The state’s public school curriculum, called Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, says students must learn “the theory of biological evolution.” Section 3A of the biology curriculum states that students must use critical thinking to make informed decisions, including analyzing a theory’s “strengths and weaknesses.”

“They do not cover the weaknesses of evolution,” said Don McLeroy, chairman of the state board, of the state’s science textbooks. “They present evolution as an absolute fact.”

McLeroy, an outspoken creationist, said he doesn’t want changes in the state’s biology standards. But some say that doesn’t mean that creationism or intelligent design, both held by the U.S. Supreme Court to be religious theories that are barred from the classroom, won’t seep into Texas’ curriculum.

Just think, with the decision of the majority of the Texas SBOE to reject a textbook for reasons other than failing to meet basic state curriculum requirements, McLeroy now doesn’t even have to bother with the analyzing the “strengths and weaknesses” rule to reject textbooks that teach evolution. Before, the Board would have to go through the motions of documenting that the textbook didn’t demonstrate the weaknesses of evolution in order to reject the book. The Board could have demanded the publishers to include so many “weaknesses” in the textbook so as to make the evolution section appear a travesty of unscientific reasoning.

But now, McLeroy and friends won’t even have to bother. They believe they can just decide to reject a book for any reason. Their decision to reject the math textbook sets the precedent for the upcoming selection of biology textbooks. Unless Attorney General Greg Abbott steps in now to stop the board, he will find it very difficult to do so in the future. He avoided having to explicitly define the Board’s authority in 2006. It seems to me, that the Board is calling him out to make him actually block Board action in rejecting a textbook. Will he do it? I guess it all depends who is funding his next run for higher office.

Technorati Tags: Texas State Board of Education, Texas SBOE, Don McLeroy, textbook approval, evolution, Terri Leo , Greg Abbott

Texas Board of Education quashes dissenting report on rejected math book | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas News on Yahoo! | The Dallas Morning News

“This is about the credibility of this board, and I will challenge anyone here who tries to challenge my credibility,” said Rick Agosto, a Democrat from San Antonio who had abstained in the November vote over whether to reject the math book.

If he didn’t vote, how could this be about his “credibility?” If he had bothered to vote for approving the textbook to begin with (which meets all state requirements) this wouldn’t be an issue at all, now would it? What’s the deal, he’s afraid the board wouldn’t elect him as an officer again? Does he really believe that the board has the right to reject textbooks based on personal beliefs even if they meet all state requirements? No wonder he’s worried about his credibility.

The state Board of Education’s unusual decision to reject a math textbook used by Dallas and 70 other Texas school districts has evolved into a power struggle over the approval of classroom materials used across the state.

At issue is whether the 15-member state board can reject any book it wants for any reason it wants. That’s what some conservative board members, led by board president Don McLeroy, say they are allowed to do.

So much for local control.

Rejection of math textbook sparks debate on state board’s authority | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Latest News

In Dallas, officials rolled out Everyday Mathematics books in kindergarten through sixth grade at 19 schools with low math scores during the 2000-01 school year. By the end of the year, only two of those schools still had low scores; a year later, none of them did, said Camille Malone, DISD’s director of mathematics.

The district now uses the book to teach the nearly 79,000 students in kindergarten through fifth grade at all elementary schools. Ms. Malone said games and hands-on examples help the students develop computation skills.

“The TAKS test is a test of concepts as well as skills,” she said. “Had we not had a conceptually based program, I’m not sure we would have had the achievement we have had on TAKS.”

So because some board members are more interested in establishing the authority of their beliefs, Dallas can not use a textbook that it believes has been instrumental in improving it’s math scores.

Terri Leo’s comments have to be among the most pathetic.

Rejection of math textbook sparks debate on state board’s authority | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Latest News

Ms. Leo said. “I object very much being taken to task for rejecting a book that I actually read.”

Apparently it doesn’t matter to her that the textbook was recommended by a review committee, the TEA commissioner, and probably several textbook committees at various districts not to mention the teachers who have been using the textbook in the classroom for a couple years. Shouldn’t they be the ones “objecting” rather than Leo?

