[Vanity] Does this stuff belong in an 8th Grade Science Textbook? You tell me.

I know that this may be a long read, there's a lot of content here, but I think that many FReepers will find the information here interesting and disturbing. I will appreciate any help I can get with this situation.

My wife and I have been homeschooling our children since they started schooling. We have 5th, 6th, and 8th graders. Recently, we made the tough decision to enroll them in a local Charter School. In Arizona, a Charter School is a privately run, smaller, more focused public school. It provides parents with school choice and some competition between the schools. Although, right now, the Charter Schools are the red-headed step children and are regularly passed over in funding, resources, etc. in favor of the megaschools. We favored the small school environment and found a Charter School that we thought met our minimum standards. We went into this with our eyes open and met with the Principal and the School Director and asked many specific questions related to policies, teachers, environment, curriculum, underlying philosophy, discipline, etc. We knew that we were going to have to unteach our children some of the garbage that they would inherently be taught in any sort of public school and we were prepared to do that.

They've been in the school less than a month and we've already run into problems with what is being taught and what we were told they would be taught. We've dealt with some, but the biggest one came up last night.

My 8th grader is not allowed to bring her Science textbook home. The reason is that the Science teacher purchased the textbooks with his own money and doesn't want any to be lost or defaced. In fact, there's not enough books to go around so some students must double up on a textbook. I understand this, to some extent, and actually see a benefit with my daughter having to take copious notes to keep up. That note-taking skill will serve her well later on.

We help our children every night with their homework. At this time, if you look at raw man hours, we probably spend more time helping them with their homework now than we spent teaching them and helping them with their homework when we were homeschooling, but I digress. Anyway, my 8th grader had some questions about an essay that she was assigned to write for her science class. She started reading off some things that were supposed to be about human ecology and said that she was supposed to write why she agreed or disagreed with each statement. Now, in what science class do you write why you agree or disagree with the First Law of Thermodynamics? In the 8th grade?!

The book is called "Global Science" and it is the 3rd Edition published by Kendall/Hunt in 1991 and authored by John W. Christensen." I can find no other science books authored by this person.

Many of those "laws and principles" had little to do with science, were value statements, and some were plainly offensive. But, whether one agrees or disagrees with the philosophy behind some of these statements, many don't belong in a science book. This piqued my interest and I read through the "laws and principles" thoroughly and then Googled them.

These are the "laws and principles" that are printed in this textbook. I quote them here so that you can read them and I enthusiastically invite comment about them:

There is no reference in the book to where this crap came from. Disturbing is the fact that bizarre value statements are mingled with scientific principles like the Laws of Thermodynamics. When I Googled, I could not find any legitimate science sites, papers, or articles which contained this set of principles or anything close to them. What I did find was that every site that had this set or a slightly reworded set were Pagan and Witchcraft sites. No, really. I'm not looking for Satanists under every bed or in every closet, but this is what I found and it surprised me.

Here's a list of some of the websites which contain this set of principles or slightly reworded versions:

The only reference I could find, and I found it on several of the sites, was to something called "Ecomagic - Book of shadows" and it showed that this set of principles was on Page 616 of that book. What does "Ecomagic" have to do with science? When I compare what was printed in the science book with the reworded versions found on the websites, it appeared to me that what was in the science book was simply a cleaned up version, with some grammatical fixes, of what was published in Pagan literature and published online. Now, of course, I need to know which was published first. The book was published in 1991 and had earlier editions. Did the Pagan sites get the statements from this "science" book, or did the "science" book AND the Pagan sites get the list of principles from some other source that I can't find? Maybe (probably) this is a distraction, but I think it is noteworthy and disturbing.

These principles are not just included in a sidebar or appendix. No, instead they are at the end of Chapter 1 and they are prefaced with this comment:

The author makes it clear right here that these so-called "principles" are going to pervade the "science" text and that the goal of the text is not to teach science, but to ensure that the students accepts these "principles".

