not have standing to sue.

You often hear colleges and universities advertise their diversity programs, stating that diversity provides a more value added education experience...well diversity includes political ideology.

And in the dorm room or dining hall, they are free to express their ideology, but in classroom, the professor decides what is and isn't discussed.

And it disturbs me that you dismiss any student who disagrees with a professor as being an uneducated punk...education is not a prerequisite for intelligence.

It is however a prerequisite for lecturing a class, and students don't have the right to interrupt or interfere with professor to lecture the other students on their point of view.

The students don't have free speech in the classroom. Just like you don't have free speech rights in a theater. You can't stand up during a performance and give a speech. The other students there are there to listen to the professor.

Apples and oranges...a theater serves the purpose of entertainment...the classroom serves the purpose of education...if students and teachers are prevented from sharing and exchanging ideas, even when not in agreement, then the forum of education loses its value.

So a student has a right to hijack a lecture, then sue the professor if he tries to take the lecture back? The students are there to listen to the professor, and it's up to the professor to yield his time to other students if he thinks what they have to say is valuable. It's not up to the courts to decide, nor should be. There is no right to interrupt lectures with your rambling and then sue the professor when he tells you to sit down and be quiet.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

So what if some liberal student is flunked because they have a Conservative minded instructor and they dont like the liberal point of view of the student?

It would be equally inappropriate...educational forums and classrooms should be protected from any form of ideological controlling influences.

Since when? And protected by whom? Courts? I don't think so. Noone is forcing a student to sit in a lecture. And even when he is in the lecture, noone is forcing him to agree with the professor.

 

[Starbuck1975]

That's for his department head, not courts to decide.

Assuming of course the department head is willing to discipline his own professors, which is rarely the case. Usually takes a lawsuit or external pressure to motivate these professionals to facilitate change.

during class, the professor has the right to sensor everything and anything. It's his class, he gets to pick what is and isn't discussed. If the student disagrees, he can complain to the dean or head of department, but he should not have standing to sue

You are missing the point...some forums are more appropriate for such discussion then others. I would expect a political science class to contain debate, to include the professor injecting his own beliefs into the discussion...however, for the educational experience to be truly enriching, it benefits all students to hear every possible perspective and opinion on whatever issue is being discussed.

And in the dorm room or dining hall, they are free to express their ideology, but in classroom, the professor decides what is and isn't discussed.

So you support professors who limit the discussion to covering their own political ideology? Kind of sounds like the brainwashing and thought control some of you accuse conservatives of.

It is however a prerequisite for lecturing a class, and students don't have the right to interrupt or interfere with professor to lecture the other students on their point of view.

I am sorry that you view dissenting opinion as disruptive...dissenting opinion, when presented in an articulate and respectful manner only adds value to the discussion...disruptive behavior should obviously not be tolerated, but I do not think that just because a student offers a dissenting opion, he is necessarily being disruptive.

So a student has a right to hijack a lecture, then sue the professor if he tries to take the lecture back? The students are there to listen to the professor, and it's up to the professor to yield his time to other students if he thinks what they have to say is valuable. It's not up to the courts to decide, nor should be. There is no right to interrupt lectures with your rambling and then sue the professor when he tells you to sit down and be quiet.

Again it depends on the nature of the discussion. If the intent of the professor is to facilitate discussion, then the professor serves as the moderator to ensure that every student has an opportunity to contribute.

Since when? And protected by whom? Courts? I don't think so. Noone is forcing a student to sit in a lecture. And even when he is in the lecture, noone is forcing him to agree with the professor.

It really comes down to intent. One would hope that these professors would have the professionalism and courtesy not to allow their own political ideologies to infringe or otherwise taint the educational experience of their students. Similarly, student should behave in a manner that is respectful towards their professors.

If a student raises an issue or challenges his professor with the intent of being disruptivem, then that student is in the wrong.

Similarly, if a professor chooses to censor or otherwise discipline a student simply because their ideology is not in alignment with their own, then that professor is acting unprofessionally.