I’m pretty sure this is just a continuation of Leo’s attempt for the SBOE to regain absolute control of textbook selection which suffered a major setback in the fall of 2006. Why now? Because biology textbooks are coming up for approval soon. And if the board “establishes” it’s right to reject textbooks for any reason, then the board can easily reject books that fail to “teach the controversy” regarding evolution.

BTW, Terri Leo is up for re-election this year. Unfortunately, the Democrats don’t have a candidate in the race. However, the Libertarian candidate is Brian Kuzma. Why should seven board members get to decide on textbooks for every district in Texas based solely on their personal preferences?

Technorati Tags: Texas State Board of Education, Don McLeroy, Teri Leo, textbook selection

FRISCO – The elementary school art teacher embroiled in a public fight with Frisco ISD has until noon Thursday to approve a settlement deal or the district will start the process to fire her, Superintendent Rick Reedy said Monday night.The proposed agreement calls for Sydney McGee to be paid for the rest of the school year and prevents her from suing the district. It also stops her from working in Frisco ISD in the future.

Dr. Reedy said the deal would eliminate further interruptions for the district, which has been the subject of a national media firestorm in recent weeks.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Latest News:

The proposed settlement agreement would avoid a formal nonrenewal decision.

I can understand why the district would push for this, the only thing they have to look forward to is more bad press while waiting to formally “non-renew” her contract. In the mean time, it’s just more stress for the teachers and students.

Now someone who might be more skeptical about the district’s offer might note that the agreement serves the districts interests in not having to face a lawsuit and ultimately defend it’s actions. I’m sure they would love to have the opportunity but are only taking this route in the best interest of the student’s well being.

I know, I know, it’s all McGee’s fault and the Lawson and Reedy walk on water so she better shut up and take the money and be grateful.

“I was pleased that the Supreme Court did not rule our schools were inadequately funded,” said Don McLeroy, a member of the State Board of Education’s Finance Committee. “Adequacy is a highly subjective assessment. The best way to judge an adequate education is to let the parents decide–give them the right to choose their child’s school.”

As long as McLeroy gets to decide on their text books.

Does this make sense? McLeroy is all for parent choice but actively works so that the SBOE is the only authority of text book content.

FRISCO — The Frisco school district wants to open an art teacher’s personnel file to the public to defend itself against her claim that she was reprimanded for allowing a fifth-grade student to see nude art.

Frisco district wants to open art teacher’s personnel file:

Superintendent Rick Reedy sent a letter to McGee on Tuesday asking for permission to open her personnel file so the district could respond to criticism over her case.”

I believe some of the information being disseminated to the press is not true and is misleading, especially the allegation that the district has disciplined a teacher for exposing students to nude art,” Reedy said in a prepared statement. “I think we can all agree that the facts should be made available for full review and open discussion.”

Well of course it’s not going to be in the files since the district has already stated that all previous warnings were verbal. That’s part of the problem. It may just be a bluff but apparently McGee is willing to open her file if the district is willing to open “theirs.”

Frisco district wants to open art teacher’s personnel file:

Dunn said he is likely to deny the district’s request unless it also agrees to open the personnel files of Reedy and Nancy Lawson, the principal of Fisher Elementary School.

I think it may be a little late for the district to come “clean” since it has already stated multiple times that the other problems weren’t formally documented since principals often like to operate “informally” to try to solve their problems.

So what are the possibilities?

The file contains previous evaluations that indicate McGee had been warned about problems before. Then why has the district been going on about verbal evaluations?

The file contains documentation regarding the parental complaint. Not likely because the district already said it wasn’t an issue and the district has been going on about verbal evalutions. I can just see some spokesperson pointing to an open file and saying, “see, no complaint!” Duh.

At this point, anything the district decides to show that would document problems with McGee would have to contridict two weeks worth of statements that the performance directives were only put into writing at McGee’s request. Granted, the file may show that McGee’s previous evaluations weren’t as great as she made them out to be. However, if that’s the case then there should be documents that show what the principal did to improve the situation. Otherwise, it’s essentially, “gosh, Syndey, you really need to work on those lesson plans” and then a year later, the principal states, “you know, you really haven’t worked on those lesson plans yet.” As I’ve said before, the question is would the principal have begun to act on the problems if there hadn’t been a complaint?