This makes it abundantly clear what the goals of the "science" text are. By mingling science (a "tool at our disposal") with a collection of socialistic, radical environmentalist, and zero-population growth garbage, as long as student has the "proper attitude", will mold them to have the mindset that the author intends. The goal is not to provide the student with an understanding of a specific science because, as the author states, "this is not just another science course."

Chapter 3 is all about Growth and Population. In fact, population problems appear throughout the entire text. The references used are typically the Ehrlich's disproven zero-population junk science philosophy. References also come from the Club of Rome's 1971 "Limits to Growth" study which is more zero-population, one-worlder garbage. Chapter 3 is quite offensive as it compares humans to bacteria, discusses abortion as an acceptable form of population control, and even includes diagrams of several birth control methods and devices. So offensive was this chapter that the original school who used this book removed the most offensive 10 pages. I found out about that content while using Google and reading a fairly positive review of the book and that content. I spoke to the Director of my children's school and he knew nothing about the book, its contents, and the excised portion.

Throughout the book are several political cartoons. One shows an Earth covered with people, so many so that they are hanging on the bottom and some are tumbling off the bottom into space. Others depict a cowboy, an indian, and a dead buffalo and it mocks the evil and stupid cowboy for wanting to slaughter more buffalo. Another shows a baby with a globe for a head labeled "population" with a big mouth and a farmer bringing food to the baby. Each progressive frame shows the baby's head and mouth growing larger, the farmer's bushel of food also growing larger, then finally the farmer has aged, the bushel is empty, and it appears the huge mouth is going to swallow the farmer who has stumbled to the ground. Another cartoon shows factories with stacks belching smoke, denuded trees, clouded skies, pipes spewing pollution into a waterway, and dead animals around it. The evil suit-wearing capitalist has his arm around his son and is captioned as saying, "Someday, my boy, this will all be yours." Pure propaganda.

Further propaganda found in the book includes NASA images of the so-called "ozone hole" over the South Pole. The images are displayed to make the student believe that the "hole", which is in fact just a natural period thinning, is there at all times. It makes no mention of the natural processes (volcanic activity, cold season weather differentials, solar cycles) that actually cause the thinning. Another example, in the chapter called "Food, Agriculture, and Population Interactions" shows a shrouded women with an emaciated dead-looking naked infant in her lap. The caption says, "Ten million children around the world live like this." This is science?

In the same chapter that contained the starved baby photo, is the section on "Global Cooperation." And I quote:

This stuff is not just hidden in the text of the chapters, but is included in the exercises at the end of each chapter and likely will be on the tests. The students are still in chapter 1 and the teacher has already assigned an essay on one of the most offense portions of the book.

The teacher of this class is an outspoken atheist. The essay assignment for students to write how they agree or disagree with the principles and laws in the 1st chapter appears to be an attempt for the students to expose their immature (they're 8th graders) disagreements with the statements so that the teacher can categorize the students, soften them up by openly or subtly attacking their disagreements or beliefs, and/or by opening then up to criticism from their peers.

I have made an appointment with the school's director to discuss these matters. I'm looking for further information from those who would like to comment on the book and its content. As you can see, I've already formed a strong basis for my arguments that I will use with the school's director and the science teacher. I would appreciate further input to help strengthen those arguments or to develop new ones to ensure that this problem is promptly corrected.

UPDATE: My wife and I visited the school in order to observe science class and the oral presentations which were to give the students' opinions on the "laws and principles" in the book.

We checked in at the office. Signed in and got a nametag to visit the classroom. The Principal said he would escort us to the classroom. On the way, he said that he had discussed the matter with the teacher this morning.

Another class was in session (we got there a minute early). We waited outside at a table and the Principal returned to his office. Class ended and the teacher came out and sat down. He said he had to be frank with us. He said we must get permission from him to visit his class (not true). He said not to presume to interfere in class, with his curriculum, or to "upset the equilibrium". He was angry, his hands were shaking, and he was very confrontational. We had not said a word at this point. We simply sat at the table while flipping through our notes and holding the well-tagged textbook.

We told him that the Principal had escorted us and that the Director was also aware that we were there to observe. The teacher angrily got up and said "we'll talk to him" and walked toward the administration office.

