The bill, which has yet to pass the Senate, would require teachers to be helped “to find effective ways to present the science curriculum as it addresses scientific controversies.” It also says that teachers may not be prohibited from “helping students understand, analyze, critique and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught.”Those “controversial” theories would include, “Biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.”
Sources say that many educrats prefer that none of these topics, nor any others that they may from time to time propose, be treated as in any way controversial – and certainly not by parents or taxpayers.
Here is another view:
Late last week, the lower chamber of the Tennessee General Assembly passed a bill preventing public school administrators from obstructing the efforts of any teacher to help:… students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught, such as evolution and global warming.
The bill, HB 386, alternatively styled the Tennessee Academic Freedom Bill and the Critical Thinking Bill, was passed by a significant majority of the Tennessee House in a vote of 70-23. The measure was sent to the State Senate on Thursday of last week, where it will be debated by the Senate Education Committee.
The bill’s chief sponsor in the House, Representative Bill Dunn (R-Knoxville), said the purpose is to promote “critical thinking” in science classes. Predictably, opponents of the proposed law insist that it is merely “a backdoor means of teaching creationism….”
Dunn continued the defense of his proposal, explaining that, “Some of the best teachable moments are when you’re discussing things, and when there’s some give and take with the students.”
Controversies are growing around who guides the instruction of kids.