So my guess is that the district has a file that shows McGee’s evaluations weren’t all that great and certain problems had been identified before. But I bet it also shows that the principal didn’t “formally” address these issues other than in the evaluations. Now why isn’t she being disicplined for failure to maintain adaquate personnel files if McGee is being disciplined for failure to maintain adaquate lesson plans?

And as for Reedy’s file? Maybe he’s behind on evaluating and giving written direction to principals?

Texas Ed: Comments on Education from Texas:

“Texas standards are not grade-level specific, most of them are noise. They can’t be measured and are just a bunch of fuzzy words,” McLeroy said.

Fuzzy words like these for high school English:

Texas Ed: Comments on Education from Texas:

(B) demonstrate control over grammatical elements such as subject-verb agreement, pronoun-antecedent agreement, verb forms, and parallelism;

Pretty fuzzy alright. Anyone can review the TEKS standards online at the TEA website. You can read more about the curriculum changes here:

All other states, beware! Texas is changing curriculum standards!

His seat is actually being contested by Maggie Charleton. And a lot of people seem to prefer her to McLeroy.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Opinion: Editorials:

First, Ms. Charleton. The Bryan Democrat is much less likely than her opponent, Republican incumbent Don McLeroy of Bryan, to use her position to insert politics into the review of textbooks. She says the board should review textbooks to see whether they meet the standards set by experts, not for a particular view of the world. That makes sense.Dr. McLeroy, a 60-year-old Bryan dentist, wants the state board weighing in more directly on textbooks. He’s been part of the group that wants broader review powers, even though the Legislature rightly stripped the board of much of this authority.

Dr. McLeroy, backed by religious conservatives, has been on the board since 1998. We believe it’s time to infuse the board with some new blood, and Ms. Charleton, with her 30 years of teaching experience, seems to have a lot to offer.

Corsicana Daily Sun, Corsicana, Texas – Charleton on a ‘listening tour’:

Charleton, a Democrat, is challenging incumbent Don McLeroy of Bryan. The seat is a swing position in a struggle for control of the board, she insists. Ideology is taking the upper hand on the board, overruling the needs of kids and parents.She points to the editing of text books to remove references to slavery in history, to remove information about breast self-exams and testicle self-exams from health books, and evolution from biology texts.

McLeroy is part of the group that includes Miller and Leo who are interested in regaining control of content of text books. His seat matters.

Retired teacher challenges SBOE incumbent in District 9:

The Texas Freedom Network, a non-partisan watchdog group that advocates a mainstream agenda of religious freedom and individual liberties, calls the District 9 seat the “swing seat” that will determine whether moderates or “political and religious ultra-conservatives” control the 15-member board.

Retired teacher challenges SBOE incumbent in District 9:

In the past, conservative Republicans on the board have advocated limiting the way Texas public school curriculum deals with issues like evolution, civil rights, sexuality education and environmental issues. In response to ideological infighting on the SBOE, the Texas legislature 11 years ago removed the board’s power to determine textbook content as part of the textbook adoption process.Conservative Republicans now hold seven of the 15 seats on the state board.

Charleton says she would like to bring mainstream Texas values and common sense to the board’s deliberations.

Here’s part of a letter written to Miller concerning McLeroy’s actions.

Texas Citizens for Science:

But that still was not enough. Unwillingly to let the TEA textbook staff do their jobs, Dr. McLeroy thought it necessary to correspond with the biology textbook publishers themselves and act like a one-man Texas Education Agency. He reminded publishers on Jan. 8 that “there is a process by which errors that remain in the books will be fixed before they get into the hands of children,” and that their “cooperation in it is required.” This sort of ex parte communication is probably not legal, and is certainly very irregular and unwise. The only way to explain this is to conclude that Dr. McLeroy is bullying the publishers, an exercise of over-reaching that all pseudoscientists engage in and serves as one of its identifiers. After all the implied threats and coercion that textbook publishers have to endure under the normal Texas textbook adoption process to change their books’ content to satisfy the political, religious, and social desires of the State Board as a single entity, now they are having to endure individual Board members calling them up with the same implied threats and informing them their “cooperation” is “required” in yet another sleazy attempt to satisfy the Discovery Institute’s wishes. No wonder our country’s textbook publishers feel they are harassed by the Texas process. Believe me, they complain privately about this, and their complaints are fully justified.There exists even further evidence that these actions were part of a planned strategy to censor the evolution content of the biology books despite their overwhelming adoption by the SBOE without changes asked for by the Discovery Institute and other creationist organizations: while the public–including scientists and science educators, and probably most members of the State Board of Education–were kept ignorant of the details of the behind-the-scene maneuverings of Dr. McLeroy to intimidate publishers, the details were known to members of other creationist organizations. Mr. Frank Mayo, an officer of Texans for Better Science Education, was obviously aware of the push to damage the biology books under the guise of “error correction,” since he referred to this effort in his message to the Katy ISD Board as they considered which biology textbook to adopt.

