[Macrobat]

The administration was able to say that they would not censure or curtail this nutbar's activities as a 9/11 conspiracy kook because it did not interfere with his teaching and was his private opinion and life.

However, NOW the dipsh!t has placed his own $20 essay on the required reading list for his course, so EVERY student MUST read it, not to mention purchase it, lining his own pocket.

A university instructor who came under scrutiny for arguing that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks likens President Bush to Adolf Hitler in an essay his students are being required to buy for his course.
The essay by Kevin Barrett, "Interpreting the Unspeakable: The Myth of 9/11," is part of a $20 book of essays by 15 authors, according to an unedited copy first obtained by WKOW-TV in Madison and later by The Associated Press.

[itai195]

I don't like this guy. But professors making their students buy the books they write is an age old practice.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Well, exactly. Many of my courses have required books that are by the professor. The course is their area of study, and often the way they teach it is very much in line with the reading material (some even write the book to go along with the course, matter of fact). I don't always agree with this strategy, but oftentimes it does make a lot of sense.

What's the course called again? What's it about? If it's called "Ridiculous Conspiracy Theories 210" then it would make some sense, no?

greg

[itai195]

And sometimes it's a shameless money grab

Edit for BRussell: Not that it is necessarily in this case

[BRussell]

I'm sure he's raking in the big bucks with 1/15 of the royalties on a $20 book that 25 students per year are buying.

[sek929]

The students still have the right to slam it in their responses, so I'd say some of them will.

[subego]

Linkage?

Is this the "little Eichmann" guy?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by itai195

I don't like this guy. But professors making their students buy the books they write is an age old practice.

What he's doing isn't uncommon. I've had to do it in math courses for example when a teacher publishes their own workbook.

[Chuckit]

I think the point is that he's basically trying to teach nutty conspiracy theories. Apparently the university had previously said that they were OK with him being a fruitcake as long as he wasn't letting it affect his teaching.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I think the point is that he's basically trying to teach nutty conspiracy theories.

Speaking of nutty conspiracy theories, they let people teach evolution in universities. So it would only be fair to let him teach this stuff too.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by itai195

I don't like this guy. But professors making their students buy the books they write is an age old practice.

But then the prof can tell his friends that people are buying his book ...still its lame.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Speaking of nutty conspiracy theories, they let people teach evolution in universities. So it would only be fair to let him teach this stuff too.

You're not making any sense at all.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Speaking of nutty conspiracy theories, they let people teach evolution in universities. So it would only be fair to let him teach this stuff too.

IIRC one of the biggest supporters of Intelligent Design is a UC Berkeley professor.

[Dakar]

My guess is if he is reviled for this his attendance is going to go down down down till the course is closed.

[Gossamer]

Anyone see the latest South Park? The government wants you to think there was a 9/11 conspiracy.

[Macrobat]

He teaches a course on Islam, as an Associate Professor

Kevin Barrett - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In short it is an extremely thinly veiled attempt at indoctrination, since his conspiracy theory has NOTHING to do with Islam.

[Millennium]

At least in and of itself, there is nothing wrong with requiring one's own books in a college course. But if, as Macrobat says, this book has nothing to do with the subject matter of the course, then that's another story. I doubt there are any legal issues, but the ethics are dubious.

There's also the matter of professors bringing their personal politics into the classroom, but this has always been a controversial subject.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Macrobat

He teaches a course on Islam, as an Associate Professor

Kevin Barrett - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In short it is an extremely thinly veiled attempt at indoctrination, since his conspiracy theory has NOTHING to do with Islam.

This Wikipedia article will immediately show anyone the foremost problem with its submission system. It's merely someone's opinion on what Barrett is doing, and how it's wrong!

And what does Associate Professor mean exactly, Macro? You say that as if there's something wrong with that. There are tons of associate professors teaching in universities throughout the world, and many are often well-published and/or respected.

