Teacher Fired for Disagreeing With Literal Interpretation of Bible

It's always good to have more information.On the other hand, apparently there was no faculty peer review or administrative hearing of the sorts normally associated with a legitimate concern for or protection of academic freedom.If he has been accused of misbehavior by a student, then he should have the right to confront that accuser in the appropriate setting.If he was informed that a student complained about his treatment of Christianity, I see no reason why he should not discuss that in the classroom. As for laughing at them, I wonder: Guffaws? Chuckles? Smiles? Strange as it may seem, students cannot always be depended on to tell the unvarnished truth.My wife is a professor--a popular one who receives overwhelmingly positive student reviews. She teaches literature and presents many theoretical perspectives: feminist, traditional close reading, deconstructionist, Marxist, you name it. She also welcomes student perspectives.Occasionally, inevitably, someone will write in their course review that she "tried to force [x] theory on us" and "ridiculed my beliefs"--because she insisted they master the tenets of multiple perspectives and challenged them to account for their own. To demand that a student achieve proficiency of a literary reading of the Bible, for example, is not to demand that they relinguish their religion: but some will insist that it is just that.I find it especially interesting to hear the student you quote say "what we wanted" (emphasis mine). If the administration discharged this instructor because a group of students brought complaints to which he was not allowed to respond, the administration has a great deal of explaining to do. If that is the case, I'd imagine any competent attorney could overturn his dismissal and win damages.I agree that more information is necessary for a fully formed judgement. But if the administration had attended to the normal process of faculty peer review and administrative hearings before discharging the instructor, I don't think they'd be saying, "No comment, it's a personnel issue." Edited by Omnivorous, : spelling and U.S. collective noun treatmentEdited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.Edited by Omnivorous, : Jesus wept! No more typo corrections!

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Typically, an administration that has followed a well-defined policy which respects both student rights and an instructor's academic freedom will say so: "After careful review and following the procedures of hearings and appeals that we have in place to protect the interests of all blah blah blah."I suspect (and this is just a hunch) that the "No comment" means what it usually means when academic bureaucrats clam up: 1) Oops, we didn't follow our own contractually mandated (or defined) procedures, and 2) Who knew this would atract national attention?We'll see.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Well, you wouldn't get any R-E-S-P-E-C-T in court.To most people in the world, the virgin birth IS a fairy tale. You can't gain respect by attacking them when they say so.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

Oh, sure--the Virgin Mary was a hammerhead shark.That'll calm everybody down.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------