Supporting Science Education

I am not really sure what the point of this blog entry is....

What is the name of the book put out by the NAS?

What exactly are they claiming the danger is?

Never mind, I'll go find it for myself....

Perhaps this will help other readers...

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11876

"In this sense, science and religion are separate and address aspects of

human understanding in different ways. Attempts to pit science and religion

against each other create controversy where none needs to exist." (Page 12)

I like that, a very reasonable statement…

"Science and technology are so pervasive in modern society that students

increasingly need a sound education in the core concepts, applications, and

implications of science. Because evolution has and will continue to serve as a

critical foundation of the biomedical and life sciences, helping students learn

about and understand the scientific evidence, mechanisms, and implications of

evolution are fundamental to a high-quality science education.

Science and religion are different ways of understanding. Needlessly placing

them in opposition reduces the potential of both to contribute to a better future." (Page 47)

I also like that, another very reasonable statement.

I am not so sure that the blog entry which emphasizes "the danger" (ooooh scary) is so representative of the actual book… They do make it clear that they feel that public school education should be based on evolution, and that evolution is well established science and does a fine job of describing biological diversity.

What the publication does not do is suggest that "producing engineers who can compete in global science and technology research and development" requires that religious belief be abandoned, only that evolutionary biology be firmly understood.

Again, I think the OP leaves much to be desired...

I guess I am just old fashioned, but I don't see that science and religion cant co-exist in a school setting. I also see no real need to teach religion in a public classroom; that was what Sunday Schools and Churches used to be do. Personally though I am of the opinion that evolutionary theory is grossly overblown. There are numerous unexplainable holes in the theory of evolution (eg; inversions of the fossil record); that makes me nervous and I think it should make any thinking scientist nervous. I dont want to start a controversy here, but I dont believe that teachers (given the influence teachers have on the minds of young students) should enforce the acceptance of evolutionary theory on the students and say "Here it is it's undisputed fact" when they only provide one side of the argument. I'm not saying they should teach creationism or intelligent design or anything else of a religious nature, but they should be required to present all the data (those that support evolution and those that suggest it may not be entirely accurate in the pronouncements manywould draw from the theory..

Very well put!!

If they want religion out of the schools under what ever guise, they need to replace it with classes on ethics and morals. That is something our leaders seem to role model just the opposite. The vacuum in this area leaves our students with the roll model of "if you can get away with it that's ok". Nothing about long term ramifications to themselves or our culture.

How else can we bolster and strengthen science education and critical analysis in our classrooms?

Easy, let the Teachers teach the reality, not the single sided non controversy, because proper discernment of controversy is real world analysis. Of course then students will then recognize bad political thinking and fuzzy BS statements by the press and others.

The article is fuzzy short term thinking and has a vague bias I don't quite make out. Maybe a personal frustration or conviction.

My analysis

Brad

"Ethics and morals" exist outside of religion, there is no vacuum.

In my opinion, parents are responsible for teaching their children "ethics and morals", are they not? At least I wouldn't trust a stranger to raise my children.

Daniel

Most families are 2 parents working or only a single parent working. That's not even the dysfunctional families. Schools raises most of the kids. Walk into any major business and watch the politics, infighting, BS. Manners yes, morels, ethics?

Don't get me wrong I'm not pro church as it stands, because they don't even read the scriptures in the context they were written in. (another can of worms).

Skip one or two generations and you lose the family values and start over with what an individual can figure out. About the time they get it down they may get a chance to teach their grand kids.

Do I trust the state to teach morels and ethics? Not! Crooks and Politicians are interchangeable. Even if the politician is not a crook per se they have to turn a blind eye to ignore the crimes going on. I had friends that worked as congressional aids. Monica was the norm not the exception. May be different now but I doubt it.

I grew up in a upper middle class neighborhood and their was lots of vacuum there. Lower class neighborhoods had even more vacuum.

Or maybe some one can tell me why the U.S. has more people in prison than the rest of the world? Conspiracy? I don't think so. I think it is a lack of good roll models and piss poor training of our children as a whole. The Gov. is pro active not pre active, just not in their best interests to do so.

Opinion, yes backed by to much experience.

Brad

Your right that parents should teach their children ethics and morals. As a society we all have the responsibility to instill upon our future generations ethics and morals.

As i see it now we as a society are lacking in this regard. As there is a proportion of our children that are not being taught ethics and morals by their parents. Some of that is due to work load of the parents, the lack of a parent themselves to teach them or indifference to their child's well being. What ever the reason what they are being taught is to be gangsters and hoods.

A teacher may be a stranger to you only because you allow it. To your child they are not stranger. Our children have contact with them 6 to 8 hrs a day just about every day until they become an adult. Think it would all so be very hard to teach a history class with out some discussion about ethics and morals.

"At least I wouldn't trust a stranger to raise my children."

With this statement it tells me of your concern for your children's well being. As a society they are all our children and find no fault in any one helping to teach them ethics and moral as long as what they teach reflects on those of the society.