Posted on 11/17/2005 5:26:06 AM PST by truthfinder9
The New York Times report that Kansas state has redefined science is in fact false and the reporting misleads the public in regards to how science is defined by most states across the country.
In a Science Times article echoing other mainstream media's misreports, the New York Times today reports that Kansas has "redefined science," stating:
In the course of revising the state's science standards to include criticism of evolution, the board promulgated a new definition of science itself.This is not accurate, the state did not adopt a "new definition of science." In fact, the standard now in place in Kansas realigns the state with all other states in the nation that define science in their standards.
Kansas reinstated a traditional definition of science which reads: "Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory-building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena." This is nearly identical to the definition of science adhered to in 40 states across the country (nine states do not define science at all). Kansas is the only state that did not have a traditional definition of science.
In May of this year Discovery Institute issued a study examining the definitions of science used by all states in the nation which found that:
The definition of science ... is fully consistent with definitions used by all other states in the U.S. By contrast, the definition of science currently used in the Kansas standards ... is idiosyncratic and out of step with current educational practice.
The Discovery Institute study was conducted by biologist, Dr. Jonathan Wells, a senior fellow with the Institute's Center for Science & Culture, and later sent to the Kansas State Board of Education. The complete text of the study is published below so that readers can see for themselves what the definitions of science are like in all states.
Definitions of Science in State Standards
Research by Jonathan Wells, Ph.D
Summary
The definition of science proposed in the Minority Report [note: the minority report is what the Kansas state board of education adopted as its new science standards] is fully consistent with definitions used by all other states in the U.S. By contrast, the definition of science currently used in the Kansas standards and defended by the Majority is idiosyncratic and out of step with current educational practice.
Reviewers Dennison and Miller claim that the Minority Report proposes a radical re-definition of science. Yet a comprehensive survey of state science standards (attached below) shows that all other states in the union that define science in their standards define it in a way similar to the Minority.
Dennison and Miller, along with reviewers Heppert and Theobald, also claim that the revised definition would open the door to supernatural explanations in science. This is simply false: No one is proposing that supernatural explanations should be included in science.
The definition of science in the current Kansas science standards is unlike any other in the U.S. By defining science first and foremost as "seeking natural explanations," the current standards subtly shift the emphasis in science education from the investigative process to the end result. This shift is out of step with modern science education, which gives priority to the activity of formulating and testing hypotheses. The Minority's definition is consistent with science as an open-ended inquiry that follows the evidence wherever it leads. The Majority's definition, by contrast, shortcircuits this process of inquiry and encourages premature answers to scientific questions -- the sort of "just-so stories" criticized by scientists such as Stephen Jay Gould.
The only other state in the U.S. that explicitly limits science to naturalistic explanations is Massachusetts. In the Massachusetts science standards, however, this limitation comes at the end of a detailed description of the scientific enterprise that begins by defining science more generally as "attempts to give good accounts of the patterns in nature." Only Kansas currently defines science primarily as "seeking natural explanations." As the comprehensive survey attached below shows, the Minority's proposed revision would bring the Kansas science standards back into the mainstream of the U.S. science education community.
A Comprehensive Survey of State Science Standards
Of the fifty states, nine include no definition of science or explicit description of scientific inquiry in standards accessible through the Internet. The standards of forty states include a definition of science or explicit description of scientific inquiry that is consistent with the one proposed in the Minority Report. Only Kansas defines science as "seeking natural explanations."
Here is a sampler of science definitions used by other states:
Arizona: "Science is a process of gathering and evaluating information, looking for patterns, and then devising and testing possible explanations."
Arkansas: "Science is a way of knowing that is characterized by empirical criteria, logical argument, and skeptical review."
Connecticut: "Scientific inquiry is a thoughtful and coordinated attempt to search out, describe, explain and predict natural phenomena."
Idaho: "Science is a human endeavor that seeks to understand the universe by observation, experimentation, and rational interpretation of observations."
Louisiana: "Science is a way of thinking and a system of knowledge that uses reason, observation, experimentation, and imagination."
Montana: "Science is an inquiry process used to investigate natural phenomena, resulting in the formation of theories verified by direct observations."
Nevada: "Scientific inquiry is the process by which humans systematically examine the natural world."
New Hampshire: "Science is, above all, a problem-solving activity that seeks answers to questions by collecting and analyzing data in an attempt to offer a rational explanation of naturally-occurring events."
Ohio: "Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation, based on observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, and theory building, which leads to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena."
South Dakota: "Science is a process of gathering and evaluating information, looking for patterns, and then devising and testing possible explanations."
Utah: "Science is a way of knowing, a process for gaining knowledge and understanding of the natural world."
Well of course the NYTs rats lie at the drop
of a beret, to protect their souless socialist
movement to rip the human spirit out of all
americans.
NYT lied? Can it be? What's this world coming to?
Gimmi a break!
Kansas did, indeed redefine science.
Here's the original:
"Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us."
And here's the new version:
"Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observations, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena."
That is called a change. The new version is different from the old version. The new version does not specify natural explanations.
Junior, archival ping.
Basically what happens when "educators" get anywhere near science.
At least most of the others do not have a malicious intent. The Kansas definion was changed specifically to allow ID.
Actually, I was taught the latter definition, over..
well lets just say "over 25 years" ago...and leave it
at that. In fact that was the way i was taught it, in
both a private and a public school. They used to call
it 'Scientific Method'...
Jonathan Wells is a Butt buddy of the Reverand Moon.
Pardon... Reverend Moon
Interesting that Kansas would like to defend ID as science, even though it partakes of none of the activities listed in the various state definitions.
Not one hypothesis or test or piece of new data has originated with the ID movement.
You do realize, I hope, that a word for word presaging on the Kansas rewrite is highly unlikely.
Do you have a written source to back up your memory?
ID is science, evolution is religion and a completely different definition is not a changed defintion.
Wonderland.
'Fraid not...that *was* a *long* time ago for me..
But i have no doubt that a search for the term
'Scientific Method' would result in some
corroborating info.
Nope, not scientific method.
That version misses the basic point of the answers needing to refer to the natural world.
That's one reason I doubt your memory.
At any rate, it's not the definition at the beginning of the standards that counts. It's the bogus undermining of evidence in the details. The assertion that the fossil record does not support evolution -- something denied by ID advocates Behe and Denton.
You're right..there's a lot of stuff besides the new definiton that is dishonest and just plain wrong and definitely put there with an agenda
CrevoSci threads for the past week: CrevoSci Thread Count, 2005 YTD: 1111 On This Date in CrevoSci History Longest CrevoSci Thread Ever 2002-12-11 Evolution Disclaimer Supported (6,880 replies) Lost CrevoSci Battlefields (Pulled or Locked Threads) CrevoSci Warrior Freepdays for the month of November:
|
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