There’s plenty more but since the letter was addressed to Miller, I suspect she didn’t see any reason to pursue any of it’s claims.

Visit McLeroy’s webpage for more information on his priorities and beliefs. He begins with the need for teaching “clear thinking” in Texas schools.

Clear Thinking about the Texas Public School System:

Thus, the most amazing “orthodoxy” which dominates the educational establishment “leviathan” today is the slighting of “facts and knowledge” for emphasis on problem-solving and critical thinking. Problem solving and critical thinking are secondary skills. Before one can think and solve he must first have something to think about.

I have to admit that I only skimmed the stuff. But jeez, he calls it “clear thinking” but it isn’t supposed to emphasis critical thinking skills. I suspect this falls into the realm of Leo’s tendencies to indoctrination rather than thinking. What can I say, I work in a profession that didn’t even exist when I was in graduate school and I coach Odyssey of the Mind. Facts accumulate and even change over time. We need to be able to figure out how to use them.

If you want facts against evolution or comprehensive sex education, McLeroy’s website is the place for it. Of course, I find it curious that he doesn’t present a whole lot of facts backing up his abstinence only approach to sex education.

As for his approach to evolution? I didn’t bother with it. People who want evolution out of the schools aren’t interested in science being able to explain and predict the world around us, they are interested in discrediting anything that contradicts their religious beliefs.

I do believe this gets us back to indoctrination again. Is education about the filling of the pail or the lighting of the fire? Oh, wait a minute. Did Yeats believe in evolution?

See, she’s only trying to protect the children of Texas from poorly written text books. In 2003, she provided an example of what she was talking about:

Capitol Inside:

This shift in policy has resulted in many disastrous results. One book approved in Texas, for example, was the subject of national ridicule and condemned on the floor of the U.S. Senate by Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV). Dubbed the “Texas rain-forest algebra book,” it received an “F” grade on a report card produced by Mathematically Correct, a group of independent math scholars who reviewed math books adopted in Texas. The book watered down algebra by including such things as chili recipes, ancient myths, a photograph of Maya Angelou and Bill Clinton (this was supposed to demonstrate parallelism in sentence structure), and asking students what roles zoos play in society. No algebra is even mentioned until page 100. The publisher states that the algebra book’s focus is to “get students to communicate their thinking about problem solving and to work on different approaches, rather than focusing on getting the right answers”. The book says the teacher’s role “is to be a facilitator who supports students. Questions should be posed to stimulate thought rather than get an answer.” Under the previous system, the SBOE was able to insist that publishers correct outrageous and offensive content. Without SBOE content standards, political agendas masquerading as science have been smuggled into classrooms. Books marred with inaccuracies, omissions and errors have been approved as well.

And we all know how many Texas districts rushed out to adopt the text book just because it was approved by the state board. Don’t we? Well, no we don’t. Now this could just be an oversight by Leo in failing to mention the actual number of children who’s algebra education suffered from the use of these text books. You know, somehow I doubt it.

The legislature took the power from the SBOE in the early 90’s after years of flagrant and nationally embarrassing decisions approving or disapproving text books based on the beliefs of a small percentage of the population. Essentially, the SBOE was denying local districts the opportunity to adopt text books simply because board members thought they books undermined Texas values rather than it’s actual factual content. As for who gets to define those values, well, the board naturally. Leo obviously feels the legislature made a mistake.

I can’t help but believe that she represents that small minority that the legislature was addressing. On her personal website, Leo states the following:

TERRI LEO – STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION DISTRICT 6:

A strong conservative voice in the State Board of Education’s management of the multi-billion dollar Permanent School Fund will always be essential, and I have stood consistently for traditional, conservative values in this, as well.

