Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
16% of US science teachers are creationists
Sunday, June 17, 2012 6:38 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:Despite a court-ordered ban on the teaching of creationism in US schools, about one in eight high-school biology teachers still teach it as valid science, a survey reveals. And, although almost all teachers also taught evolution, those with less training in science - and especially evolutionary biology - tend to devote less class time to Darwinian principles. US courts have repeatedly decreed that creationism and intelligent design are religion, not science, and have no place in school science classrooms. But no matter what courts and school boards decree, it is up to teachers to put the curriculum into practice. "Ultimately, they are the ones who carry it out," says Michael Berkman, a political scientist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park. But what teachers actually teach about evolution and creationism in their classrooms is a bit of a grey area, so Berkman and his colleagues decided to conduct the first-ever national survey on the subject. 'Not shocking' The researchers polled a random sample of nearly 2000 high-school science teachers across the US in 2007. Of the 939 who responded, 2% said they did not cover evolution at all, with the majority spending between 3 and 10 classroom hours on the subject. However, a quarter of the teachers also reported spending at least some time teaching about creationism or intelligent design. Of these, 48% - about 12.5% of the total survey - said they taught it as a "valid, scientific alternative to Darwinian explanations for the origin of species". Science teaching experts say they are not surprised to find such a large number of science teachers advocating creationism. "It seems a bit high, but I am not shocked by it," says Linda Froschauer, past president of the National Science Teachers Association based in Arlington, Virginia. "We do know there's a problem out there, and this gives more credibility to the issue." Better training When Berkman's team asked about the teachers' personal beliefs, about the same number, 16% of the total, said they believed human beings had been created by God within the last 10,000 years. Teachers who subscribed to these young-Earth creationist views, perhaps not surprisingly, spent 35% fewer hours teaching evolution than other teachers, the survey revealed. The survey also showed that teachers who had taken more science courses themselves - and especially those who had taken a course in evolutionary biology - devoted more class time to evolution than teachers with weaker science backgrounds. This may be because better-prepared teachers are more confident in dealing with students' questions about a sensitive subject, says Berkman, who notes that requiring all science teachers to take a course in evolutionary biology could have a big impact on the teaching of evolution in the schools. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13930-16-of-us-science-teachers-are-creationists.html educational systems are failing us and will keep us from competing with the rest of the world. As an indiction, tho' I'd have to purchase the full article, I came across the following listing of how American 12th grader taking upper-level science courses compare to other countries:Quote:In Physics: they scored 9th out of 13 countries Chemistry: they scored 11th out of 13 countries Geometry: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Algebra: they scored 12th out of 13 countries Calculus: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Biology: they scored 13th out of 13 countries http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4449128?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=56262697653 I'd have to buy the article to find out exactly what countries they were compared with, but it's not promising information any way you look at it.
Quote:In Physics: they scored 9th out of 13 countries Chemistry: they scored 11th out of 13 countries Geometry: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Algebra: they scored 12th out of 13 countries Calculus: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Biology: they scored 13th out of 13 countries http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4449128?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=56262697653
Sunday, June 17, 2012 8:55 AM
NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: In Physics: they scored 9th out of 13 countries Chemistry: they scored 11th out of 13 countries Geometry: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Algebra: they scored 12th out of 13 countries Calculus: they scored 13th out of 13 countries Biology: they scored 13th out of 13 countries I'd have to buy the article to find out exactly what countries they were compared with, but it's not promising information any way you look at it.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 9:13 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Sunday, June 17, 2012 11:55 AM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: I'd like to hear what 'creationists', specifically young earth types, have to say about the bio stratification of the fossil record. Oh, that's right.. THEY CAN'T ! They may try some silly explanation involving Noah and the flood, but sadly for them, there IS no evidence which supports their views. It's not even a theory.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 4:19 PM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Maybe you should ask Sarah Palin, since she's such a big hero of yours. It's really funny how many of those young Earth creationists you support. Just another example of your myriad hypocrisies.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 5:36 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 5:43 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Remember how you said Carter raised taxes ? It's here: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=52174 Care to discuss how you were really, really wrong on that?
