Education Intellectual freedom Intelligent Design science education

Michael Egnor reflects on Joshua Swamidass’s proposal for effectively canceling Christian colleges

Spread the love

The main thing is, why should anyone think it would be only Christian colleges?:

Notably, Swamidass completely leaves out the one criterion that is the cornerstone of accreditation of educational institutions: outcome metrics. Accreditation generally hinges on the question: how do graduates of an institution compare with other graduates on standardized tests, graduation rates, professional employment and accomplishments, etc.? I don’t know (and Swamidass has nothing to say about it) how students from Christian colleges compare, but is it well established that homeschooled kids (who are disproportionately taught by conservative Christian families) score almost 100 points higher on the SAT and score correspondingly higher on the ACT than the national average. Christian colleges and universities that teach creation science (I use the term loosely, as does Swamidass) may also teach evolution, but they treat Darwinism as a theory, and they examine it critically.

How do undergraduates from Christian colleges perform on the science portions of GRE exams? If we are to accredit based on curricular content, we must examine all curricular content (let’s start with implicit atheism, materialism, and wokeness) and let’s use outcome metrics as the gold standard. My suspicion, based on the outstanding performance of homeschooled students on standardized testing, is that students from colleges that teach creation science do very well in comparison with their peers from colleges that teach atheist science.

It is certainly possible — and I believe likely — that students in universities that teach creation science understand more about Darwinism, not less, because they are taught to examine Darwinian theory as science, not as dogma.

Michael Egnor, “Joshua Swamidass and the Cancellation of Christian Colleges” at Evolution News and Science Today

Of course.

The most common misconception some of us encounter in this area is the belief that outcome metrics are a serious consideration any longer in American education. No one sponsoring the war on math is concerned about outcomes because educators have the power to jimmy marks to reward whatever they want to reward and then pass the problem on to others who must then do the same. When the game stops, many young people are angry but very often at the wrong people and about the wrong things.

The United States already scores well below most Western countries on education, despite spending far more money — and few American educators seem to care much about that as long as the bucks keep flowing.

Making footballs of Christian students is, doubtless, a pleasant distraction from the war on math and literacy. And people willing to help it along are complicit, for their own purposes, in the mass dumbdown.

See also: Bob Jones University prez fires back at Swamidass re doxxing creationists
Prez Pettit: “BJU students regularly score above the 90th percentile on the Medical College Admission Test …” But that’s just the problem, Steve. They can’t get your students on lack of competence so they have to engage in covert viewpoint discrimination. Swamidass is suggesting a means of proceeding along those lines.

and

See also: Josh Swamidass on the need to single out and punish creationists: One key effect of Cancel Culture is the elimination of competition by citing grounds that are irrelevant to performance. As Klinghoffer puts it, employers “will wish to know if they are about to take aboard a creationist in a science-related field. For example, a pediatric nurse oncologist, caring for little kids with cancer, while believing that the world is under 10,000 years old.” Someone with “Correct” views on the age of Earth will be deemed more acceptable even with fewer gifts in pediatric nursing. It’s a recipe for Virtuous underperformance.

Readers may recall Joshua Swamidass from Peaceful Science.

4 Replies to “Michael Egnor reflects on Joshua Swamidass’s proposal for effectively canceling Christian colleges

  1. 1
    ET says:

    According to Swamidass he says he was trying to protect Christian colleges and creationists. He says he doesn’t want them to be punished. He responded on Meyer’s facebook post about the article.

  2. 2
    buffalo says:

    What happened to “peaceful science”?

  3. 3
  4. 4
    bornagain77 says:

    In other news, Darwinists continue their brutal suppression of anyone who dares stray outside the so called “national norms”, (as Dr. Swamidass affectionately calls them in his Q and A), of indoctrinating students with the pseudoscientific propaganda of Darwinian evolution.

    Cancel Culture in Science – March 22, 2021
    Summary
    This is another of the over 200 cases I have documented where secular society has suppressed academic freedom and allowed unfettered indoctrination of Darwinism. If Darwinism is factual beyond doubt as its supporters contend, they would not need to censor the opposition. Science progresses only when evidence is king and debate is not only allowed but actively encouraged. This is especially vital in the college setting. After his course was canceled, Professor Hedin eventually left Ball State University and now teaches at Biola University in La Mirada, California where he now has academic freedom to continue teaching honors students.
    https://crev.info/2021/03/cancel-culture-science/

    Dr Bergman has published 3 books of true stories of careers ruined by Darwinist censors. (“Slaughter of Dissidents”, Silencing the Darwin Skeptics, and Censoring the Darwin Skeptics), Volume III includes chapters on methods the censors use for ensuring opposing views are not seen or heard in libraries, the news media, and bookstores.
    https://crev.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Bergman-SOD-series.jpg

    Moreover, If anything should ever be ‘canceled’ for not being a real and testable science, it is Darwinian Evolution itself. As I’ve said numerous times before, Darwinian evolution is more realistically classified as a pseudo-science, even as a religion for atheists, rather than ever being classified as a real and testable science.

    Excerpt: “In short, when Darwin published his book, and in regards to inductive reasoning itself, Darwin did not do, or have, any original experimental research that would actually establish his theory as being scientifically true. i.e. Darwin had failed to use the scientific method!
    And now, over a century and a half later, the situation still has not changed for Darwinists.
    To this day, Darwinists still have no experimental research that would rigorously establish Darwin’s theory as being scientifically true,
    In fact, at practically every turn, the scientific evidence itself actually contradicts, i.e. falsifies, Darwinian theory.,,,”
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/josh-swamidass-on-the-need-to-single-out-and-punish-creationists/#comment-726686

Leave a Reply