If you read the entirety of the article you’ll get a much better overview of the thing. The summary misses what is probably the most important point – Intelligent Design is being taught as part of the Historical Controversies section of the course. The entire point of that part of the syllabus is to encourage the development of investigative skills, critical thinking, and the ability to analyse historical narratives and cultural forces in action.
Just a few lines into the posted article it notes:
Queensland History Teachers' Association head Kay Bishop said the curriculum asked students to develop their historical skills in an "investigation of a controversial issue" such as "human origins (eg, Darwin's theory of evolution and its critics"). "It's opening up opportunities for debate and discussion, not to push a particular view," Ms Bishop said. Classroom debate about issues encouraged critical thinking – an important tool, she said.”
.
Further, Intelligent Design as a controversy is in great company – it’s being taught alongside the Shroud of Turin and Noah’s Ark under the section on Forgeries, the problem of the ownership of the Elgin Marbles, Nazi archaeology, and evolution.
Controversies
Students develop their historical skills in an investigation of TWO of the following controversial issues:
a) human origins (e.g. Darwin’s theory of evolution and its critics)
b) dating the past (e.g. radio-carbon dating, tracing human migrations using DNA)
c) fakes and forgeries (e.g. Piltdown Man, the Treasure of Priam, Noah’s Ark, the Turin Shroud)
d) the use and display of human remains (e.g. repatriation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander human remains, The Iceman, Egyptian mummies, Lady Dai)
e) imperialistic attitudes towards archaeological property (e.g. Indigenous cultural artefacts from around the world) f) the ownership of cultural property (e.g. the return of Parthenon sculptures)
g) the impact of war and terrorism on antiquities (e.g. the Buddhas of Bamyan, the looting of Iraqi museums)
h) political and ideological uses of archaeology (e.g. archaeology under the Nazis and Fascists)
i) a school-developed study of a controversial issue.
Students examine the nature and context of the controversy, including:
the historical background
the extent of the controversy (media coverage, nationalistic feeling, government involvement) and significant developments relating to the controversy
different perspectives and their bases
an assessment of the different perspectives.
While there’s certaintly a risk in the style of presentation, isn’t this exactly what we want to be taught to our kids? The ability to examine, consider, and weigh.
Ps. This was posted on the same story as it appeared in the firehose section (http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=12901414) – why aren’t comments shipped over to the main page when the story shifts over as well?
What's odd is that the numbers constantly show that this generation is one of the most socially involved yet. They volunteer all the time. Do charity work. Involve themselves in causes in record numbers. Call their mothers. I guess it could be argued that in an increasingly competitve world all these things look great on a college application but that doesn't explain why college kids keep doing these things. I doubt any social service really helps in the employment fields, and I'd doubt if the Employment offices on campus suggest otherwise.
A growing body of academic and market research suggests millennials — who are in their mid-20s and younger — are civic-minded and socially conscious as individuals, consumers and employees.
61% of 13- to 25-year-olds feel personally responsible for making a difference in the world, suggests a survey of 1,800 young people to be released today. It says 81% have volunteered in the past year; 69% consider a company's social and environmental commitment when deciding where to shop, and 83% will trust a company more if it is socially/environmentally responsible.
Two-thirds of college freshmen (66%) believe it's essential or very important to help others in difficulty, suggests a survey of 263,710 students at 385 U.S. colleges and universities. The 2005 report, by the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California at Los Angeles, found feelings of social and civic responsibility among entering freshmen at the highest level in 25 years.
Volunteerism by college students increased by 20% from 2002 to 2005, says a study released last week by the federal Corporation for National and Community Service.
Maybe I'm overstating the point but I just don't see how volunteering as a local fireman whilst studying Physics, or working with disabled kids whilst studying History, or spending hours in retirement communities while trying to do something fancy with election data from the last 20 years, can be defined as anything but empathetic. That's the kind of thing my peers were fulling their time with.
Finally, regarding the debt question - in my experience I've found that those with the biggest debts are the ones with most empathy. Those with debts of over 200k are damn near living saints. Same goes for those on financial aid really. It's a damn small sample I know but it sure as hell felt like the ones doing the most good on my campus were also the ones recieving the most aid. There's always space for a cynical interpretation but it's of unknown value in this situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Just a few lines into the posted article it notes:
. Further, Intelligent Design as a controversy is in great company – it’s being taught alongside the Shroud of Turin and Noah’s Ark under the section on Forgeries, the problem of the ownership of the Elgin Marbles, Nazi archaeology, and evolution.
You can read the entire syllabus on their website: http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/Documents/SeniorYears/History/Ancient%20History.pdf [australian...lum.edu.au] The relevant section is on Page 8 and reads:
While there’s certaintly a risk in the style of presentation, isn’t this exactly what we want to be taught to our kids? The ability to examine, consider, and weigh.
Ps. This was posted on the same story as it appeared in the firehose section (http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=12901414) – why aren’t comments shipped over to the main page when the story shifts over as well?
I found a decent summary article at http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-10-23-gen-next-cover_x.htm which had some intersting counter points
Maybe I'm overstating the point but I just don't see how volunteering as a local fireman whilst studying Physics, or working with disabled kids whilst studying History, or spending hours in retirement communities while trying to do something fancy with election data from the last 20 years, can be defined as anything but empathetic. That's the kind of thing my peers were fulling their time with.
Finally, regarding the debt question - in my experience I've found that those with the biggest debts are the ones with most empathy. Those with debts of over 200k are damn near living saints. Same goes for those on financial aid really. It's a damn small sample I know but it sure as hell felt like the ones doing the most good on my campus were also the ones recieving the most aid. There's always space for a cynical interpretation but it's of unknown value in this situation.