Sunday, June 17, 2012 6:01 PM
PHOENIXROSE
You think you know--what's to come, what you are. You haven't even begun.
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: What makes any "theory" more important than the other?
Sunday, June 17, 2012 6:21 PM
MAL4PREZ
Sunday, June 17, 2012 7:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by PhoenixRose: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: What makes any "theory" more important than the other? *sigh* A theory is a scientific model, based upon solid evidence, and agreed to be generally correct by a community of researchers who are experts in the field. Theories can be expanded upon or updated, but many of them are very close to being scientific law (example: the Theory of Gravity has been updated to the Law of Gravity, because a metric shit-ton of empirical evidence has shown that, yes, gravity always works like that, and there are equations that describe the behavior of objects interacting with gravity accurately every time they are run. Equations can't really describe evolution, so it may never become a scientific law; but it's not far from one is the point I'm making.) What makes the theory of evolution/natural selection "more important" is that it is actually a theory. It has been observed, repeatedly, by several research groups, in the laboratory and the field. Bacteria go through several generations in the space of a week, and can be observed adapting and evolving by anyone with a petri dish and a microscope. The famed fruit flies are the same way, and you don't even need the petri dish or microscope. Contrast "intelligent design," which is not a model based on testing or observation, has never been peer reviewed, in fact cannot be peer reviewed, is not agreed to be generally correct by experts in the field of biology, and basically does not fit the actual definition of the word theory. In scientific terms, it is a postulation, at best, and will never be more than that because testing and observation are not possible. Therefore, as the courts have ruled, it is not science and should not be taught in the context of science class. What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 7:22 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Remember how you said Carter raised taxes ? It's here: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=52174 Care to discuss how you were really, really wrong on that? No, psycho, I don't remember saying that, because I never did. I said he TRIED high taxes. Which he did. And for that, I wasn't wrong. Now, kindly go frack yourself.
Sunday, June 17, 2012 7:25 PM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: I'd hate being a student being taught either one of those unproved "theories" as fact on tax payer dollars.
Quote:If I fall off a 500 foot cliff, the "law" of gravity dictates that 9 times out of 10 it will kill me.
Monday, June 18, 2012 4:27 AM
CAVETROLL
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Remember how you said Carter raised taxes ? It's here: http://fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=52174 Care to discuss how you were really, really wrong on that? No, psycho, I don't remember saying that, because I never did. I said he TRIED high taxes. Which he did. And for that, I wasn't wrong. Now, kindly go frack yourself. Sure, sure ... Nixon and Ford raised them but DIDN’T 'try' high taxes. And Carter who LOWERED them, did 'try' high taxes. That's why you're so fun to laugh at. You and your RapFacts™
Monday, June 18, 2012 4:48 AM
Monday, June 18, 2012 7:45 AM
RIONAEIRE
Beir bua agus beannacht
Monday, June 18, 2012 9:00 AM
Monday, June 18, 2012 9:03 AM
STORYMARK
Monday, June 18, 2012 9:04 AM
Quote:Originally posted by CaveTroll: Girls! Girls! You're both pretty. Can we stay on subject, here? Why don't you two start your own thread so you can argue? The rest of us will just check in from time to time to see how it's going.
Monday, June 18, 2012 11:22 AM
DEVERSE
Hey, Ive been in a firefight before! Well, I was in a fire. Actually, I was fired from a fry-cook opportunity.
Monday, June 18, 2012 1:13 PM
Monday, June 18, 2012 1:22 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by CaveTroll: Girls! Girls! You're both pretty. Can we stay on subject, here? Why don't you two start your own thread so you can argue? The rest of us will just check in from time to time to see how it's going. She started it. And I got man parts.
Monday, June 18, 2012 1:25 PM
Monday, June 18, 2012 1:40 PM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Quote: Maybe you should spit 'em out, and not type with your mouth full, fatty.
Monday, June 18, 2012 2:04 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Thanx, Deverse, I really appreciate that information. Is that list of countries in the order of highest educated in general? Would find that interesting, if it were
Monday, June 18, 2012 2:52 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: Hi Mal4, missed-cha! Interesting to hear Six didn't used to be so angry/crazy...I think I only met him this time around.
