Well, I guess I now have time to blog again...being after five in the evening on a Saturday, both my home and school computers up, and much of my preparation for the first day of school in the books.
I've blogged about related cases before, and so it is with a small feeling of satisfaction that I note that the plaintiffs attempts to force the University of California to accept their mutilated version of a biology course as meeting the former's 'a-g requirements' has been rejected by the courts. NCSE has a summary of the events, and a PDF of the court's decision in entirety is available here.
Really, when I think of the hoops that both I and my students have to satisfy in order to meet UC's requirements for a lab science course, among them meeting the California State Standards, I feel a little ticked off that the suit went as far as it did. Anyone who has actually taught a standards-based course in this state would recognize PDQ that the bodies in this suit were not meeting the standards. And, you know, not all high school science courses are intended to address those standards, which we teachers often find onerous. At the school I teach, we offer pretty fair courses in anatomy, ecology, zoology and environmental science. They are fine offerings, but they don't satisfy either the UC a-g requirements or the standards. This is enough of an issue that we face pressure from within the district to eliminate any science electives and confine instruction to standards-based courses!
Under the circumstances, I don't think it asks too much of private schools to meet the same standards. To those who chafe at what they feel are the metaphysical challenges to their (typically Biblical) worldview, I can only wonder why they would feel that their religious liberty exempts them from teaching the standards. After all, the educational establishment is not compelling sectarian believers to affirm or deny anything as gospel.
8/16/2008
RULING IN UC CASE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
We are experiencing the Hegelian synthesis here. we have been dragged so far from the U.S. Constitution that no one really cares any more.
Case in Point: Where in the Constitution is it mandated that all children must receive a standardized, secularized, sanitized state dictated education? Much less that those who do not choose to participate in this system will be punished?
It seems to be the normal assumption that every child is a ward of the state, the only entity that can determine what is best for him/her. Orwell's 1984 is just a little late, but only a little.
The parents do still have the option of not using the state college system which their tax dollars support. They can go to other institutions, and might be better off for it.
If the subject is biology training, I doubt that the children will suffer near as much as biologists want to believe. If it is biology as a pursuit that is the concern, then train the students that want it. If it is an agenda propped up by biology that is the concern, then the loss of new believers might be considered a desperate situation. Today it is hard to tell which it is, despite claims of the advocates.
The state of American education is such that criticism of outside systems and educators seems somewhat misplaced and ironic.
I think you missed the point Stan, the problem was not "teaching" state mandated secular ideas, the problem was someone oustside the secular system wanting to enforces its distinctly non-secular views on the state sponsored, secular, post-mandated educational system. Sorry for the pedantism ;)
Where in the Constitution is it mandated that all children must receive a standardized, secularized, sanitized state dictated education? Much less that those who do not choose to participate in this system will be punished?
I believe in the Preamble there is a bit about promoting the general welfare, and I think that since the passage of the Northwest Ordinance (1787) it has been accepted that the Founders intended that "schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged." The basic rules by which certain land was set aside for schools and other governmental institutions were all worked out pretty quickly after that, Stan. To be fair, the Founders probably took for granted that public schools would also furnish instruction in religion and citizenship as well as science. Over time, that set of values came into conflict with those parts of the Constitution which sought to avoid the establishment of religion. That conflict has not been resolved to this day.
If it is biology as a pursuit that is the concern, then train the students that want it. If it is an agenda propped up by biology that is the concern, then the loss of new believers might be considered a desperate situation.
Ah, there we go, the 'worldview' argument: as in, evolution amounts to something like a secular worldview, and supposedly the educational establishment conspires with the 'evolutionist' to compel that this worldview, and only this worldview, is in a science class.
From this, it's a small step to argue that all 'worldviews' be presented in the interest of fairness. As Ken Miller has correctly noted in his new book 'Only A Theory', this is a case of conservatives appropriating the 'cultural relativist' rhetoric of the academic left and using it against them.
Well, I don't have a worldview in mind when I'm teaching the state standards, and neither does the state Department of Education. What we have in mind is teaching science. The problem with the inclusion of alternate 'worldviews' with respect to evolution is not that they might be wrong, but that this would tend to enshrine non-falsifiable claims as integral to the curriculum, which would then undermine the very foundations of science.
Public school biology teachers should fight to make sure that evolution is in the curriculum not because we want to 'convert' students to the bogeyman of 'evolutionism', but because we know that evolution is foundational to modern biology. We want our students to be scientifically literate. A student who has never heard of evolution, or who does not understand evolutionary theory, or who thinks that they must as a personal matter choose to believe either in evolution or God---those students, sad to say, are either ignorant or misinformed.
Post a Comment