I think even the most devout around here would find that disgusting. What is taught in privately owned but publicly funded schools should *not* negate what is taught in public schools. If those whackadoodles want to teach creationism in school, they should have their public funding yanked.

I dunno, I bet mutejus can come up with some reasons why it's a "good thing."

He might. But he would be wrong. Private schools can teach whatever they want, but they shouldn't expect accreditation. Charter schools, however, are fully publicly funded with a focus (many schools for the arts are charter style schools) and *must* abide by the state guidelines or lose state funding and states must abide by federal guidelines or lose federal funds.

Preaching to the choir, Draug. I couldn't agree more.

See, we do get along once in a while. When you aren't a complete prick and/or I'm not having a meltdown over lack of sleep and having just lost a job. :-)

By the way, are you about ready to DM us some Thursday soon?

YJ!!!! Y J !!!!!!!! Aren't you supposed to be organizing a campaign?!!? Go away, you godless heathen!

"and *must* abide by the state guidelines or lose state funding and states must abide by federal guidelines or lose federal funds."

What state guidelines are you saying charter schools must abide by, Draug? Certainly they don't have to abide by all the same guidelines as public schools -- that's more or less the point of charter schools.

But anyway, yes, this curriculum seems highly questionable. There are even ways to have discussions about the evolution controversy that would stimulate students to a greater interest in evidence and how science works, but this does not seem to be anywhere near that.

The state guidelines Dr. Draugnar, Esq. assumes to exist because it sounds right to him.

It's unacceptable to teach creationism in public schools, and counter-productive to teach it in private ones. My Catholic school taught evolution, so it's not as if the idea's inherently incompatible with Christianity.

However, is ignorance of evolution really worse than ignorance of English or history or mathematics? Our public schools do a pretty bad job teaching those, and a kid who can't write effectively or do enough math to keep his finances in order is worse off than one who just has a silly idea on how animals came about. What I'm saying is we should keep our priorities in order and focus on making education as a whole better rather than just smacking down this absurdity and moving on like everything's fine.

dear invictus, as i don't know much about the american education, i am not going to address this matter, but i highly disagree with a line of reasoning like: there are worse problems, let's forget about this. there are always worse problems. that doesn't justify not talking about the others.

That's not what I said at all. I said don't just move on like everything else is fine after this nonsense is exorcised from schools. There's lots of other nonsense in other topics, and it probably has worse practical effects on children.

@Invictus

There is a very big difference between teaching something poorly and teaching something that is wrong.

Not a very big difference, no.

I don't want to go down a rabbit hole here. I agree creationism has no place is public school and is ridiculous to teach as science even in private schools. I just also think there are bigger problems, such as our schools producing people barely literate in English, which do more harm than teaching a shoddy natural history curriculum. That's not me saying teaching creationist nonsense isn't a problem that should be dealt with immediately, it's me saying that there are worse, bigger problems which handicap children for the rest of their lives in a way an incorrect understanding of the natural world won't.

I do see what you're saying and I certainly agree our education system as a whole is subpar. I'd also agree that not being able to write will ultimately affect someone more than believing in creationism. However, I think the creationism debate is in large part a microcosm for why our education as a while is so bad.

I wouldn't agree it's a large part as a whole. After all, it ISN'T taught in virtually every school. That's what makes this newsworthy. I grew up in Illinois and the issue literally never came up in the classroom. However, it's still the second worst school system in the country.

@semck - Are you confusing private and charter schools? The state sets the curriculum (minimum at least) of what must be taught. Charter schools are, jn a sense, public schools because they are fully publicly funded. Their leeway is in "focus" and the manner in which the kids are taugt. Arts schools like the SCPA, have certain requirements they still must teach or lose state funding. Montessori schools use a different method to teach, but still meat the states minimum curriculum requirements. Private schools receive no such funding, but charter schools do. So yes, with regards to curriculum, they mist meet state minimum standards. They are fully publicly funded.

@Invictus - Fuck you too, asshole.

@Invictus

Yes, but there is a culture of looking down on education and educators and I think you'd find a high correlation between believing in creationism and looking down on education as a whole.

gameID=133899 in 20 minutes.

We have a love game advertisements thread for this, Rhinos.

He knows. It was a mistake.

"there is a culture of looking down on education and educators and I think you'd find a high correlation between believing in creationism and looking down on education as a whole."

Eh, I wouldn't buy that. Is creationism rampant in the inner cities, where young people often place little value on education? And what do you even mean by "looking down on" education?

But this is now just a hijack, and an exceptionally stupid one at that since we agree on everything that matters.

In the US, teaching is not widely valued as a worthwhile profession.

But, yes, we are largely agreeing with one another.

Of course, I think this is one of the very few subjects most people here would agree on, so there isn't too much to discuss.

I actually think Invictus's point is slightly important, because far from creationism being a microcosm of what's wrong with our schools (it's not, as he's pointed out), it's instead an easy target that people get disproportionately worked up about, obi-style, for reasons that have everything to do with their ideology and very little to do with their concern for education.

Modern science textbooks are absolutely riddled with errors, even the ones that don't teach evolution. That IS symptomatic of the problems overall with education, but I don't know if I've ever seen a single post about it here or on facebook, whereas it's certain I'll see anything that comes up about the rare creationism scare.

The ones that do teach evolution, I meant to say.

Wait a second, disproportionately worked up? This is a HUGE deal. There is a powerful movement to make what's going on it Texas the standard. You can't dig in your heels far enough to fight this kind of garbage.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make saying that science textbooks are "riddled with errors." Even if that's true (I'd need to see something more than your say-so to be convinced), I'm not sure what you are suggesting ought to be done about it.

What he's saying is that people can dependably get furious about creationism creeping into schools but not about the many other serious problems in public school instruction. For example, the rate of functional illiteracy is shockingly high, but we never hear about how poor English curricula represent a mortal threat to America's future competitiveness.

As I've been saying, creationism has no place in a science classroom. However, there are other problems with the education system which are more serious in absolute terms. Having a misguided view of the natural world is less bad than being generally ignorant of English and mathematics.