What’s interesting is that in the previous paragraphs she doesn’t really address the conservative values that she refers to in “as well.” She does talk about her roles on the board and how the board affects text book decisions nation wide. When she presents her view on phonics-based instruction, she doesn’t appear to be suggesting that it is a conservative view.

While some would dismiss this as merely mincing words, I think it really does reflect her belief in having a strong conservative voice in all things regarding education. She has a conservative agenda and her mind is made up.

The Leiter Reports: Editorials, News, Updates: Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them–Round 4:

Terri Leo is the leader of the Texas Taliban faction on the State Board of Education; she even exercised her perogative as a Board Member to make a speech before the last public hearing of the Board in Austin to profess her commitment to creationist-inspired skepticism about Darwin’s theory of evolution (and this before hearing any testimony!).

Whatever you may think about the evolution debate, I think it is telling that she was providing her views before any testimony. So what is education to her? Apparently it doesn’t include teaching the thoughtful discussion and analysis of a situation before reaching a conclusion. Maybe it’s more about indoctrination? It certainly is not about local control and trusting local teachers and officials to make sound judgements regarding the education of their children.

Lowe, Leo win re-election to state education board:

Leo, a homemaker and former teacher in Garland and Dallas, voted as one of four board members against 11 others to reject some biology textbooks dealing with evolution.Leo, 44, said the books did not fully discuss and portray deficiencies in the scientific basis for evolutionary theories.

The majority voted to adopt the books because books can be rejected based only on factual errors or failure to follow mandated state curriculum.

NCSE Resource — Textbook power grab rebuffed in Texas:

A brief (PDF) from a number of groups, led by the Texas State Teachers Association and also including the Texas Freedom Network and the Texas Association of Biology Teachers, urged the attorney general to reaffirm DM-424, contending that Leo’s request “telegraphs a desire by some members of the SBOE to return to the day when textbook decisions were made on non-educational grounds,” when “the SBOE’s textbook adoption process was entangled with ideology, politics, and religion, and was a forum for divisive political battles that focused on ideological rather than educational or pedagogical concerns.”

Leo is not up for re-election this year. However, all Texans who believe that public education should be a place for informed and civic education rather than mere indoctrination would do well to keep an eye open for her next power play.

MySA.com: Metro | State:

AUSTIN — Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott on Monday refused to expand the State Board of Education’s authority over textbook content beyond what the Legislature authorized in a 1995 law.Social conservatives on the board had asked him to overrule a 10-year-old opinion interpreting that law.

In his new ruling, Abbott did depart from one part of the prior ruling by saying the board can review supplemental materials, such as teacher guides, charts and workbooks.

The dispute dates from when lawmakers attempted to limit the board’s control over textbook content by only granting specific authority to reject books that are factually inaccurate or do not cover enough of the required state curriculum. Dan Morales, then the attorney general, interpreted that law in a 1996 opinion.

Star-Telegram | 09/19/2006 | Board gains ground via AG opinion:

But Abbott’s opinion appears to expand the authority of the board to consider content as it relates to U.S. and Texas history and the free-enterprise system.

MySA.com: Metro | State:

“This decision is a huge victory for the citizens of Texas in that it confirms the Texas board’s democratic check and balance over otherwise unaccountable textbook editors and publishers,” Leo said.

Star-Telegram | 09/19/2006 | Board gains ground via AG opinion:

“It’s kind of good news, bad news,” said Geraldine “Tincy” Miller of Dallas, the board’s chairwoman. “The only downside is that we didn’t get complete authority back.”

MySA.com: Metro | State:

Leo said she will keep pushing the Legislature to expand the 15-member board’s control over content.”I just don’t think that liberal New York editors should be deciding the content of textbooks,” she said.

What bothers is me is that no where do any of the articles say which books the board has had a problem with it’s content in the past ten years. Why does Leo think that the board needs me more control? How have the books been neglecting Texas history and the free- enterprise system? If this is such a huge victory, why aren’t the details of the battle well-known? Could it be possible that the legislature actually knew what it’s was doing when it restricted the boards power?