It is a sad state of affairs that we should even have to entertain the thought of having the legislative branch attempt to regulate or otherwise moderate the exchange of information and knowledge in our academic institutions.

 

[MCWAR]

Give it up! If the leftist thought there was a more conservative bias they would be up in arms. Even if were just professors opinions and not indoctrination they would be backing this bill tenfold. Because its more common to find leftist teachers in a college setting, they are very comfortable with it.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: MCWAR
Give it up! If the leftist thought there was a more conservative bias they would be up in arms. Even if were just professors opinions and not indoctrination they would be backing this bill tenfold. Because its more common to find leftist teachers in a college setting, they are very comfortable with it.

:roll: I've found very few leftist teachers in my time on campus, most of mine have been centrist or unwilling to display their affiliation.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Starbuck1975

t is a sad state of affairs that we should even have to entertain the thought of having the legislative branch attempt to regulate or otherwise moderate the exchange of information and knowledge in our academic institutions.

It is a sad state of affairs, but I think you miss the point. There is no genuine need to even think of such legislation. It purports to solve a problem that does not exist. The sad part is that it is just another move to supress any opposition to the party in power. In all of my life, I have never seem the likes of the Republican Party's current attempts to acquire and consolidate power, or to stiffle dissent so vigorously. That's sad, and scary.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Ah yes, the same tortured "logic" line supertool is trying to trot out...:roll:
No one is telling them how to do their job - protecting students from rogue "professors" is not telling professors how to do their job - quit being so dense.

Ignore reality if you wish DM but it is not left vs right - it is student vs "professors" abusing their positions.

If you read the site you wouldn't be asking for examples...

No one is claiming it is in every college or is every professor, but for you, the OP, others to claim it is targeting leftist professors is absurd - it equally protects students - from ANY side.
Also, I never said the professor was there to learn from the student - infact I have stated that the professor does have control in their classroom - however, that does not mean they can do anything they want. The issue here is accountability and the lack of recourses for students being wronged by professors. YOU seem to be the one with the misunderstanding since you(like supertool) have to twist and contort my statements into some bastardized position (I clearly have not taken) to argue over.

And as I stated, tax-payers need to hold those who receive gov't funds accountable. If the Uni system won't do it - the states can and must step in. Yes, big gov't sucks - however since we are stuck with it, I want to make sure there is some accountability for the taxpayer's dollars. Do you not think the University system should be accountable to those who fund it, whether the students or tax-payers?

CsG

I don't care how much you bleat the same arguments over and over, I'm convinced that legislation is not needed here. Furthermore, I've perused the FIRE site on several occasions and cannot find any evidence that professors are marking down students based on the student's ideology or political affiliations. If it were as widespread as you suggest, you could quite easily point me to some examples of this happening, and yet you keep ducking it.

Bottom line is I don't believe this is the problem you and the conservative club members at various schools are making it.

Again, no where did I say it was widespread, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be attended to.

Wow, THAT was hard to find! :roll:

And again, I agree, Legislation SHOULD NOT be needed, but IF Academia will not step up to the plate and offer clear and structured recourse for students - these sorts of bills will continue.

CsG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I read it, have you?

You obviously have not read the legislation if you think dealing with interruptions(disruptions) will be outlawed. Get a clue.

CsG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

So what if some liberal student is flunked because they have a Conservative minded instructor and they dont like the liberal point of view of the student?

It would be equally inappropriate...educational forums and classrooms should be protected from any form of ideological controlling influences.

Exactly. What the naysayers don't realize is that this goes both ways(although percentage wise there are more admitted liberals in the Unis than Conservatives).

CsG

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

That's for his department head, not courts to decide.

Assuming of course the department head is willing to discipline his own professors, which is rarely the case. Usually takes a lawsuit or external pressure to motivate these professionals to facilitate change.

Students should not have standing to sue because they don't like what's being discussed in class, or if their feelings have been hurt. There is no right to not hear what you don't expect and to not be offended. So these so called "conservatives" are making up rights that don't exist.

during class, the professor has the right to sensor everything and anything. It's his class, he gets to pick what is and isn't discussed. If the student disagrees, he can complain to the dean or head of department, but he should not have standing to sue

You are missing the point...some forums are more appropriate for such discussion then others. I would expect a political science class to contain debate, to include the professor injecting his own beliefs into the discussion...however, for the educational experience to be truly enriching, it benefits all students to hear every possible perspective and opinion on whatever issue is being discussed.