We followed. He said a few things to us on the way. We expressed that a real science book should be used instead of the one he was using.

We stepped into the office but the Principal was busy with someone else. A few things were said in the office. He said to step outside.

Outside he was angry, we were calm. He said to not presume that we can exert control on curriculum or his classroom. He said "I won't let you do this" and if we continue on this course, there would be "consequences". I asked if this was a threat and to what consequences was he referring. My wife asked if he intended to punish our daughter or give here a bad grade. He backed off a bit.

He said that textbook was science, a holistic approach. That he used multiple sources.

He said idealogy has no place in classroom, Christian or otherwise. I said, then that book has no place in your classroom as it is full of idealogy and opinions. I said that he is a science teacher and that he should know the difference between science and opinion.

He said he hasn't had any other parents complain. I said, "not yet. But you may see more."
I mentioned that we were keeping this situation at the school level now but more people may become aware of it. He said, "so now you're threatening me." I said no, that there are others becoming aware of the issue and they may show more interest in the days to come. He said to "go for it."

Discussion turned to the "principles" in the book. I turned to the page and told him that the division of them into scientific principles and opinion was not something I made up. That all future editions of the book correctly divided them into 2 categories under the headings "scientific principles" and "value statements". That the author and publisher admit it was mostly opinion. He said he does not allow opinion or ideaology to be taught in classroom, but would not censure opinion from the students. I said the book was full of opinion. As an example, I mentioned the paragraph promoting "redistribution of wealth" was opinion and didn't belong in a science book.

He defended the textbook again as a good science book. I showed him that the previous and only other school that used it only used for one year, had to cut out 10 pages, and then they dumped it.

I said there were real science books purchased. My wife said that he should be using the approved curriculum. We've looked at the new science books and they're real science. My wife said she's never seen anything like this, especially in a science book. He started yelling at her. I said that he does not need to yell. He immediately stopped and commanded, "stay here!"

He angrily walked into the office, straight to the Principal, interrupting whatever meeting he was having.

We walked in and waited by the secretary's desk.

He started yelling in the Principal's office. He said we were going to disrupt. He said we obviously had an agenda. Said we can't do this. That it goes both ways now and his "dander was up". We could not hear what the Principal told him, but we were told later that he had to allow us into the classroom.

He came back out and he said we could attend today. We walked quietly to class. He mentioned an upcoming "diversity and tolerance" assembly on Thursday that discusses this issue. He said that he though that we should attend. I thanked him for letting us know and stated that we may, in fact, attend.

After class was over, he immediately got up and said he would accompany us to the office.

As we walked he said that he believed that we could not communicate. I said that it was not a personal issue, but an issue with the specific book. He said that he would not tolerate an attack on his professionalism and curriculum from us. That he would not tolerate us exerting control over his classroom. That he would not allow us to upset the equilibrium in the classroom.

He said that he thought I was transcribing everything in the classroom so that I could launch another attack. He was upset that I had borrowed the textbook and not given it back (I had said a few days when I borrowed it and I was bringing it back today which was a few days) and that I had put tabs all over it. That I did not tell him that I was going to use it to "attack" him was unacceptable. He was visibly angry at this time. He said that he knew we were going to attack

He insisted that he should not have been the last to know that we were coming into his classroom. He said that Americans are confrontational and legalistic and that, at this point, anything we discuss may become a legal issue and that he was not sure that he could even talk to us anymore. We assured him that was not our intent.

He said that when we come into his classroom, that it sends a message. That when we question the curriculum, we're questioning his professionalism. He then said that I was the one who brought up the issue of threats.

I corrected him and quoted precisely what he had said in our previous conversation. That he had first said to me that if we continued on our current course, "that there would be consequences." He is the one who made threats, not me.

I reasserted that our argument was not with him, his credentials, or his teaching methods. I said that he should not take everything so personally, that the issue was not directly with him. I said that we had heard good things about what a good and intelligent teacher he was and that he worked hard and was a great contributor to the school. I said our issue was with the specific book, not with him.

