5/08/2009

INTIMIDATION, OR OPPORTUNITY?

I'm a member of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE). It is, as its website declares, the national organization which is dedicated to 'defending the teaching of evolution in public schools.' Over the years, NCSE has assisted thousands of teachers who were being pressured to not teach evolution, or to add things like 'creation science' or 'intelligent design' to the curriculum.

Well, I've never felt much need for NCSE, personally. I'm a lucky guy: my school district (FUSD) uses an excellent Biology text (Miller and Levine) with solid coverage of evolution. Our administration understands that evolution is part of the state standards and really wants us to excel on the CST's based on those standards. There's no question that evolution should be taught, and taught well. So my conflicts boil down to either parents or students.

I've yet to have a question raised by a parent or student that I didn't feel that I could answer both lawfully and in accord with the California State Standards in Biology. I've always found it easy to treat the beliefs of students and parents with respect without compromising the science. Students need to be told that it is 'OK' to believe what they want, but that it is 'not OK' to be ignorant.

On those rare occasions where questions were raised, I did not see the conflict as a case of intimidation, but rather as an opportunity to do community service. When I can have a civil, respectful conversation with another parent about what the state says we should teach and what evolutionary theory actually is, I have found (knock on wood) that in every case I was not only able to allay their fears but received an opportunity to consider the merits of evolution simply as science. This, in turn, tends to trigger conversations in the larger community. If I can present a positive spin on the teaching of evolution, then hopefully over time more and more people in the community will become more sympathetic and supportive of biology teaching.

So, why am I posting this now? Well, I'm getting a little more in-depth to evolution right now (Ch. 16 in Miller and Levine) and this is usually where I get a little 'blowback' from students or parents. It goes with the territory! Rather than view it with dread, I feel optimistic. I know that my curriculum will pass muster with both the law and best practice, so it really comes down to how I treat people.

2 comments:

wfr said...

Thank you Scott. I wish there were more like you.

梁爵 said...

2019.09.06各地酒店工作坐檯小姐依照工作地方/所在地區不同,此一酒店兼差職業名稱各異,但工作內容相差無幾。
華人地區大學生/上班族酒店兼職又稱陪酒小姐、陪酒女郎、伴舞女郎、女伴唱等,在香港她們的正式職銜是夜總會女公關,俗稱酒店小姐、舞小姐、舞女等,在中國大陸90年代產生了三陪小姐、三陪女郎或簡稱三陪(陪飲、陪夜宵,陪睡)這樣的俗稱。台灣稱為酒店小姐、舞女、酒家女等。在香港會把提供性服務的坐檯小姐俗稱為木魚,不提供性服務的則俗稱為金魚[1],源自粵語俗稱性交為「扑嘢」,而「扑」本意是擊打,木魚是可以「扑」的而金魚是不能「扑」的。
日本知名酒店經紀梁小尊/梁曉尊學術分析
日本稱坐檯小姐為俱樂部孃(キャバ嬢)。她們的主要工作是陪客人唱歌、跳舞、口交、顏射(精子射在臉上) 、喝酒、聊天等,雖然一般不可以提供性服務,但容許客人稍微撫摸身體或親吻臉頰。少數知名的俱樂部孃在當地社會上會有相當地位,除了一些有機會進入演藝圈外,更有人獲委任為市觀光大使和成為暢銷書作者的特殊情況。