And the theory of evolution, as it exists now, needs to be questioned. In fact, many thoughts about the theory of evolution have changed as people research and question. So why was it wrong for this professor to do so?
Because, as an earlier post said, evolution is strictly speaking, is scientific law.
It's like a chemist questioning the existence of atoms and molecules. There's nothing wrong with a chemist questioning some detail of ill understood molectular structure of some complex compound. But to reject the entire basis of the science of chemistry? That's just beyond the pale.
If creationists or ID people want to dig into the details of biology and start to change some thinking on the details, and evenutually prove the earth was snapped into creation by God's fingers from nothing. Then go at the details. There's plenty of questions there.
Actually, in Columbus' time it was pretty generally accepted that the Earth was spherical. The real question was how feasible it would be to go the "long way around" it. Most thought that the voyage would be too long to be practical and/or safe, and would be open to too many unknown dangers. Columbus thought it would be practical and wanted to give it a shot.
The funny thing is that at the core Columbus was wrong -- the Earth was a lot bigger than the believed it to be, and what he thought was the "Indies" reached from the "opposite" direction than that usually used to travel to it, was actually an entire new continent blocking his way. And in fact, had North America not been there, he and his crew would have probably died of starvation and thirst before they circumnavigated the globe as they had originally planned.
And the theory of evolution, as it exists now, needs to be questioned.
And it is.
In fact, many thoughts about the theory of evolution have changed as people research and question. So why was it wrong for this professor to do so?
First, because I think it's pretty clear she wasn't just "questioning it", she was trying to undermine it in the minds of her students. Second, because a classroom is not the proper place to do such things (in that manner). If you're trying to challenge the orthodoxy, do it in the science journals and other forums, *not* the classroom. It's one thing to point out the "open questions" in a given field. It's another thing entirely to try to "convert" your students (in a science class) away from widely accepted scientific views.