If his theories contain claims that the buildings were wired with explosives, then I would say, not so.

Schoolteachers, by contrast, tend to have undergraduate degrees in Education with perhaps a graduate certificate, also in Education, which pays them more money. They have little control over their curriculum, teaching rote subjects from rather scanty expertise. It's just night and day.

Secondly, I think you (we) give college professors too much credit. They definitely don't spend as much time in the classroom as an average 'teacher'--which you pointed out. However, not all of them--particularly ones at small state schools--do ANY outside, original research projects of their own. I can think of a dozen professors just at the university I attend who A) don't have their doctorates B) don't plan to get their doctorates and C) believe that since that A) don't have them and B) don't want them they aren't required to do any original research. That isn't to say that don't prepare for lectures by gathering information, but isn't that what a teacher does five days a week 4,5,7 or 8 times a day? I think it is...

they don’t work as much.

They spend, on average, less time in the classroom, to be sure. Research, writing, and other professional obligations tend to eat up a lot more time, though.

Mere? Oh - I know they don't work as much.

'It’s not inconceivable to me, though, that he could have a lecture on how people perceived the 9/11 attacks or how people process information and form opinions based on media reports and use his revisionist belief as part of an interesting to-and-fro with the students. '

Well then that wouldn't really be keeping his personal opinions to himself.

All I'm saying is that while I don't agree with him I don't see why even if he does convey his beliefs as his beliefs in context of what he's supposed to be doing it's a firing offense. The last I heard it was still a free country.

I'm with Steve. Regardless of where the money that actually goes into the paycheck of the professor, the student (ME) still spends too much money to not have at least a say in what goes on in the classroom. Besides that, if we're going to say that it's state subsidies that go to the actual paycheck (in the case of state schools such as the one I'm at) then are we saying that the state should have control over what they say? Same with if the money comes from private donations. If John Doe the millionaire donates a million bucks to pay for the salaries of 10 professors at a private university, is that saying that John should be able to help decide if the professing of those professors is appropriate? Probably not. The ultimate responsibility (and therefore the power) MUST reside with the students--they (we) are the ones who are forced to sit and listen to the mad rantings of such profs and as such they should have the power to recommend--even strongly recommend--what kind of teachers should be at the university.

As for the belief that "professors are not just school-teachers" I think that depends on the context. Inside the classroom they ARE just school teachers, especially at the undergraduate level--they just happen to be more highly trained. Another person pointed out that essays, articles, opinion papers etc. are the place for them to present their theories, not the minds of the impressionable students in their poli-sci 101 class(or whatever under-grad course). Too often professors think that they have a platform to use for whatever they want and that belief goes unchecked. And that is just not acceptable.

(on a side note, one of my education professors here says that--though he is not a fan of all aspects of NCLB--he thinks having a standards based curriculum at the college level where professors are held accountable is a good idea and that the tenure system is "fundamentally flawed." I don't know that I agree with that, but it certainly is something to ponder...)

Students deserve the education they are promised, regardless of who pays for it. According to the information a few posts down, it's not happening.

While tuition is only a part of the overall revenue needed to run a college or university it is still a great deal of money. Students must have a right to monitor and speak out against abuses such this.

At the undergraduate level these guys are not much more than teachers, so teach. Academic freedom should be exercised when writing papers or articles for professional journals, those are the peers who should ridicule, not students, it's not there place or responsibility to take on those who grade them. Disputes with professors usually end up with the student losing.

This is typical public sector nonsense with everyone expecting accountability to addressed by the offending parties themselves. It doesn't happen. In an effort to just get along many of these abuses are swept under the rug and ignored. Outside intervention is long overdue.

It's not inconceivable to me, though, that he could have a lecture on how people perceived the 9/11 attacks or how people process information and form opinions based on media reports and use his revisionist belief as part of an interesting to-and-fro with the students. Controversy and going against student preconceptions are excellent teaching devices if properly employed.

I wrote this about a month ago when Inside Higher Ed first reported on this story.

While many groups, notably the Kos Kids, have purity tests for their candidates and standard bearers, as a nation that values free speech, we should accept the dissent of others.

I don't agree with Woodward. I find the student action to work to get him fired troubling.

At most schools, tuition receipts fall far short of meeting the budgetary requirements. Subsidies from the state (in the case of public institutions), private donations, athletics (in the case of big-time football and basketball schools), interest from the endowment, and other monies fund faculty pay.

Students have a customer service relationship with the school from an administrative standpoint, not an educational one. Students aren't customers of professors, they are apprentices to be mentored.

LJD:

Professors at state schools are not political appointees of the governor. Indeed, they're not ordinary civil servants, either. They're subject matter experts hired to increase the body of knowledge in their field and to engage their students.

Should he be fired? Well, I think that, as you said, this depends on the context of his nutty rants. Is he somehow tying them into psych class? I seriously doubt it, but if he is doing so in a valid manner, than this must be considered. If he, as you said, is simply using his classroom as a platform for his views, then he should be dismissed.

As a current college student, I believe that the students actions should be applauded--they're standing up and saying they don't want to pay this guy to spout absolute garbage (which I think we can agree is what he is, in fact, spouting).