Texas Board of Education Supports Evolution

somanyrobots writes with this excerpt from the Dallas News: "In a major defeat for social conservatives, a sharply divided State Board of Education voted Thursday to abandon a longtime state requirement that high school science teachers cover what some critics consider to be 'weaknesses' in the theory of evolution. Under the science curriculum standards recommended by a panel of science educators and tentatively adopted by the board, biology teachers and biology textbooks would no longer have to cover the 'strengths and weaknesses' of Charles Darwin's theory that man evolved from lower forms of life. Texas is particularly influential to textbook publishers because of the size of its market, so this could have a ripple effect on textbooks used in other states as well."

Comments

other "theories"

[david in brasil]

Evolution is not the only theory taught in school. Gravity is another theory. I suppose that Texas schools should teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of the Theory of Gravity, too.

Re:other "theories"

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, gravity is easy to test.

Theory of evolution is also fairly easy to test, and that was done before. Scientists from around the world used populations of fast-reproduction species (mostly bugs), and placed them in specific conditions. After some time - features useful for living in these new conditions were developed. This looks like definitive proof done in the lab for me.

On the other hand you just can look into fossilized bones of ancient species, or remains of our own predecessors - go, figure out yourself.

I understand that a "weakness" of theory of evolution would be a claim that changes in species appear randomly vs. deterministic. But knowing how strong anti-evolution-redneck-lobby is in USA, I would expect something like "it's not the way it's described in the Bible".

I live in Europe, in *very* conservative an catholic country (90% of populations are catholics), but anyone who would say evolution is bullshit would looked at like he was crazy.

Teach Methods and Logic

[RAMMS EIN]

I think it would be valuable if schools taught methods and logic. Not just knowledge, but also the way of how knowledge can be arrived at. Teach people what is and what isn't a conclusive argument, point out the factors that complicate deriving valid conclusions from one's observations, and show that how experiments can be set up to minimize those factors. Preferably also teach statistics, so that people can calculate the probability of two things being corerlated vs. the probability that an observation is due to other factors.

All these are valuable skills, not specifically in the evolution debate, but in every aspect of life.

As for my stance on religious issues...I am convinced that we have no conclusive evidence one way or the other on most of them, and I would say that, until we do (which I think will never happen) everyone should be free to believe as they do. Nothing gives me the right to force my beliefs on you, and the same applies in the other direction.

Re:Teach Methods and Logic

[apoc.famine]

Nice idea, but if people at large were taught how to think, then the government as it exists today would not last long.

You cynical bastard..... Of course, you're 100% right. As a science teacher, I can clearly state that School isn't about learning to think, and developing logic. School is about learning to engage/disengage when you hear the bell. It's about being able to work the line, downtrodden with the rest of your social peers.

I had some high ideals for what Education was once. That was before getting a Master's degree in Education, and working in a public high school. I could be the best science teacher ever, do original research and instill thought and logic into my students. Except for a system that doesn't let me. By the time I see students in 9th grade, the #1 question they have is "What's the answer?", followed by "Am I right?".

As a science teacher, that kills me. Science is the PROCESS of FINDING that answer, of PROVING that you're right. When the base mechanic that all students operate under is right/wrong, with the answer as the most important thing, Science (and Education) has already lost.

Our state standardized test for Science is a largely multiple-choice, "do you remember what you were taught in Science?" test. Since WHEN is Science about regurgitating facts? It's not. But designing a test where students must figure something out on their own is hard to do, hard to score, and entirely outside much of their skillset, due to a life-time of fact regurgitation. This ties directly into religion as well, for such qualities are REQUIRED to be religious. You must be able to spit out the tenets of your faith. You must noe use use logic and question what's mashed into your head by those above you.