He said that he has had a hard time even staying at the school. That before last month they didn't even have textbooks. (They were using a computer-based curriculum with all textbook available only on the computers in the classrooms and all assignments submitted on the computers)

I said that I was aware that he had to purchase the textbooks out of his own money and that he got them at a used textbook store. And that the entire school had recently gone through massive changes after the firing of their incompetent director. That I understood and appreciated what was going on in the school at this time.

He said that he didn't like the books that had been purchased for his science classes. He said that "they" had "sent over" only one of each of the books (they have more than enough in the room where they store the textbooks). He said he uses several books and draws on all of them for his science class and that after the upcoming winter break, that they would "probably" be moving into another book. He just liked chapter 1 for its information about tectonic plates and global changes. I reminded him that it was also chapter 1 that contained the "laws and principles" that were mostly opinion.

He said that he had had to put up with alot at the school and that this situation today was probably the "straw that broke the camel's back." He mentioned that my wife was an experienced teacher as a homeschooler and that since we have so much knowledge about this issue, that we should tell him how to run his classroom. That we should just take over his science class and pick his curriculum for him. He was quite angry at this point, at times yelling in my face from 6 inches away. I remained absolutely non-confrontational and continued to apply what little "verbal judo" I knew, which was to grow quieter and assume a meeker posture the more angry or threatening that someone else became while the content of my statements came from a position of strength.

He stormed into the Principal's office at this point and we followed.

We sat down with the Principal as the teacher went off to find an additional chair. We whispered a few things to the principal that despite the teacher's angry confrontation with us, that we were fine and that he had no need to fear us getting angry. The intent was to display that the teacher as out of control and unable to contain his anger which was irrational in the first place. I think that we succeeded at that.

We rehashed a number of issues that we'd already gone over and over. The teacher did not want us in the classroom again, the principal reminded him that it was a public school and that we could go into whatever classroom we wanted and observe. The teacher finally grew angry about the textbook and said that he didn't want to see my well-tagged copy of the textbook ever again and that I could keep it and do with it hatever I wanted. I said that I had brought it to the school to give to the Principal so that he could review the pages I had marked and give it back to the teacher. The teacher then said that while he recognized the Principal in his chain of command, he did not recognize us. We reminded him that we were parents of one of his students, that we were also taxpayers and that the school was a public school. Therefore, we are, in fact, in his chain of command. He then said that he felt that this was turning into a legal issue and that he felt that he could no longer have a direct conversation with us as parents. The Principal said that he felt that we were not looking for a legal battle (he was right) and that the teacher should not worry about that.

The teacher then reminded us about the "tolerance and diversity" assembly on Thursday and again recommended that we attend. The teacher then told us to talk to the Principal and that he would return for a private discussion with the Principal later.

We had a long and very friendly conversation with the Principal. He tried too hard to please us, but I could not get any solid guarantees of action concerning the book. The Principal is also a science teacher and he said he has no qualms, if it comes to it, to take over the science classes for the 8th, 9th, and 10th grades and that he would use the approved and purchased curriculum. He said on Friday that the book would be out of the classroom this week. Now, he revised that to say that the correct science book would be "in the classroom" on Thursday. However, he did not say that the teacher would even use the book or if he would stop using the offensive book in question.

We asked to see a copy of the teacher's approved lesson plan. The Principal said that the teacher had submitted one, but that he was in the process of having the teacher make a number of significant changes. So, we didn't get a copy.

He spent most of his time agreeing with us, but I think he was just trying to appease us just like he's probably working now to appease the teacher. I don't think he wants to make a decision and unrealistically wants to make everyone happy - which is not achievable. He gave us some bad information about the policies at the local mega-middle school. My wife checked right after (called the administrator) and found that his information was wrong.

We had a copy of the state standards for science and showed him that little of the information in the offending science book meets any of the state testing requirements.

He told us that the teacher has had a hard life and that he's spent much of his teaching career teaching in China. That he's come a long way since the beginning of the year and that his teaching style has changed considerably in order to accomodate American students. He was accustomed to the style of China where he had nearly total control of his classroom and no one, especially not a parent, questioned him. I mentioned that he likely picked up on China's false belief that children were property of the state. I stated that in America we believe the exact opposite.

