Posted on 02/27/2004 5:55:40 PM PST by Coleus
February 26, 2004
Darwinism to Face Scrutiny
by Sonja Swiatkiewicz, state issues analyst
Ohio and Minnesota have the opportunity to make a difference in how Darwinism is taught to schoolchildren.
Ohio made history in December 2002 when its state Board of Education approved changes to public school science standards requiring students to be tested on their understanding of evidence for and against Darwinism.
Just over a year later, Ohio again stands at a crossroads of sorts, while its school board seeks to establish a model curriculum to implement 2002's changes. Minnesota, likewise, has come to a place of decision — whether or not to follow in Ohio's footsteps in the teaching of Darwinism.
The Ohio school board voted 13-4 on Feb. 10 in a preliminary vote to accept "Set A" of the model science curriculum -- the curriculum that will be sent to each district to guide teachers in how the new science standards should be implemented in the classroom. "Set A" includes 42 individual lessons that deal with potentially "controversial" topics; nine of them (those slated for grade 10 life sciences) discuss evolutionary theory.
Only one of the 42, however, seeks to include the "critical analysis" of Darwinism that is now required to be taught — and that's where the rubber meets the road.
Fiercely protective pro-Darwinists are attempting to derail the new science standards before kids in the classroom ever reap the benefits of this dramatic change in policy. Critics have claimed that the "Critical Analysis of Evolution" lesson mandates the teaching of Intelligent Design.
In fact, the "Critical Analysis" lesson supports the new requirement that students be able to "describe how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory." Students will be taught that theories are tentative explanations that are subject to modification as continued experimentation demands; the differences between microevolution and macroevolution; and guided to examine the various lines of evidence for and against the theory of a common ancestry (macroevolution).
While the board had already indicated its support of "Set A" in its entirety, Darwinists are applying pressure to the board members to convince them to remove their support. A final, binding vote will be taken during the board's meeting March 8-9.
A few states away, Minnesota's Legislature is grappling with making initial changes to the state's science standards. Four members of the science standard writing committee have submitted a "minority" report, urging the Legislature to accept two standards that mirror Ohio's.
These two standards will lay the groundwork for Minnesota's schoolchildren to be taught critical analysis of evolution — which has been specifically encouraged by the No Child Left Behind Act conference report.
But first, the "minority report" must be accepted into the recommendations to be sent to the full House and Senate.
Those who support a balanced presentation of Darwinism, the evidence for and against macroevolution, must make their voices heard. The type of science education Ohio and Minnesota's kids receive is dependent on board members and legislators knowing concerned citizens care about the unbiased teaching of evolution.
TAKE ACTION
Ohio
Please contact the board members who voted in favor of the "Set A" curriculum to thank them for their support and encourage them to vote in favor of "Set A" on Mar. 8 or 9. Please contact them by March 5.
Richard E. Baker (Hollansburg), 937-548-2246
Virgil E. Brown, Jr. (Cleveland Heights), 216-851-3304, Virgil.Brown@ode.state.oh.us
Michael Cochran (Blacklick), 614-864-2338, ota@ohiotownships.org
Jim Craig (Canton), 330-492-5533, Jim.Craig@ode.state.oh.us
John W. Griffin (West Carrollton), P.O. Box 49201, West Carrollton, OH 45449-0201
Stephen M. Millett (Columbus), 614-424-5335
Deborah Owens Fink (Richfield), 330-972-8079, deb@uakron.edu
Emerson J. Ross, Jr. (Toledo), 419-248-8315
Jennifer L. Sheets (Pomeroy), 740-992-2151, Jennifer.Sheets@ode.state.oh.us
Jo Ann Thatcher (McDermott), 740-858-3300
James L. Turner (Cincinatti), 513-287-3232, jturner@cinergy.com
Sue Westendorf (Bowling Green), 419-352-2908, sue.westendo@ode.state.oh.us
Carl Wick (Centerville), 937-433-1352, carl.wick@ode.state.oh.us
Please politely urge the four board members who voted against "Set A" to reconsider and vote in support. Please contact them by Mar. 5.
