Tuesday, August 12, 2008
Lonesome State
Retired University of North Texas associate professor of English, Dr. Edra Bogle, is running for the Texas State Board of Education. As this article demonstrates, she is a candidate worthy of support, not least because she is running against an incumbent who has supported dentist Don McLeroy, the chairman of the board, who has said that there are two systems of science:You've got a creationist system and a naturalist system ...Professor Bogle has a notable quote of her own. Speaking of the latest creationist ploy, teaching the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolutionary theory and letting the students "make up their own mind," she said:
I'm not sure an 11th grader with two semesters of science can decide.Which is, of course, the point of the creationists. Given a choice between something they don't really understand and their parents' beliefs, the creationists are counting on the kids choosing the latter as long as they are told there is some sort of scientific doubt about the former.
Good luck, Texas!
.
Comments:
<< Home
Of course, part of the problem is we let people who've forgotten any little science they learned in school decide who gets to be on the school board... :)
Dave S. said...
"I'm not sure an 11th grader with two semesters of science can decide."
And what about the next batch of 11th graders? 'I'm sorry kids, you don't get to decide, the class last year decided.' :)
"I'm not sure an 11th grader with two semesters of science can decide."
And what about the next batch of 11th graders? 'I'm sorry kids, you don't get to decide, the class last year decided.' :)
# posted by 
: 3:44 PM
: 3:44 PM
I don't know -- my prejudice, shall we say, is that the average 11th grader is sufficiently proficient in abstract thought that she could benefit from learning a little epistemology in a science class, e.g. how to assess the epistemic virtues of competing explanations.
The difficulty is that the average high school science teacher doesn't know how to teach epistemology to high school students. And it's not easy.
The difficulty is that the average high school science teacher doesn't know how to teach epistemology to high school students. And it's not easy.
The difficulty is that the average high school science teacher doesn't know how to teach epistemology to high school students. And it's not easy.
Beyond that, there is no intent to teach epistemology at all. Clearly what is expected is that "alternatives" will simply be dumped in front of the kids and they will left to their own devices to choose between them. Indeed, if any teacher started to effectively explain the basis for the restriction of science to naturalistic explanations, you'd likely get the same caterwalling about it being an insult to religion that the upcoming NOVA show on an archeolological exploration of the Bible is getting.
Beyond that, there is no intent to teach epistemology at all. Clearly what is expected is that "alternatives" will simply be dumped in front of the kids and they will left to their own devices to choose between them. Indeed, if any teacher started to effectively explain the basis for the restriction of science to naturalistic explanations, you'd likely get the same caterwalling about it being an insult to religion that the upcoming NOVA show on an archeolological exploration of the Bible is getting.
I expect you're right, John. But they're the ones who wanted us to "teach the controversy," so they can't bitch.
... they're the ones who wanted us to "teach the controversy," so they can't bitch.
I suspect you mean they aren't entitled to bitch. That's a far cry from what they can do!
;-)
Post a Comment
I suspect you mean they aren't entitled to bitch. That's a far cry from what they can do!
;-)
<< Home
