Okay, Sweet Crusader and everyone else who may jump on me for this, I am going to say a few words @ the professor, perhaps even a few defending him.

1. I agree that selecting a textbook that is inappropriate for the students' level demonstrates poor teaching skills. Usually this happens among new teachers, all enthusiastic about the deep discussions of graduate school, and eager to continue them with their undergraduates. Then, most of them come down to earth.

2. Except those with big egos or extreme insecurity, and thus defensiveness. In your professor's case, this may only be an indication of his having lived out most of his career in a "different era." Once upon a time, students did not question their professors or teachers. We sat and listened. We might make fun, softly, of a fool, but we almost never challenged the teacher. Why did he come back after retirement? Perhaps the department had a course that had to be taught, and he was pressured into filling the gap. This will affect his patience level, too. Finding qualified science teachers is very difficult.

3. Okay, this is the part many people who have written are not going to like: It is a bane of the existence of many of we professors that students demand "study guides." And then, should we dare to put a question on the exam that was not on the study guide, we are accused of not having played fair.

Here's the deal: The student is responsible for all the material in the course as portrayed in the syllabus. In fact, the syllabus has been considered the legal document, akin to a contract, in several court cases. The course should teach what it promises.

I like to compare the student's responsibility to know the material to the responsibility of every citizen not to drive drunk. The police set up roadblocks to identify drunk drivers. The instructor sets up a roadblock called a "test" to identify students who do not know the material. The police cannot stop all drivers, and the test cannot ask about everything one hopes the student will have learned. This does not mean that it's okay to drive drunk as long as you avoid roadblocks. Nor is it OK to just study what's on the study guide.

Personally, I give study guide. I did it bec. it was easier than putting up with the student yapping. I give key word phrases. I also point out that these key word phrases can denote whole chunks of info (History of radio) and my interpretations of what's important to remember may differ from the students'.

We live in what has been called an "overcommunicated" society. We are bombarded by -- I forget the exact number -- something like 10,000 messages a day. Most of these we screen out. I had the privilege of handling some data that was part of a major NIH study about how much people know about genetics. Genetics is going to shape the future. People know more about what Mickey Mouse eats for breakfast than genetics. Yet, this single complex science alone can wreak havoc or heaven on our world. And it is not the only one. People are voting and making decisions on the basis of silly misunderstandings about very important things.

The most important thing that we can teach our students in college is how to discern key information. Bec. that is what students have to do in the world outside the classroom door. And no one is going to hand them a study guide. Yet students are enraged if we ask them to study without a guide and learn the vital skill of discernment.

I honestly didn't see anything really awful in your professor's email. So maybe I am an ********** too who deserved to lose my job. Yet I have gifts and dozens and dozens of emails and thank you cards from students who got something out of my classes and our teacher-student relationships.

Let me emphasize that I am not dumping on you, Sweet, nor am I saying that this particular professor may not be a jerk. I'm just trying to present "the other side." Okay, so bring on the nay-sayers.