I like the quote "although Mr. Barrett presented a variety of viewpoints, he had not discussed his personal opinions in the classroom." Well? In another words, he did not just present the "standard" viewpoint of what happened - he presented alternate scenarios that may have been plausible depending on what information you look at. He did not just preach his own viewpoint. He taught the students that there are multiple ways of looking at anything, and many of these may often not be the "standard, accepted" view.

I find your opposition - as well as that expressed in the Wikipedia article - hilarious. What, exactly, are you complaining about? It's unacceptable to view alternate explanations of anything?! It's unacceptable to look at conspiracy theories about your government? I mean, why not - they've been caught secretly giving acid to random people before to study its effects (which included people killing themselves, btw).

I know this can't be a Conservative thing, can it? I'm pretty sure Doofy or maybe even Spliffdaddy wouldn't protest this sort of alternative-viewpoint outlook on the world.

greg

[Spliffdaddy]

I'd say that any professor that requires a student to purchase his book should be taken behind the school and shot.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd say that any professor that requires a student to purchase his book should be taken behind the school and shot.

Do you not believe professors should require students to read, or should the books just not be tailored to the class?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd say that any professor that requires a student to purchase his book should be taken behind the school and shot.

Why? I would want a professor to think highly enough of their own work to think it useful in teaching their subject.

I want any teacher who thinks their work is that crappy to be taken behind the school and shot.

[Macrobat]

Associate Professor means that he is not tenured, or even a full professor, which means he is not entitled to the same considerations by his employer.

The entire point is that, even though he makes this book a required reading and purchase, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with his course's subject matter.

It's neither a Conservative, nor a Liberal thing - it's a COMMON SENSE thing.

[BRussell]

FYI, he's not an Associate Professor, which is a high-ranking tenured position. He's a part-time lecturer, which is a low-ranking non-tenurable position.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I'd say that any professor that requires a student to purchase his book should be taken behind the school and shot.

No professor requires students to purchase anything. He says "this is the text we'll be using, so if you don't have it you won't know what's going on and you'll be ****ed. Therefore, you should buy it."

And...why? Professors teach in their area of expertise. When my professor in the history of science last year got us to buy her book, it made the class even better. Not only did the book complement the lectures, but it was always easy to ask her for more explanation or background information if something wasn't immediately making sense/clear.

Originally Posted by Macrobat

The entire point is that, even though he makes this book a required reading and purchase, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with his course's subject matter.

Isn't there a week-or-two-long section of the course on 9/11? Isn't 9/11 vitally important to understanding the Islamic world's relationship with the rest of the globe, and the US in particular? I don't know what other subject matter he's teaching in the course, but if he has a focus on looking at alternative viewpoints of history it may be entirely relevent. Remember, the Islamic world's contribution to modern science was entirely overlooked until relatively recently, and still remains relatively unstudied today.

What I'm saying is: I don't agree with this guy's viewpoints. But I also don't see why you think this is so wrong. And I don't think your arguments for your dissent are very good; in fact, it just seems like so much more of the "dumb liberal educators" bit that floats around here so much.

greg

[BRussell]

I guess some people just don't trust people to evaluate beliefs for themselves and so want the government to be our thought nannies, protecting us from bad ideas.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by BRussell

I guess some people just don't trust people to evaluate beliefs for themselves and so want the government to be our thought nannies, protecting us from bad ideas.

Do you mean to be posting this stuff in a different thread? Your responses seem to be consistently non sequiturs.

[Spliffdaddy]

If the professor believes that his book is the most effective means of teaching the students - then the professor should provide a copy of the book to the students. They can return it after the course study is completed.

At minimum, the book should be provided at-cost - with no profit gained by the professor.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

If the professor believes that his book is the most effective means of teaching the students - then the professor should provide a copy of the book to the students. They can return it after the course study is completed.

At minimum, the book should be provided at-cost - with no profit gained by the professor.

So you believe authors should not make money from their books?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

So you believe authors should not make money from their books?

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

I'm not even going to bother explaining something so easy to understand.

[Chuckit]

Sure, "not going to bother." We'll pretend that's why you can't explain it.

[dialo]

Why does everyone keep calling it a "book?" From the descriptions I've read it's a regular course packet that costs $20 and the essay is in the course packet.

