DesignedUniverse -> The Textbooks and Evolution

The Textbooks and Evolution

Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic

Charity	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 05:45 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 341 Member No.: 4 Joined: 14-February 04	News stories about the ever growing need to remove evolution for the public school textbooks. This topic is heating up all over the country.

Charity	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 05:47 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 341 Member No.: 4 Joined: 14-February 04	Bye-Bye Evolution Cox: Evolution Change a 'Suggestion' Valerie Hoff Reports Kathy Cox, State School Superintendent Related Links Georgia Department of Education's curriculum Web site Provided By: The Associated Press Last Modified: 1/29/2004 8:25:58 PM ATLANTA (AP) -- A change that would strike the word "evolution" from Georgia's science curriculum is only a suggestion and far from becoming official policy, state schools Superintendent Kathy Cox said Thursday. Cox's proposal for new middle and high school science standards would ban references to "evolution" and replace it with the term "biological changes over time." "Ultimately, I think the people of Georgia will tell us what we need to do," Cox said. The proposed change is part of more than 800 pages of revisions to Georgia's curriculum that were posted Jan. 12 on the Department of Education Web site for educators and the public to consider. The new curriculum -- which is expected to be voted on by the state Board of Education in May -- will replace standards adopted in 1984 that have been criticized by many educators as shallow. During a Thursday press conference, Cox repeatedly referred to evolution as a "buzzword" and said it was removed, in part, to alleviate pressure on teachers in socially conservative areas where parents object to its teaching. "If teachers across this state, parents across this state say, 'This is not what we want,' then we'll change it," Cox said, referring to the proposed change. Educators criticized the proposal by Cox -- a Republican elected in 2002 -- saying science teachers understand the theories behind evolution and how to teach them better than politicians or the public. "The curriculum was created by practitioners who teach the subject and know what's needed," said Jocelyn Whitfield, a government specialist with the Georgia Association of Educators. "It would be of great concern, particularly to science teachers, if, without their knowledge, that's been changed." Scientists consider evolution the basis for explaining the differences among plants and animals. "I think it's a step backward," said state Rep. Bob Holmes, D-Atlanta, chairman of the House Education Committee. "Here we are, saying we have to improve standards and improve education, and we're just throwing a bone to the conservatives with total disregard to what scientists say." Sen. Connie Stokes, D-Decatur, spoke against the proposed change for about five minutes in the Senate chamber, telling fellow lawmakers, "This is a much, much bigger issue than what we believe personally because it puts our kids at a disadvantage ... (on standardized tests)." Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor urged senators to familiarize themselves with the proposed changing, warning they would ultimately be held accountable. Cox said the concept of evolution would still be taught under the proposal, but the hot-button word would not be used. "If people will actually read the curriculum, they'll see this is a very forward-looking document," Cox said. That led some social conservatives -- who prefer religious creation to be taught rather than evolution -- to criticize the proposal as well. "If you're teaching the concept without the word, what's the point?" said Rep. Bobby Franklin, R-Marietta, easily one of the legislature's most socially conservative members. "It's stupid. It's like teaching gravity without using the word 'gravity.' " A spokesman for Gov. Sonny Perdue declined to give a detailed comment on the issue. "On a controversial issue like this, it is probably appropriate to have the open, public dialogue Superintendent Cox has called for," said Perdue spokesman Dan McLagan. The proposed change would not require schools to buy new textbooks omitting the word "evolution" and would not prevent teachers from using the word, Cox said.

Charity	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 05:48 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 341 Member No.: 4 Joined: 14-February 04	Several States Have already adopted this proposal across the nation. It is time to say so long to the religion of evolution being pushed on our public school kids. Kathy Cox needs you letters, phone calls and emails of support. This proposal will allow for other theories of origins to be introduced (according to Headlines CNN News). I think they are jumping the gun on that one, but at least having the term "evolution" removed from the textbooks IS A BIG STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. As for "other theories to be introduced"? Well, it has ALWAYS BEEN LEGAL TO DISCUSS OTHER THEORIES OF ORIGINS IN PUBLIC SCHOOL. It's just that the ACLU and other communist organizations like them, have brow-beated teachers into thinking they cannot discuss other possibilities. ALL THAT IS ABOUT TO CHANGE. Your help and INVOLVEMENT are very important. Send ex-president Jim Carter -BIG EVOLUTIONIST- a message that just as we always thought, he does not have a CLUE!!!