Again, it's up the the professor to decide what is intellectually enriching, not the courts. And discussing every perspective of every issue will take time away from teaching course requirements.

And in the dorm room or dining hall, they are free to express their ideology, but in classroom, the professor decides what is and isn't discussed.

So you support professors who limit the discussion to covering their own political ideology? Kind of sounds like the brainwashing and thought control some of you accuse conservatives of.

I support professors deciding what they teach and what they want to discuss. I don't support exposing professors to risk of lawsuits from snitches, and taking away their authority in the classroom.. This is how it was done in USSR under Stalin. There was a political officer on campus and student snitches to make sure the professors didn't go off on tangents, so to speak. I don't think we need to do this in the US.

It is however a prerequisite for lecturing a class, and students don't have the right to interrupt or interfere with professor to lecture the other students on their point of view.

I am sorry that you view dissenting opinion as disruptive...dissenting opinion, when presented in an articulate and respectful manner only adds value to the discussion...disruptive behavior should obviously not be tolerated, but I do not think that just because a student offers a dissenting opion, he is necessarily being disruptive.

And you think this should be decided by courts? You think universities should spend taxpayer and student dollars defending their professors from disruptive students who think they are just offering a dissenting opionion? I don't think a classroom is an open forum. It's a place where the professor teaches, sets agenda, and directs discussion.

So a student has a right to hijack a lecture, then sue the professor if he tries to take the lecture back? The students are there to listen to the professor, and it's up to the professor to yield his time to other students if he thinks what they have to say is valuable. It's not up to the courts to decide, nor should be. There is no right to interrupt lectures with your rambling and then sue the professor when he tells you to sit down and be quiet.

Again it depends on the nature of the discussion. If the intent of the professor is to facilitate discussion, then the professor serves as the moderator to ensure that every student has an opportunity to contribute.

Classroom is not a forum unless the professor wants it to be a forum. Nor should it be. If professor wants to limit discussion in the interest of time, he should have that right without being sued.

Since when? And protected by whom? Courts? I don't think so. Noone is forcing a student to sit in a lecture. And even when he is in the lecture, noone is forcing him to agree with the professor.

It really comes down to intent. One would hope that these professors would have the professionalism and courtesy not to allow their own political ideologies to infringe or otherwise taint the educational experience of their students. Similarly, student should behave in a manner that is respectful towards their professors.

Again, courts have no place deciding these issues. When you pick a university, you can find out about who teaches there and chose not to go there. When you sign up for class, you can find out who teaches and chose not to take it. So if you don't like the professors stance on issues, or his teaching style, you don't have to take his class

If a student raises an issue or challenges his professor with the intent of being disruptivem, then that student is in the wrong.

Similarly, if a professor chooses to censor or otherwise discipline a student simply because their ideology is not in alignment with their own, then that professor is acting unprofessionally.

Then why can the student sue the professor, but not the other way around. If a student wrongly interrupts the class, he should be named in a lawsuit by the university and be forced to compensate other students whose learning experience he disrupted. Is that how you want to run educational establishments? If you don't like something, sue?

It is a sad state of affairs that we should even have to entertain the thought of having the legislative branch attempt to regulate or otherwise moderate the exchange of information and knowledge in our academic institutions.

Yes, it is. There is no need to entertain that thought. It's completely ridiculous.
I hope Florida passes it, and has its university system bankrupted by student lawsuits, and has its best professors flee to other states. Sometimes sh!t has to hit the fan before the rightwingers realize their stupidity.

 

[SuperTool]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I read it, have you?

You obviously have not read the legislation if you think dealing with interruptions(disruptions) will be outlawed. Get a clue.

CsG

The author of the legislation obviously disagrees with you :roll:

?Some professors say, ?Evolution is a fact. I don?t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don?t like it, there?s the door,?? Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue.