Most classes of this kind have course packets and most profs will put their essays and articles on the subject in the course packet. I don't think they make any money on it at all. The $20 per course packet probably covers the copy shop's printing fee and the copyright clearance for the 15-20 articles from various sources. In fact, I've often heard profs complain about how silly it's been when they've had difficulty getting copyright clearance for their own published materials.

Like in every occupation, there are good profs and shitty profs. Don't like the prof? Don't want to buy the class materials? Solution: don't take the class. Problem solved.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Do you mean to be posting this stuff in a different thread? Your responses seem to be consistently non sequiturs.

Haha, no it's exactly on topic. ShortcutToMoncton was questioning Macrobat about his desire to see this instructor fired or otherwise censored. I responded by saying it was a nanny-state view of government that should protect people from ideas. Why did I say that? It's a nanny-state view to believe that the government should protect us from politically unpopular ideas. I believe we can handle them and evaluate their validity on our own, and don't need the governor of Wisconsin or the state's members of Congress to protect us from them by getting this instructor fired.

Let me know if I have to provide elucidations of any other posts of mine that befuddle you, and I can PM them to you.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

If the professor believes that his book is the most effective means of teaching the students - then the professor should provide a copy of the book to the students. They can return it after the course study is completed.

At minimum, the book should be provided at-cost - with no profit gained by the professor.

So does this apply only if it's the professor's literature? What about if the course is using someone else's book? Does the prof/university have to supply that for free, too? Or should the students pay for that? Just not when the prof's own book is the best one for the course, hmmmm?

These are ridiculous arguments, and you know it.

And plus, dialo has it right - this was a coursepack of articles. $20 probably covered the photocopying and copyrights. I have to buy these all the time. I have one currently I spent $75 for, and the prof did indeed write one of the (14) articles in - and why not? He's an expert on the history of science. It's also interesting to note that the copyright costs came out to about $50.

greg

[Chuckit]

I don't see where anybody is asking the federal government to take action. It seems like they're just saying the school ought to can the guy.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by dialo

Why does everyone keep calling it a "book?" From the descriptions I've read it's a regular course packet that costs $20 and the essay is in the course packet.

Ah yes, you're probably right. I had assumed, from the description, that it was an edited volume. But it doesn't really make sense that it would only be $20. A book company would probably sell something like that for $140 if it was an actual academic book.

[dialo]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Ah yes, you're probably right. I had assumed, from the description, that it was an edited volume. But it doesn't really make sense that it would only be $20. A book company would probably sell something like that for $140 if it was an actual academic book.

No, it looks like you are right. The descriptions I read of an "unedited, unpublished collection of essays of which his is one" (or something along those lines) made it sound just like a course packet, but apparently it's a book that hasn't been published yet.

I really don't understand why he thinks it's useful to have a book talking about the bush admin's role in 9/11 in what appears to be a basic class on islam ("Islam: Religion and Culture" is what CNN says the class title is), but I also don't see why there is really any national controversy here. When I was in college I took classes with profs I didn't like and read things I didn't agree with. I'm guessing UW Madison has prof and class evaluations for students to read before registering for a class, and this issue is likely well-known on campus, so student who don't want to take the class can probably steer clear.

Maybe the guy is just a psycho in some ways. Most of my profs in college were fantastic (granted, it was a top university), but I had a psychotic prof in a theater (sorry, theatre ) class I took once, and there's no national news story about her. I also had a grad student instructor in a nietzsche class I took who was dumb as a rock. I also had smart profs who had opinions I totally disagreed with.

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

At minimum, the book should be provided at-cost - with no profit gained by the professor.

Well, universities have libraries. University libraries put items on reserve at the request of the instructor if the library already owns it. Items can also be obtained through interlibrary loan, although textbooks and recently published items are hard to get, or the instructor or student can put in a request for the library to purchase it.

In this case, the fact that there are only 3 essays required in it means that he'd almost certainly have the item put on reserve so students can just photocopy the required essays. Most (all?) major university libraries purchase every book put out by the university's faculty members.