Robin C. Hovis (Millersburg), 330-674-5000, Robin.Hovis@ode.state.oh.us
Cyrus B. Richardson, Jr. (Bethel), 513-734-6700, Cyrus.Richards@ode.state.oh.us
G.R. "Sam" Schloemer (Cincinnati), 513-821-4145, Sam.Schloemer@ode.state.oh.us
Jennifer Stewart (Zanesville), 740-452-4558, Jennifer.Stewart@ode.state.oh.us
Two members were absent for the Feb. 10 meeting, and should be politely contacted as well.
Virginia E. Jacobs (Lima), 419-999-4219, Virginia.Jacobs@ode.state.oh.us
Martha W. Wise (Avon) 440-934-4935, Martha.Wise@doe.state.oh.us
In addition, please contact Gov. Bob Taft and tell him you support the teaching of critical analysis of evolution. For contact information for Gov. Taft, visit our CitizenLink Action Center.
Minnesota
Please contact the chairpersons of the House and Senate Education Policy Committees, Rep. Barbara Sykora and Sen. Steve Kelley, and urge them to accept the "minority report."
In addition, please contact your own representative and senator and politely urge them to support the critical analysis of evolution when it comes to a vote.
Also, please contact Gov. Tim Pawlenty and urge his support for teaching the evidence for and against evolution. Contact information for Gov. Pawlenty is available through our CitizenLink Action Center.
With a position like you've espoused, I don't blame you.
Well said.
I agree, but what I'm interested in is the truth. If someone can show me convincingly that evolution is true, fine. If they can't, I won't believe it.
Check out the other thread too. Weve got creationists waving guns around in there.
Absolutely correct. But there's no justification for having unexplainable views, and then simultaneously expecting them to be forced into classrooms by law. If they are unexplainable, they belong in your church or your home.
Otherwise, why can't the Buddhists force their version of creation into the curriculum?
Thanks for the ping, Coleus, and the contact info.
I'll be busy on the phone next week.....
Not pointless, Joe.
The difference between Divine Purpose and chance is enormous, and the contrast between confidence in the knowledge that we were lovingly created by the Almighty God, or the hopelessness that results from thinking we descended from slimy algae couldn't be greater.
I submit that many of our country's problems......abortion, despair, meaningless lives..... are direct descendents of a purposefully Godless theory of our origins.
That's what needs to be taught as a theory, along with evolution which is a THEORY, taught as FACT.
In public schools, both should be taught, so kids no longer get atheism crammed down their throats under the guise of science.
When you want your views enforced by government at gunpoint, you certainly should have to explain them.
But that wasn't my point, which I'm sure you already know.
My point was the children who are taught that our origin was nothing but an accident of chance are far more likely to feel that their lives are without purpose and meaning.
If you look at literature, art, music in the 20th century you will see what was, IMO, the result of atheistic evolution.......meaninglessness.
I also believe the problem of abortion is an inevitable result of the lack of value placed on life due to evolution. Destruction of the weak by the strong.
Understanding that we are the special creation of a loving God changes your whole perspective, and understanding of the purpose of humanity.
Ah such tiny tiny thinking. What makes you think evolution is chance? Mankind has been domesticating canines for thousands of years, the chiwawa is evolved from the wild wolf was that chance? Of course not.
Also the bible specifically says God created Adam from the dust of the ground, the animals and plants were created in their kind but there's no real specifics there so evolution for plants and animals isn't denied by the bible because it's simply not mentioned. But Man, man was created specifically from the dust of the ground, we were not evolved from algie (as you put it).
Create a universe in a set state? That's like setting a billiard ball down before the pocket and tapping it into the hole. Take an infinite amount of mass and universe and explode it all to form the infinately large and the infinately small and along the way produce us, now you're talking about putting all the balls on the the pool table and breaking the set so the balls disintigrate into a cloud of dust leaving the word "cool" on the table.
God is so much more awesome than even the believers can even begin to understand :)
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.