Update on Texas Board of Education

Our elected school board chairperson responds to email query on Neil Armstrong with suggestion to take it up with the teachers. Considering that certain members from the Houston area on the board consider public education an abomination to God and ironically are on the board to only support only home schooling and the majority would be more comfortable in a private school where truth is let us say, more malleable, I find it incredible the current chair person - who succeeds the guy who uttered the phrase Someone needs to stand up to these experts! in the context of the science in the classroom debate vs. creationism in the classroom can suggest without a giggle to take it up with the teachers that bring ideas to the board by way of the TEA? I wonder if I were to ask any given teacher about who sets content of the textbooks and curriculum? You cannot have it both ways. Leadership is sometimes about leading. People in responsible positions need to behave responsibly. Period. Not sneaking your craptastic agenda into the public domain. You see no one should have to debate this nor should we need to have a discussion on this type of topic. We still have a Constitution?

Meanwhile, my follow-up response went answered. I expect nothing less from such cowards who try to indoctrinate with dogma incessantly. If one path fails, find a proxy to seek another to method to succeed with a thinly veiled agenda. It's a sad day for Texans and liberty.

Hi Gail,

We have not met in person. However, I have had the opportunity to speak to you on a few occasions regarding the science in the class room vs. faith is a private issue best left out of a science class room. As the board did have basic confusion over the essential meaning of the word 'theory' in that specific case, the board has demonstrated that it has lack of understanding of the basics of science. If we do have teachers in our system making such Orwellian suggestions on revising historical context, well - that is truly terrible. If you do not know, the central character in the novel, 1984 had a job. This job was to take historical figures and turn them into 'unpersons' by removing them from any documents or literature because they conflicted with the 'party' agenda. The board should be objective and balanced. It should also have the scruples to discern between nonsense and legitimacy. For that very reason, instead of entertaining such nonsense, the person(s) who suggested it should have been challenged on whom else fails to meet 'these standards' and by what exactly are these? Then apply them universally. Followed up by a review of their own credentials. There has to be some merit. There has to be some standard. I believe the Texas public education received when I exited the system is far stronger than one being offered today and I am in my mid 40s. That should not be the case. We have better tools, better information available, yet our system is falling down. You do have a leadership position on the board? We were taught critical thinking skills. If our teachers and board lack this basic skill - what hope do we have? I expect more. Our kids deserve more. We cannot be forever importing talent into the state while our recently educated students best hope is to get jobs at Wal*Mart because they were ill prepared and non-competitive, beyond being overly prepped on TAKs because our system failed them due to our board being busy with obscure nonsense right out of a fictional book. But it does make sense if your proposing teacher is teaching to the test. Remove info and facts and have a smaller test.

On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:42 AM,
SBOESUPPORT <sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us>
wrote:

Mr. Best:

I'm not sure we've met before, although you seem quick to blame me for the removal of Neil Armstrong from the social studies curriculum standards. A panel of classroom teachers that was named by the Texas Education Agency to review our standards has recommended the removal of Neil Armstrong, apparently because he is not a "scientist." The State Board of Education has instructed the review panel that we believe Armstrong should remain in our history standards, as his walk on the moon marked a significant contribution to American space exploration. The issue will come back to us for further discussion in November. You might have to ask the teachers of Texas to stop making such embarrassing recommendations to the elected board.

Gail Lowe State Board of Education

Texas BoE Vote Update- Or Hijackers of the GoP Update

Apparently Dallas, Texas - what one would expect to be the den of the conservative block of Texas - is not so narrow minded after all. Consider the Board of Education vote according to the Dallas Morning News: All three Dallas-area board members – Republicans Geraldine Miller of Dallas and Pat Hardy of Weatherford, and Democrat Mavis Knight of Dallas – opposed the rule that would allow the curriculum a creationism foothold by purporting flaws in evolutionary theory. They cited the recommendations of a science review committee of teachers and academics, who contended that talking about "weaknesses" would undermine the proper teaching of Charles Darwin’s theory of how humans evolved from lower life forms. On the other hand, the central area (Lampasas to Ft Worth area) Texas Board of Education members and The Woodlands (Houston) area, which one would naturally expect to be more, let us say enlightened, seemed to have difficulty distinguishing fact from fantasy. It highly probably these people do not have a grasp of the issues. Perhaps they lack even a basic high school level education level biology accreditation, nor could give you a definition of simple terms like theory, hypothesis, observation, validation, corroboration, geology, or evidence. At least for now – enough outraged people called and said enough is enough. The vote was narrow.

The final vote is in MARCH!!! SO DO NOT GIVE UP!

Do we need to reinforce that our expectation for all subjects be relevant?

1) Math? We teach math? Not 2+2=5? What if there is a miracle? You aint got no time machine to prove otherwise? Maybe 6000 years ago when the Earth was made, the 2+2 did make 5?
2) English? What if my bible says I decide I do not prononce nor spel the sam az yu.
3) Home Schoolin? My youngins got their learnins from their bible. It all good and they aint need no social skills as they get thit from church. I dont want them confused with devil words and trickery.
4) Chemistry? Why not Alchemy? Lead into Gold? It is great in a recession!
5) All theories are incomplete!!! Therefore, all are worthless! Therefore, no Gravity!
6) What is the point of having a standard, a discipline, if it actually means - nothing? It is no longer a science at that point. It is would be like confusing Astrology with Astronomy. Which probably is actually a tad confusing to certain BoE seat warmers!

Maybe we need a new board? At least, we need to thank the ones in Dallas who cared enough to consider the definition of 'science'! For the others? Consider there are places in the world where your 'ah' perspective would be 'tolerated'. Of course, you will be living in the 5th century - but that is what you are after - right? Just do not make me do it. If you want that for your children, send them such a place and pay for it yourself. Let them reap the consequences of non reality.

Teach Them Science!

I just spoke with my Board of Education representative Gail Lowe and had to explain to her what a theory is. These people are responsible for the E in BoE in Texas. When we spoke and I expressed my opinion that I desired to keep science in the classroom, she took the approach that I am in the camp that evolution should be taught in schools.

Who made camps exactly? The Scopes Trials were quite a while ago. Inherit the Wind, was a great book and a decent movie. But that is history! Why are we re-visiting this topic today? I am not convinced the people responsible for the selection of our text books have an adequate understanding of the basic principal of science. Religion is not science. Considering, science requires a theory to be supported by evidence and this theory can be only be supported with evidence. This process is repeatable through experimentation by others, with supporting theories which do not stand by themselves. A theory is not monolithic entity. It is a framework, a continuum, and it is self correcting. Religion is faith. It is personal. One does not ask another person to validate another person’s faith. At least they should not. I had to make this point this point very clear.

Fact: There is not room for both in a science classroom. One is theory based. One is not. This is not opinion. You cannot test, measure, and replicate tests of others faith based observations.

Fact: Just because a given ‘theory’ is not ‘whole’ does not mean that the parts which are understood are in any way invalidated by the supportive arguments.

Fact: Science deals with what it can observe either directly or indirectly. No magical thinking is allowed.

I left the conversation with the idea that what we know today changes from what we will know tomorrow. We learn. We adapt. Science is humbling. I suggested if want to have religion in our schools, we should have religious electives. Dogma, on the other hand is stagnant. Did not we just get recently get around to apologizing to Galileo for his blasphemy about Jupiter? If you want to see how the GOP has been hijacked by the Christian right, visit the Discovery Institute. So much for limited government.

Yes – it has come to this. We are worse than Kansas, we are even worse than Louisiana. However, unlike these states, we set the example.

Visit the site: http://www.teachthemscience.org/