Regardless, though, it's common for college students to buy books they don't want or don't like or don't agree with, and most of the time they are far more expensive than $20.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

If the professor believes that his book is the most effective means of teaching the students - then the professor should provide a copy of the book to the students. They can return it after the course study is completed.

At minimum, the book should be provided at-cost - with no profit gained by the professor.

Correct. I used to supply my students with reading material I'd created for free. I saw it as part of my job, not an opportunity for extra income. A quick half hour with the photocopier once a year, job done.

Mind you, at least this guy's students have the opportunity to tell him how crap they thought his book was and demand their money back. If any of them have the plums to stand up in class and tell him he's an idiot, that is.

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by dialo

Why does everyone keep calling it a "book?" From the descriptions I've read it's a regular course packet that costs $20 and the essay is in the course packet.

Most classes of this kind have course packets and most profs will put their essays and articles on the subject in the course packet. I don't think they make any money on it at all. The $20 per course packet probably covers the copy shop's printing fee and the copyright clearance for the 15-20 articles from various sources. In fact, I've often heard profs complain about how silly it's been when they've had difficulty getting copyright clearance for their own published materials.

Like in every occupation, there are good profs and shitty profs. Don't like the prof? Don't want to buy the class materials? Solution: don't take the class. Problem solved.

One of my professors sent us the original Word document for his book instead of making us buy it in the bookstore. Now that was a professor.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

That's all wonderful and good - it's also illegal.

You're not allowed to copy books - or even full chapters - without copyright permission, no matter if you wrote it or not. It's the publisher who enforces this, not the author.

In my school, the university print shops will refuse to photocopy major parts of a book, and faculties will not allow professors to put copyright material online without publisher approval. Some can get around it by using personal passwords and/or websites, but that's besides the point.

There's still no argument here.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Mind you, at least this guy's students have the opportunity to tell him how crap they thought his book was and demand their money back. If any of them have the plums to stand up in class and tell him he's an idiot, that is.

This coming from the guy who will argue 'til he's blue that Milosevic was actually an innocent martyr for the Kosovo/Bosnian conflict.

Good call.

greg

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

That's all wonderful and good - it's also illegal.

You're not allowed to copy books - or even full chapters - without copyright permission, no matter if you wrote it or not. It's the publisher who enforces this, not the author.

A professor shouldn't be publishing the information in the first place then. It's his job as a teacher to teach everything he knows about the subject he's teaching in - not to teach half of it then say that he can't teach the other half because his publishers won't let him.

"Right then boys and girls, today we'll learn our five times table.
One times five is five. Two times five is ten. Four times five is twenty. Five times five is twenty five".

"Sir, sir! What about three times five?"

"I can't cover that since I wrote about it in my book. You'll have to buy it if you want to know."

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

This coming from the guy who will argue 'til he's blue that Milosevic was actually an innocent martyr for the Kosovo/Bosnian conflict.

Good call.

If you find me ever defending a socialist (like Slobby), you can be pretty much be completely sure that I'm correct in my argument.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by BRussell

Speaking of nutty conspiracy theories, they let people teach evolution in universities. So it would only be fair to let him teach this stuff too.

[marden]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

Anyone see the latest South Park? The government wants you to think there was a 9/11 conspiracy.

I "LOL'ed" at it. They made points that even the dipsnits that believe that conspiracy crap will find difficult to reconcile.

My guess is they'll just ignore it.

Why bother with the truth when a good lie/conspiracy is there to wallow around in?

(An allusion to dogs who love to wallow around and smear themselves with other dog's feces.)

[marden]

Originally Posted by Doofy

Correct. I used to supply my students with reading material I'd created for free. I saw it as part of my job, not an opportunity for extra income. A quick half hour with the photocopier once a year, job done.

Mind you, at least this guy's students have the opportunity to tell him how crap they thought his book was and demand their money back. If any of them have the plums to stand up in class and tell him he's an idiot, that is.

If it's an elective course then the students are already smeared with conspiracy feces and because they can't get enough of it ON them, they want to infuse the feces into their beings.