The Principal wants us to believe that he's working on the issue within his limitations. We've verified these limitations and they do exist. We are willing to work with the Principal as long as we see results. First, the textbook must not be used for 8th grade science anymore. Second, it should be removed from 9th and 10th grade as soon as alternate textbooks are available which are appropriate for those grades. Since the teacher has so many other textbooks in the classroom, he has more than enough to choose from to replace the offensive textbook. (We haven't reviewed them yet, but we plan to.)

We're going to wait and see what happens next. My wife will be attending the science class again tomorrow when my daughter will probably give her oral presentation. They know that we are not going away and we know how much pain it caused the teacher to have us all over him today. Good. If he wants that pain to ever go away, he's going to have to admit to the problems with the book and get rid of it.

I later emailed the Principal the links to the objective reviews of the textbook which were done by The Textbook League. I excerpted portions which explained that the books were garbage and why. He wrote back and said that he appreciated the information.

Here's an excerpt from the book, Chapter 11, "The Economics of Resources and Environment" (Remember, this is supposedly a science book.)

11.14 The Economic Role of the Goverment.

Every human system has some inherent flaws. The free market system is no exception. Any system run by individuals, some of whom are very selfish, can create problems. Thus informed citizens have encouraged their governments to become involved in the economy and to interfere with and/or manipulate the free market. The government's role in our economy is one of great political and philosophical controversy. Like any other program of human creation, goverment intervention in our economic system has had varying degrees of success.

Our government has been given five main economic functions, with the goals of lessining the injustices and improving the benefits of the free market system:

1. To ensure economic stability.
For businesses to function, contracts must be firm. Through its legislative powers, governments can establish rules for property ownership, standards for weights and measures, money standards and policy, and rules for legal agreements between parties.
2. To promote and maintain competitive markets.
Competition is necessary for the free market to function efficiently. New techniques of production and new products drive out-moded practices out of existence. Price increades conserve scarce goods and make sure they are used wisely.
Unfortunately, it is possible to stifle competition and prevent free market forces from functioning. Firms can band together and control supply and demand. Supply can be restricted and then higher prices obtained. To prevent this, governments can pass and enforce anti-trust laws.
3. To change the distribution of resources in order to provide for public wants and needs.
As we mentioned before, the costs of both preventing pollution and pollution cleanup are not automatically included in the price of goods. To prevent innocent parties from having to pay for the pollution of others, goverments have intervened. They may either force a supplier to eliminate or reduce a problem, or they may force someone to pay for the cleanup. The net result is that the cost of the good in question rises to reflect its true cost.

In other cases, the entire public may be taxed to provide goods and services that the market system would not provide equally to the entire population. For example, people want police protection, roads, schools, immunizations, and other goods and services. If a majority believes that everyone is entitled to these things, governments supply them.

4. To promote fairness (equity) through the redistribution of income and wealth.
So often we hear: "The rich get richer and the poor get poorer." It is true that to make money you generally have money to invest. Because of this, those who are wealthy have a distinct advantage over those who are not. Not only do the poor find it difficult to work up the ladder of usccess, they have trouble saving for their old age, paying for emergencies, and providing opportunites for their children. To remedy some of this, our government provides such things as Social Security, Medicare, disaster relief, education assistance, and so on. Further the majority of our federal government's expenditures are financed with a progressive income tax. This means that those with higher incomes pay proportionately more in taxes.

Here are some questions from the end of the chapter:

18. What factor make the market system work? (Their error, not mine.)

19. List two features of the market system.

20. List five problems with the market system.

21. List five functions most governments are asked to perform in order to remedy problems that the market system cannot solve on its own.

22. Contrast how economists and scientists view resources.

23. Choose a position for or against gasoline rationing in the United States.

That's just a taste of what is in this book. I may even scan some of the stuff in and post it online for everyone to see. Again, this is supposed to be a science book and it is being taught as "science" by the "science" teacher during "science" class. It isn't science. Clearly, it is political propaganda pretending to be science. Just because someone puts "science" on the book's cover, does not make it science.

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.