Charity	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 10:14 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 341 Member No.: 4 Joined: 14-February 04	Teaching Evolution (AP) The word "evolution" is back in Georgia's proposed science curriculum -- but some scientists remain concerned about how the new plan treats other basic theories. The Big Bang was moved from high school biology to middle school earth science and lessons on plate tectonics were scaled back in the proposed curriculum posted last month on the Department of Education Web site. The theories are considered controversial in some circles because they conflict with religious beliefs about how God created the universe. Some of that missing material was reinstated yesterday, after state schools Superintendent Kathy Cox convened a team of science teachers to make revisions. The topics would be part of middle school curriculum. But some scientists say those theories are too advanced to be fully understood by middle schoolers. State officials say there's also a high school course in the works. A Department of Education spokesman says it's possible that the class could be required, but that decision hinges on upcoming revisions of graduation requirements. (**Updated on 02/14/04 11pm)

ALS	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 10:21 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 125 Member No.: 1 Joined: 14-February 04	"Some scientists" will say anything, and have, and still do. (IMG:http://www.conservababes.com/darwinpics/darwinandthebrain.gif)

Charity	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 10:24 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 341 Member No.: 4 Joined: 14-February 04	According to what I just heard on the news, there will be an "optional" class that teaches the big bang theory. That would be a step in the right direction if kids can "opt" in or out of this class. I'll bet they don't get many to sign up for it. B)

ALS	Posted: Feb 14 2004, 10:29 PM
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 125 Member No.: 1 Joined: 14-February 04	Parents should be able to have choices. And then we need to work on elimination of teacher's unions, tenures and those silly lib litmus tests for new hires. ;)

ALS

Posted: Feb 14 2004, 10:40 PM

Administrator

Group: Admin
Posts: 125
Member No.: 1
Joined: 14-February 04

QUOTE

State panel backs disputed lesson, infuriates supporters of evolution
Columbus - The State Board of Education gave preliminary approval Tuesday to a 10th-grade biology lesson that scientists say could put "intelligent design" in Ohio classrooms.

Setting aside an impassioned plea from the National Academy of Sciences, the board voted 13-4 to declare its intent to adopt the "Critical Analysis of Evolution" lesson next month.

The academy warned that doing so would give a green light to teaching intelligent design, the idea that life is so complex that a higher being must have created it.

The disputed lesson plan has thrust Ohio back into the middle of a national fight over how to best teach the origins and development of life on Earth to public school children.

That fight is between supporters and critics of Charles Darwin's theory that life evolved through natural processes, a battle that has raged since the "monkey trial" of biology teacher John Scopes nearly 80 years ago.

"It's a sad day for science in Ohio," said Patricia Princehouse, who teaches biological evolution at Case Western Reserve University. "This opens up the reputation of Ohio scientists to ridicule nationally and internationally."

Board member James Turner of Cincinnati, who supported the lesson plan, said he believed some members of the scientific community were overreacting.

"I think this is a case of passion lacking perspective," he said.

“I reject the notion that this lesson somehow advances the notion of intelligent design or creationism,” Turner said.

Princehouse and other scientists complained that much of the language in the lesson plan came from Jonathan Wells' “Icons of Evolution,” a seminal text in the intelligent design movement. The board’s standards committee Monday deleted the title of the book from the lesson plan’s bibliography, but critics complained that Wells’ ideas remained.

Princehouse and others vowed to fight the measure and predicted a court challenge if the lesson plan stands. The board will take a final vote on the measure next month, although changes to the lesson are possible through June.

Board member Martha Wise of Avon, who opposes the lesson plan, said support for the measure reflects a turnover on the board that has left it more conservative than the body that approved the state’s science standards 14 months ago. Supporters of the lesson plan said it simply reflects the science standards the board adopted in December 2002, which called for students to examine criticisms of biological evolution. They also argue that Ohio’s curriculum will include more arguments on behalf of evolution than standards in most other states.

“I wish intelligent design were in the lesson — then there would be something to complain about,” said Robert Lattimer, a Hudson chemist and outspoken intelligent design supporter. “But it’s simply not there.”

Teachers are not required to use the model curriculum, but exams such as the state’s new graduation test will test children on what the curriculum covers.

Debate about the lesson plan rose to such a fevered pitch this week that the board’s president, Jennifer Sheets of Pomeroy, took the extraordinary step of admonishing her colleagues against attacking one another or members of the public.

Tempers continued to flare after the vote. Board member Sam Schloemer said Ohio Department of Education officials were pressured by intelligent design advocates on the board to make sure the writing team of educators and scientists came up with a lesson plan sympathetic to intelligent design. He called on Gov. Bob Taft to intervene.

“Senior level staff members at the Department of Education are ready to revolt,” said Schloemer of Cincinnati. “They’re totally embarrassed by this whole process. If the governor would call it off, it would be gone.”

Taft spokesman Orest Holubec said the governor had no intention of getting involved in the board’s work. “The governor has faith in the board members and expects they will approve curriculum based on the standards they adopted in 2002,” he said.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/...95549160490.xml

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

0 Members:

« Next Oldest | Education | Next Newest »