Maybe they had suffered some kind of brain drain and needed a refill of crap.

[marden]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

So does this apply only if it's the professor's literature? What about if the course is using someone else's book? Does the prof/university have to supply that for free, too? Or should the students pay for that? Just not when the prof's own book is the best one for the course, hmmmm?

That reminds me of the liberals who are in favor of the USA getting involved in fighting wars and getting involved in foreign disputes and problems just as long as they don't benefit the USA.

Good thing you've switched positions on the jihadist threat or else this would be where you'd be presented with your own hypocrisy.

[marden]

Here O'reilly debates a supporter of this crap shooter, Barrett, (Jim Fetzer a former U of Minn. Philosophy prof.). He calls him a nut and a loon.

FOXNews.com - Free Video Player

It's pretty friggin funny.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

So you believe authors should not make money from their books?

I think Professors should teach a class and not exploit their position as professor, to make a buck as author.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by marden

Here O'reilly debates a supporter of this crap shooter, Barrett, (Jim Fetzer a former U of Minn. Philosophy prof.). He calls him a nut and a loon.

FOXNews.com - Free Video Player

It's pretty friggin funny.

I saw that last night. Very funny indeed. He asked the professor if he had aliens living in his basement. All this evidence of a conspiracy and he can't get it on the front page of any noteworthy publication. O'Reilly rarely hits 'em out of the park, but this time he lambasted the kook.

*edited to include; the link did not work for me.

[ghporter]

Just don't take the freakin' course! Get parents to complain to the Regents. Get students to write letters to the editor. Make the administration look like dupes in editorials. But do NOT take the imbecile's class. They hate that.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by Doofy

A professor shouldn't be publishing the information in the first place then. It's his job as a teacher to teach everything he knows about the subject he's teaching in - not to teach half of it then say that he can't teach the other half because his publishers won't let him.

"Right then boys and girls, today we'll learn our five times table.
One times five is five. Two times five is ten. Four times five is twenty. Five times five is twenty five".

"Sir, sir! What about three times five?"

"I can't cover that since I wrote about it in my book. You'll have to buy it if you want to know."

What? I think maybe you didn't say what you perhaps meant to say? This doesn't even make any sense in the context of what I said, or what we're talking about. No one said anything about what the professor can or cannot teach, whether or not it's something he published. The issue here is the distribution of copyrighted reading material. Professors only have a limited amount of time to cover material in class - almost every class requires significant background/additional reading material in addition to class notes. This additional reading material cannot be distributed for free. Thus, if any of this material is written by the professor - which, considering they often know the material best, makes a whole lot of sense - then copyright charges must be paid the same as if it had all been written by Joe Schmoe across the continent.

There still hasn't been a valid argument presented against this concept.

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton

That reminds me of the liberals who are in favor of the USA getting involved in fighting wars and getting involved in foreign disputes and problems just as long as they don't benefit the USA.

Good thing you've switched positions on the jihadist threat or else this would be where you'd be presented with your own hypocrisy.

I'm not aware of anyone who is opposed to the USA getting involved in wars that benefit the USA. I am aware of many people - including myself - who are opposed to the USA, or any Great Power, that always relegates serious issues of human injustice (whether it be poverty, oppression, hunger, etc.) to the back burner in order to actively combat less-serious but ideologically-threatening problems that nevertheless have great economic interest. Okay?

And, I'm not aware that I've switched positions on the jihadist threat. I don't believe I had a relatively firm position either way before the last six months, because I saw - and still see - flaws with most of the arguments on the issue.

greg

Now Playing: Minus the Bear - Absinthe Party at the Fly Honey Warehouse

[marden]

Originally Posted by ebuddy

I saw that last night. Very funny indeed. He asked the professor if he had aliens living in his basement. All this evidence of a conspiracy and he can't get it on the front page of any noteworthy publication. O'Reilly rarely hits 'em out of the park, but this time he lambasted the kook.

*edited to include; the link did not work for me.

I loved it. Yes, thanks. I just clicked it and it worked flawlessly. Sorry, I don't know what to say.