Archive for the ‘Separation of Church and State’ Category
So who’s going to stop them?
January 23rd, 2008
Star-Telegram.com: | 01/19/2008 | Evolution’s status may be debated by state board
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
Because they don’t like it
January 17th, 2008
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.
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.
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
You can teach creationism as long as it’s quality creationism
January 16th, 2008
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board said Tuesday that it will wait until April to decide whether the Institute for Creation Research can offer an online master’s degree in science education. The board was supposed to take up the issue next week.
In November, a team of educators and coordinating board officials visited the institute’s graduate school in Dallas and concluded that it offered a standard science education curriculum. In December, an advisory council recommended that the board approve the institute’s application.
So what does this mean? The team that visited the program said that is was “a standard science education curriculum.” So why is the board delaying? What has the board found out since then to suggest that it might not be teaching at a graduate level? If so, why didn’t the original advisory council indicate the problem before?
Maybe the board is hoping that the Institute will not be able to meet its “graduate level” standard. That way they can reject the application without rejecting creationism and avoid offending those who believe that creationism should be taught as a scientific alternative to evolution. I can just see it now, “oh no, we didn’t reject the program because of the content but because the content wasn’t at the graduate level!”
As we start to put evolution disclaimer stickers on our biology textbooks, we might want to consider some other stickers suggested by Colin Purrington as well.
Technorati Tags: Evolution, Creationism, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Institute for Creation Research, Master’s Degree in Science Education
Special privileges for Bible classes
January 6th, 2008
Rep. Warren Chisum, R-Pampa, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee the bill’s author, said that if 15 or more students express interest in the Bible as Literature course, districts must offer it.
“A lot of schools don’t know they can have the course, and this bill notifies them that the Supreme Court ruled school districts can offer it,” Chisum said. “School districts should know they can offer the course because it better prepares students for college literature and history classes.”
So why do students have this right for only one class? Why shouldn’t they be able to petition for calculus, Greek, Shakespeare, or microbiology? Surely they help better prepare students for college work as well? Why is the public school system giving special preference to a specific course?
Because the law requires a school district to offer the Bible as literature course if 15 or more students express interest, what if 15 or more students express interest in the Koran or any other religious text?
“The bill applies to the Bible as a text that has historical and literary value,” Chisum said. “It can’t go off into other religious philosophies because then it would be teaching religion, when the course is meant to teach literature. Koran is a religious philosophy, not of historical or literary value, which is what the Bible is being taught for.”
If nothing else, students should be able to petition for the Koran as history or literary value because of Chisum’s inane statement. He doesn’t think the Koran has anything to do with the history of the middle east, you know the area where we are now engaged in two wars? The Koran might have something to do with a recent assassination in Pakistan? I remember there being some sort of deal with the Koran and a book called the “Satanic Versus” or a movie called “The Kite Flier.”
If students can’t petition for any other class that would better prepare them for college then why make an exception for this one? By only allowing students to petition for this class, Chisum has undermined the very legitimate, educational basis for teaching the Bible as literature.
Technorati Tags: Bible as Literature, Warren Chisum