So if a student in biology class interrupts the class and starts yapping about Jesus Horses, and the professor tells him I don't want to hear about it, the student can sue.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, no where did I say it was widespread, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be attended to.

Ooooh ONE case from two years ago! Well, if it isn't as widespread as the young conservative club members would like everyone to think -> Perhaps it isn't the problem it's being made out to be -> Therefore, legislation isn't needed. Or are you simply in favor of big government legislating various aspects of our lives for no damn good reason?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I read it, have you?

You obviously have not read the legislation if you think dealing with interruptions(disruptions) will be outlawed. Get a clue.

CsG

The author of the legislation obviously disagrees with you :roll:

?Some professors say, ?Evolution is a fact. I don?t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don?t like it, there?s the door,?? Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue.

So if a student in biology class interrupts the class and starts yapping about Jesus Horses, and the professor tells him I don't want to hear about it, the student can sue.

No, you just can't comprehend why that is not a disruption or interruption. Get a clue, no one is going to be sued because they controlled an interruption. If the topic is evolution(and it relates to the class related material) then there is no issue. The issues arise when topics discussed are off-subject and/or the "professor" doesn't claims his opinion/whatever is fact and there is no discussion when there obviously is room to disagree.
Take the theory of Evolution and lets say it relates somehow to the class being taught. If a professor does state that Evolution is FACT and doesn't allow for intelligent design to be discussed and says "Evolution is a fact. I don?t want to hear about Intelligent Design, and if you don?t like it, there?s the door," then the professor should be dealt with. There is no rational reason for a "professor" to act in such a fashion. None.

CsG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Again, no where did I say it was widespread, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be attended to.

Ooooh ONE case from two years ago! Well, if it isn't as widespread as the young conservative club members would like everyone to think -> Perhaps it isn't the problem it's being made out to be -> Therefore, legislation isn't needed. Or are you simply in favor of big government legislating various aspects of our lives for no damn good reason?

:roll: That was just from a quick glance at a listing of their cases. There are more - try doing your own homework before making claims that you read the site and didn't find anything.
No, I'm not infavor of big gov't. I'm not in favor of having to make extra laws to protect students either...but if the Universities won't act, then those providing funding are the only ones left...
"Do you not think the University system should be accountable to those who fund it, whether the students or tax-payers?"

CsG

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SuperTool
I read it, have you?

You obviously have not read the legislation if you think dealing with interruptions(disruptions) will be outlawed. Get a clue.

CsG

The author of the legislation obviously disagrees with you :roll:

?Some professors say, ?Evolution is a fact. I don?t want to hear about Intelligent Design (a creationist theory), and if you don?t like it, there?s the door,?? Baxley said, citing one example when he thought a student should sue.

So if a student in biology class interrupts the class and starts yapping about Jesus Horses, and the professor tells him I don't want to hear about it, the student can sue.

No, you just can't comprehend why that is not a disruption or interruption. Get a clue, no one is going to be sued because they controlled an interruption. If the topic is evolution(and it relates to the class related material) then there is no issue. The issues arise when topics discussed are off-subject and/or the "professor" doesn't claims his opinion/whatever is fact and there is no discussion when there obviously is room to disagree.
Take the theory of Evolution and lets say it relates somehow to the class being taught. If a professor does state that Evolution is FACT and doesn't allow for intelligent design to be discussed and says "Evolution is a fact. I don?t want to hear about Intelligent Design, and if you don?t like it, there?s the door," then the professor should be dealt with. There is no rational reason for a "professor" to act in such a fashion. None.

CsG

WTF? Who's forcing you to take that class? Furthermore, who's forcing you to go to this college in the first place? If you're such a hardcore Christian warrior that you can't tell the difference between REAL science and baseless ID bullcrap and feel the need to proselytize in every class that you attend, perhaps you should have chosen a nice Christian college to attend.

College science professors are there to teach SCIENCE. If you want to discuss religion, go take a religious studies class. Or better yet, go talk about it at church.

Geeze, do I really have to spell this crap out for you?!?