Comments on: The State of State Science Standards https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/ Sun, 05 Feb 2012 22:46:20 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 By: Chris Winter https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490815 Sun, 05 Feb 2012 22:46:20 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490815 In The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Diane Ravitch writes mostly about No Child Left Behind and its effects on schools. But early on in the book she discusses the movement to get curriculum standards written by the states.

According to her, the controversy that developed had a chilling effect, and subsequently what most of the states produced was vague to the point of uselessness.

Judging by the content of this thread, that situation has improved considerably.

]]> By: Chris Winter https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490814 Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:54:07 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490814 By the way, NIBMSEITLOE is an acronym because it is pronounceable. If you can pronounce “Sadeq Gotbsadeh” you can pronounce NIBMSEITLOE.

“Where have you gone, Sadeq Gotbsadeh? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you. Woo woo woo.”

Please excuse the digression.

]]> By: Chris Winter https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490813 Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:36:52 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490813 For those whose acronym fu is just developing:

NIBMSEITLOE = “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.”

]]> By: anon https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490812 Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:40:20 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490812 less schools more war!

]]> By: Greg Laden https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490811 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 17:56:13 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490811 Lynn, you touch on an interesting point.

A set of standards for life science could say “Use inquiry based learning and other appropriate techniques to cover biology as a field of study unified by Evolutionary Theory, and do so with reference to important concepts for healthy and respectful living and informed citizenship” and be done with it! Not telling teachers HOW to do that is not necessary if teachers know hot to do this.

IOW, the nature of the standards might vary across states in the way in which the role of the standards is seen in the system of education.

Sorry for the moderation. I have no idea why some comments are put in the moderation bin, plus for some reason where comments get put has changed and I sometimes forget to look there!

]]> By: Lynn Wilhelm https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490810 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:27:56 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490810 Hey Greg, one of my comments seems to be in moderation. Is that new? Can you rescue it?
Thanks

]]> By: Human Ape https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490809 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 16:05:19 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490809 “Insisting that the word “evolution” appear in the state standards for life science is not an issue of pragmatism. The simple truth of the matter is that evolution is central to life science, and, for pragmatic reasons, if you leave the word out it will not be taught at all in many science classrooms. If it requires a fight to get the word in the standards, then that’s all there is to it.”

My state, Florida, adopted new science standards in 2008. For the first time in Florida’s history our standards have the word evolution in it, and also the standards make evolution one of the big ideas of science. When the public was asked for their input, preachers, politicians, school board members, and other professional idiots complained about the word evolution, as if there is something wrong with teaching the foundation of biology in a biology classroom. Thanks to relentless ridicule the uneducated morons lost and the standards were approved with virtually no changes.

I was expecting our new standards would get an A from Fordham but we got a D. The good news was they wrote “Evolution is very well covered.” and “Even human evolution is treated — a rarity in state science standards.”

Human evolution is a rarity in state science standards. This is disgraceful. There can be no other scientific fact more interesting than how our species developed. If a student thought science was boring, tedious, and not interesting, he or she might fall in love with science if human evolution was taught. But most states don’t bother to mention it in their standards.

I’m interested in this problem because despite being a student at one of the best high schools in America, I never heard the word evolution mentioned in my biology class. This was in 1964/1965 and it seems like there’s been very little progress in the past 47 years. Most students are still being cheated like I was.

The only possible solution I can think of is the complete eradication of the Christian death cult from this country, a virtually impossible but very worthy goal.

]]> By: Greg Laden https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490808 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:39:15 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490808 Well, it sounds like you’ve got it pretty bad. I wonder if it would have been possible, back channel-wise, to have gotten “evolution” in the standards along with “Intelligent Design” as a compromise. Then, later, after the standards are set (and usually there is a reigning statute, yes, saying when they can be changed?) a moderately simple trip to the Tenth Federal District Court to get the ID part removed surgically.

Congratulations on your award, by the way.

]]> By: vhutchison https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490807 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:21:45 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490807 Greg: Just to answer your question: The new Oklahoma teaching standards were just adopted within the last few months. However, the same problems obtained several years ago when the standards were revised. Part of the problem now is the state Superintendent of Education, an ultra-conservative Republican whose only experience was in starting two charter schools. Many believe that she is pushing the far-right anti public education agenda. This is the reddest of all states – every county voted for McCain, every elected state official is Republican and the Legislature is now dominated in both houses by Republicans, many newer ones are of the extreme tea party types. This has not been easy for those with any liberal positions!

]]> By: Greg Laden https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490806 Wed, 01 Feb 2012 04:59:46 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/31/the-state-of-state-science-sta/#comment-490806 I have done my share of grassroots lobbying, but not in Oklahoma. It sounds like it is pretty bad there.

When did this particular bit of negotiation happen? When were the current science standards (sans the word “evolution”) worked out?

I remember a big to-do in OK in or around 2000 or 2001. If that is what we are talking about, then I can see why this would have been the case. Kitzmiller was decided in 2005.

Subsequent to Kitzmiller the situation you describe would be very difficult to imagine. Before it, it was happening everywhere.

]]>