As a Science teacher, what am I to do? If our scores drop too much due to students being unable to barf out facts on command, then the administration takes a look at the department to see if we're doing our "jobs". And as our job is clearly to stuff the heads of mindless automatons with facts, until the bell rings and they move to the next filling station, those not doing that need to be seriously worried about their jobs. And that's as it should be - our society doesn't run on millions of individuals, having individual thoughts and doing individual things. It runs on Industry and Media. It runs on 3 types of beer, 2 types of soda, 3 major sports on TV, 2 types of reality show formats, 5 types of car, etc. It runs from bell to bell, then people drive in their similar cars, on the same roads, to their similar houses, and eat the same sorts of dinner. Anything else, and it all falls apart. And that, of course, must be weeded out and crushed somewhere - luckily school is mandatory, even if religion is not. The most effective schools and states have somehow combined the two.

Re:Won't someone please think of the children?

[itsdapead]

It's not like a high school freshman is going to be scarred for life by hearing two sides of an argument. "These people believe this for this reason. These other people believe this for this other reason."

They might not be scarred for life, but they won't learn much science. Scientific debate isn't about valuing everybody's opinion - its about objectivity, logic and evidence.

This isn't even about a debate between science and faith: its a debate between science and bogus pseudo-scientific FUD which attempts to dress religious fundamentalism up as science. Even mainstream religion thinks the debate is absurd.

There are almost certainly gaps and weaknesses in the Theory of Evolution. However, it still explains more than any other theory on offer, and you don't throw it out because it fails to dot a few "i"s - at least not until you have a new, better theory.

When Newton's theory of gravitation failed to accurately predict the orbit of Mercury, the scientific community didn't throw Principia on the fire and go back to crystal spheres and epicycles - it went on to make good use of the understanding given by what Newton's theories did predict, until that smart guy with the bad hair came up with a better theory which someone then went out and proved. That's how science is supposed to work.

PS: I'm all for books on evolution having a label in them which points out that its a theory with which some people disagree provided that, in return, every copy of the Bible is required to have a preface by Richard Dawkins. Fair's fair, eh? :-)

Re:Science includes BOTH strengths and weaknesses

[nietsch]

well, you might be right there. With all these battles about what to teach, there is probably no room for teaching critical/logical thinking. There are quite some ex-teachers that claim that the basic purpose of the school system is not to bring out the best in each student, but to deliver working and middle class drones. As few as possible top student should be delivered, as this favours the ruling elite that can afford to sent their kids to better private schools...
Not that I think that the people on this board are actively planning that, but if their main feature is what party they represent, I assume them not to be very educated in educational science.

Re:Science includes BOTH strengths and weaknesses

[drinkypoo]

There are quite some ex-teachers that claim that the basic purpose of the school system is not to bring out the best in each student, but to deliver working and middle class drones.

I know personally (though not well) a current teacher who straight tells his students that they had better listen because they are being prepared to go into prison or the military, and if they want a chance to escape that fate, they are going to need some tools.

Unfortunately there is definitely no time to teach these kids what they actually need to know. The curriculum requirements due to the No Child Left Behind shit leave the instructors at the school where he teaches with negative fifteen minutes in the day to teach other material, assuming that calling roll, getting students seated and on topic et cetera takes zero minutes. That is obviously not enough...

The problem is compounded by the fact that (the majority of) teenagers are biologically incapable of functioning at full capacity before about 10 or 11 am, and they rarely start school later than 8:15. I know that I myself regularly had mathematics in the first period... but anecdotes aren't really all that useful. Still, I am mathematically challenged today, a serious impediment for a nerd.

Add to that the culture of violence (little Lord of the Flies bastards) in the school that causes everyone to need to toe the line in order to be permitted to exist without physical abuse, let alone the continual emotional abuse, peer pressure, et cetera and it's a wonder anyone ever learns anything in public school. What is less amazing is that for the most part, people come out of school very much fit into a traditional mold. We are taught that our success will be measured by our fiscal accomplishments. Then they teach us to sit in rows and do as we are told. The system was originally designed to produce factory workers, and it works very well. Too bad we exported all our manufacturing jobs and convinced ourselves we were the smartest people on the planet who would surely find a way to pull money out of thin fucking air.