Science Ability Down in U.S. High Schools

An anonymous reader writes "According to the International Herald Tribune, a nationwide test has shown that the ability to reason scientifically is less well developed across the board for high schoolers. Fourth graders, ironically, are actually better at reasoning in the sciences now than they were ten years ago." From the article: "The drop in science proficiency appeared to reflect a broader trend in which some academic gains made in elementary grades and middle school have been seen to fade during the high school years. The science results come from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a comprehensive examination administered in early 2005 by the Department of Education to more than 300,000 students in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and on U.S. military bases around the world."

Comments

Re:Hardly

[mikbry24]

"Hardly. If you flip a coin a thousand times, I can make a verifiable prediction that the results will be about within 50 heads/tails of 500 heads and 500 tails 95% of the time. You can test that, and see that it's true (actually, those particular numbers may not be accurate; I don't remember the details of the binomial distribution off the top of my head). Yet the process is clearly quite random and involves nothing even resembling intelligence."

Well, you know, except for the whole flipping of the coin and the coin itself. LOL I guess the evolutionist believes the coin made itself or is descended from some lower monetary form. And then the coin flips itself to give you your probability. LOL You are also now talking probabliity which is based on verifiable tests. You can't do the same with the Big Bang or molecules-to-man evolution. Further, the idea that there is an order to which things adhere by which you can make reasonable predictions again implies design, which in turn implies a designer. As for the rest of your post, your words are simply moronic and sophomoric. We all use the same science. We all have the same facts, we interpret them differently according to our presuppositions. The presuppositions are unavoidable. How is believing the universe to be orderly and designed anti-science, exactly? Isn't that the assumption that you make, too?