NoIndoctrination.org has posted a disturbing student evaluation of an Art History course taught at the University of Maryland. Described as covering "Art and archaeology of ancient Mesoamerica from 500 B.C. to 1500 A.D.," the course satisfies Maryland's "diversity requirement." It was perhaps for this reason, the student evaluator suggests, that the professor felt free to pontificate about contemporary politics, oppression, and the virtues of terrorism as a means of resisting Western imperialism:

Let me start by pointing out that this is an art history class about Mesoamerica, one that has nothing to do with sociology, politics, or the middle east. I took the course because it seemed like a fairly painless way to satisfy the "diversity" requirement. This turned out to be wishful thinking. Apparently being a "diversity" class gives the professor the right to bash American foreign policy in the middle east and glorify terrorism. During the second to last lecture, when we should have been learning what was going to be on the final, he started with his usual lecture about understanding these "oppressed" people in the middle east. He made us out to be the evil oppressors and said that we don't understand these people (Islamic Terrorists) until they BLOW it into us (in reference to September 11). He then got very animated and began to pretend that he was a terrorist. He made the point to the class (evil America) that if we tried to buy him, he would tell us to take our money and shove it up our asses. This all culminated in him pretending to strap a bomb to himself, sitting down next to a student, and saying something to the effect of, "If you try to get rid of us, we'll take you with us." If this is not glorifying terrorism then I don't know what is, and because the professor chose to use this class to impose his political views upon us (as opposed to teaching the subject matter), we barely made it through the first book of two that we were supposed to cover.

Part 1, Section B states: "Faculty members shall enjoy freedom in the classroom to discuss all subject matter reasonably related to the course. In turn, they have the responsibility to encourage free and honest inquiry and expression on the part of the students." Part 1, Section C states: "Faculty members, consistent with the princibles of academic freedom, have the responsibility to present courses that are consistent with their descriptions in the catalog of the institution." Professor Miller did not stick to the subject matter reasonably related to the course, he did not encourage free and honest inquiry on the part of the students, and he most certainly did not present the course in a manner consistent with its description in the course catalog.