Monday, June 18, 2012 2:57 PM
Monday, June 18, 2012 4:12 PM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote: Maybe you should spit 'em out, and not type with your mouth full, fatty. Hello, I'm not sure sexual orientation or obesity are relevant to the topic, even tangentially. --Anthony
Monday, June 18, 2012 4:14 PM
Quote:Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat: Deverse, thank you very much for your input. You seem to have directly answered my question. I wasn't being snarky or conspiratorial in asking why those countries were chosen. ( Well, I was , actually, but I didn't really mean it. more of a Devil's Advocate stance.) And not that I'm accusing you of claiming that. I appreciate hearing the probable basis for the selection. And the reasoning behind teaching creationism/intelligent design in your country is purely genius. Thanx again.
Monday, June 18, 2012 4:38 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Maybe you should spit 'em out, and not type with your mouth full, fatty.
Monday, June 18, 2012 5:29 PM
Monday, June 18, 2012 7:04 PM
Quote:Originally posted by DEVERSE: Had to say – PHOENIXROSE, best explanation I’ve seen in two eloquent and simply worded posts – beautifully done – I’m jealous as hell.
Quote:Originally posted by mal4prez: I'm a bit at a loss as to what 6 thinks he's arguing here. No, the existence of God cannot be disproved. That's why creationism, etc, does not belong in the science classroom. It's not complicated.
Quote:Originally posted by mal4prez: I have a theory as to why he's so different now
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 1:39 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Maybe you should spit 'em out, and not type with your mouth full, fatty. Heard that one a lot in your day, huh?
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: "More of a 'big tent' view, actually. No hypocrisy here. But keep on reachin', lil guy." More of a clueless chasing after the most-right-wing-favorite-of-the-moment.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 1:42 AM
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 2:26 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Kwicko: Try basing all of science and medicine on your so-called "theory" of a 6000 year-old Earth, and see where that gets you, Jack. Nobody but a true idiot could believe in any such "theory".
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 7:31 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: I don't really give two shits about the scientific community's justifications about why what they believe and can never prove...
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:03 AM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Kwickie - How is stating that marriage historically has been between a man and a woman in the least bit 'homophobic '? It's hating gays to tell the truth now ?
Quote: And you have some serious comprehension issues. I didn't imply you were gay. You implied it towards me. You're confused, and it shows.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by PhoenixRose: Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: I don't really give two shits about the scientific community's justifications about why what they believe and can never prove... This, right here, is where the whole thing falls down. What, exactly, does the scientific community "believe and can never prove"? Please give me specifics, because you are throwing out this accusation of belief without proof, when the entire purpose of science is to collect data and believe in things that are proven. Since I've already given you examples of evolution that can be observed in the space of a week, and you have ignored that, I want to know what "proof" you think it is that biologists don't have for their model of how it works. What reason had proved best ceased to look absurd to the eye, which shows how idle it is to think anything ridiculous except what is wrong.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:24 AM
BIGDAMNNOBODY
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by BIGDAMNNOBODY: Prove dark matter.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:40 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Quote:Originally posted by BIGDAMNNOBODY: Prove dark matter. It was, last I heard, a hypothesis.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 8:50 AM
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by BIGDAMNNOBODY: So are you saying that dark matter was "discovered" to explain the currently un-explainable?
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: To my knowledge it hasn't been discovered yet. But it would help to explain things that are confusing otherwise.
Quote:'Un-explainable' is a loaded premise. Everything science has explained was once 'un-explainable' to someone. Until it wasn't. Like the properties of the computer you are using.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:24 AM
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:35 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK: I don't really give two shits about the scientific community's justifications about why what they believe and can never prove... I will not join either of your cults.....
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:39 AM
Quote:Originally posted by ANTHONYT: Hello, Something I always find interesting about the science vs religion debate is this... Science isn't trying to disprove God. It's just trying to describe the universe. Religion frequently tries to disprove science. --Anthony
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 9:59 AM
Tuesday, June 19, 2012 10:19 AM
Quote:I do have an open mind.
Quote:it is a hypothesis which best fits with the identifiable evidence which currently exists.
Quote:It used to be a widely held scientific belief that the sun revolved around the earth.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL