science education

And in other breaking news that’ll really surprise you, snowbanks continue to pile in Ottawa, Canada. 😉 Seriously, from Sarah Chaffee at Evolution News & Views: Strauss provokes alarm about a lack of accountability — “maverick teachers” who can teach whatever they wish. However, SB 55 offers very limited freedoms. Indeed, the language of the bill says that teachers can only present information in an “objective scientific manner.” Under this legislation, they can only talk about “scientific information.” And they can do so only in classes aligned with state science standards. School administrators retain the authority to ensure that teachers follow all these guidelines. Yet, quoting a local newspaper that quoted a science teacher in Sioux Falls, Ms. Strauss raises Read More ›

From Jerry Coyne at Why Evolution Is True: From Big Think we have physicist Lawrence Krauss showing why the “teach both sides” argument for evolution—and science in general—is fallacious. This argument is now being inserted into school standards by religionists who have lost repeated court battles trying to get creationism and intelligent design taught explicitly in public schools. Their new tactic is to pass school standards allowing or urging teachers to present evidence for alternative views and “critical evidence for and against” theories like evolution and anthropogenic global warming.More. Larry Krauss, though a cosmologist, is mooted as a possible successor to zoologist Dawkins in the defence of Darwin. Thus he may not know that there is a lot of rethinking going Read More ›

 From Kerry Grens at the Scientist: Last week, the Texas Board of Education approved a draft of revisions made to its science education standards. While board members approved nearly all of the changes suggested by a committee of educators, they also voted to partially replace cuts made to controversial language regarding the teaching of evolution. “What they did . . . was accept two of our recommendations [to change evolution teaching standards], but added some language that reintroduced the creationist open-door policy,” Ron Wetherington, a committee member and professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, told The Scientist. “The committee of school teachers on which I served is going to be upset about this.” The board members and two committee Read More ›

Two Views: Keep requiring evolutionary explanations by Don McLeroy Last year the Texas State Board of Education formed an advisory committee to help them streamline the state’s science standards. The committee, composed of a majority of evolutionists, has ignited a controversy by urging the board to delete the only two evolution standards that require evolutionary explanations. To help clarify what is at stake, consider this question: Do you believe that we humans are only a bunch of molecules that enjoy having conversations? Usually, only atheists will answer “Yes.” Most of us think the idea is ridiculous and answer “No” — it goes against our scientific common sense. Yet, this purely materialistic idea is, in essence, the only officially government sanctioned Read More ›

It would have looked great as a three-dollar bill. A number of high-profile Darwinians ended up passing it around. David Klinghoffer updates the story at Evolution News & Views: I called out the Darwin activists who were promoting this “news,” including Michael Zimmerman of the Clergy Letter Project. Well, they’re back and defending themselves and each other. P.Z. Myers now agrees with me that “Joe Hannon” is a fake name — used, he informs us, by an often-banned Internet troll from Manchester, England, who haunts blog comments sections under a variety of pseudonyms. Myers cites University of Toronto’s Larry Moran, saying that “Hannon” is “a holocaust denier. He used to run a business ‘selling components — just nuts and bolts Read More ›

Hmmm. At ipetitions: A nationwide moratorium on the teaching of evolution in schools To Mike Pence, Vice-President of the United States of America: We the undersigned note that, when you were a member of the U.S House of Representatives, you spoke out on the subject of science education and for presenting students with all available information. Recently, we have seen the passage of academic freedom bills in Louisiana and Tennessee which have allowed for critical evaluation in the classroom and improved educational standards. However, whilst an important development, they were only enacted owing to the need to protect students from indoctrination. We object to the teaching of the very controversial theory of evolution as part of the K-12 science curriculum Read More ›

From cosmologist Larry Krauss, our favorite spokesman for scientism, at the New Yorker:  A long-form rant on a variety of subjects re the impending a-Trump-a-lypse, some of which intersect with items O’Leary for News has covered recently, including science education: And the Trump Administration is on course to undermine science in another way: through education. Educators have various concerns about Betsy DeVos, Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education—they object to her efforts to shield charter schools from government regulation, for example—but one issue stands above the rest: DeVos is a fundamentalist Christian with a long history of opposition to science. If her faith shapes her policies—and there is evidence that it will—she could shape science education decisively for the worse, Read More ›

First: So? From Rebecca Klein at Huffington Post: While running for governor of Michigan in 2006, Dick DeVos ― whose wife, Betsy, is now President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for U.S. secretary of education ― said that schools should have the option of teaching intelligent design alongside evolution. … To be sure, DeVos’ comments were made 10 years ago, and his wife has given no indication that she’d like to use her position in the Trump administration to promote intelligent design in schools. But Dick DeVos’ views on religion and education run parallel to his wife’s in many areas, and the couple’s family foundation has made donations that critics say have enabled the encroachment of religious education in the public sphere. More. Read More ›

From ScienceDaily: Repeated binge drinking during adolescence can affect brain functions in future generations, potentially putting offspring at risk for such conditions as depression, anxiety, and metabolic disorders, a Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine study has found. “Adolescent binge drinking not only is dangerous to the brain development of teenagers, but also may impact the brains of their children,” said senior author Toni R. Pak, PhD, an associate professor in the Department of Cell and Molecular Physiology of Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine. … The study, which was based on an animal model, found that adolescent binge drinking altered the on-off switches of multiple genes in the brains of offspring. When genes are turned on, they Read More ›

From David Klinghoffer at Evolution News & Views: Zack Kopplin is a self-described “investigative journalist and activist” who specializes in slinging the scare word “creationist” around where it doesn’t belong. His current article at The Daily Beast, where he writes irregularly, is a classic: “Creationism in Texas Could Go Extinct on Election Day.” … At a certain point, in following media coverage of academic freedom laws like these (which explicitly do not mandate or offer protection for teaching creationism or any religious doctrine), you get a little cynical about “journalists.” Or “activists” — once upon a time there was a difference. But then along comes a breath of fresh air — delivered by Tyler O’Neil at PJ Media (“Is Texas Read More ›

From a paper at Perspectives in Science (October 15, 2016): Science Standards: The foundation of evolution education in the United States Abstract: Science standards and textbooks have a huge impact on the manner in which evolution is taught in American classrooms. Standards dictate how much time and what points have to be dedicated to the subject in order to prepare students for state-wide assessments, while the textbooks will largely determine how the subject is presented in the classroom. In the United States both standards and textbooks are determined at the state-level through a political process. Currently there is a tremendous amount of pressure arising from anti-evolutionists in the United States to weaken or omit the teaching of evolution despite recommendations Read More ›

From Times Higher: College Rankings 2017: top 20 colleges for engagement Dordt College 18.3 Brigham Young University-Provo 18.0 Texas Christian University 18.0 Cedarville University 17.9 Baylor University 17.8 Note: Even if you are not a Christian, it is okay to send your kid to a serious Christian U, as long as you don’t mind hearing that the kid is engaged to a Christian who wants to do mission work. See also: Baylor prof Robert Marks on evolutionary informatics Follow UD News at Twitter!

From his blog, Shadow of Oz, recounting an incident: “There was one major conservative who spoke during my freshman year . . . [he] was invited by my liberty-minded club to speak about the dangers of political correctness in academia . . . At the lecture, dozens of students shouted out and interrupted [him] to the point where he had to stop speaking in order for them to calm down. Eventually, a few students stood up and smeared fake blood on themselves, screaming that [he] represented hatred. The room fell to chaos for a solid five minutes and, while yelling expletives and making obscene hand gestures, the protesters left a beautiful mess of red paint for the custodial staff to Read More ›

The claim that British moths “evolved” because of industrial pollution (microevolution) in recent centuries became an unquestionable truth of Darwin lobby textbooks in recent decades. But there are serious problems with that example (the peppered myth). From Waynesburg University (Pennsylvania) biology prof Wayne Rossiter, author of In the Shadow of Oz, a note: Note that I do not deny that there are examples of microevolution in action (in fact, I affirm the existence of such examples). I simply point out that this “prized horse” in the evolutionist’s stable—an example that ranks with Darwin’s finches—has serious shortcomings that go unmentioned in the public or in the classroom. In [Darwin defender] JB’s attempt to rescue the sacred cow, he/she completely misses the Read More ›

From Special Issues in Education, including Research in Science Education. Hat tip: Pos-Darwinista (Just think, one of the biggest Portuguese language blogs is a Brazil-based ID site.)