Creationist/ID Education should be allowed

Interesting, I have felt for over 30 years a similar proposal for secondary education should be considered.I would turn the last 2 years of high school into one of four things.1. College (as in free junior college) for those inclined toward an academics-based career.
2. Trade school for those inclined toward the various skilled endeavors such as carpentry or auto mechanics.
3. Traditional High School for those whose involvement with sports, drugs, prom nite, or other social endeavors precludes them from maturing sufficiently enough to make an early decision.
4. Required military service for the disruptive, and required stockade confinement for the still disruptive.However, I think the idea that all of high school should be replaced with such a proposal is also worthy of consideration.Under such a scenario, the basics of readin,' writin,' and cipherin' would have to be covered prior to high school, which would leave no time to teach Creationism or ID. However, the fanatics should be allowed to go to Bob Jones or equivalent high school for the knowledge-phobic as per their First Amendment right to remain ignorant of both science and religion. I understand that the graduates of such a program would have a future in an uncommonly awful presidential administration should the majority of voters once again allow themselves to be cowed by appeals to fear rather than hope or logic.

Yeah, but if you live in this state it can take awhile to realize it is a parody.Many Texas legislators are actually that stupid. Want evidence? Look at our intellectually challenged governor, Rick Perry.Sometimes, I really hate living here but then I check the balance in my checking account and it helps soothe the pain.Helps me buy computers so I can learn the lyrics to O, Canada!

I'm not sure I follow. My boss, the VP for instruction, has made teaching critical thinking an imperative because surveys have shown the students here tend to lack this quality relative to other colleges (what a surprise ). She even brought in a consultant to teach critical thinking and toward the end of her presentation what was the example of refusal to think critically?Climate change denialism.What an uproar that caused among some of the reality-challenged 'round these parts.Don't be so hard on teaching critical thinking. It would take one class session to dismiss creationism based on evidence because only the most fanatical and guilty would not realize: Sometimes I think go ahead, force the teaching of whatever state-approved church those wretched morons could actually agree on (it would never happen in the US because the morons here can't even agree good health is desirable). Seems to have worked wonders in creating atheist majorities in the UK and parts of Scandinavia.But then I have to remember, belief in the separation of church and state is about as American as it gets.If you are somewhat confused as to the definition of critical thinking among educators in this country, please feel free to read my signature.Although it would be quite difficult to criticize the educators in Finland, seeing how they are well-trained and respected, unlike here.Don't take too much critical thinking to figure out why Finland is #1 while the USA is #28. Perhaps a bit of critical thinking is just what our politicians and voters need.

Then obviously the term "critical thinking" is not the proper term for "teach the controversy." Otherwise, the anti-gay, anti-education, climate change denial platform of the Texas Republican Party would not denounce critical thinking.The reason that entity is against critical thinking is because they want to abolish public education in favor of home schooling in order to prevent their children from learning about dangerous ideas like science, tolerance, or questioning beliefs.No am not going to play "who is the real Noah Webster" with you. I know what critical thinking means here as opposed to what it may mean somewhere else because I am here.So what's the deal? Are you really against the idea of "question authority?" Do you really think the truth won't become apparent? Are you against the ideal behind my signature?Damn, you appear more pessimistic than Schopenhauer. Yeah, as if I disagree.Am I now a straw man?

You do know we are on the same side of this issue, I just wanted to make that very clear.Now you have piqued my curiosity. Is the term "critical thinking" being abused by creationists outside of Texas?Sure am not surprised.Please pardon my apparent ignorance concerning this matter as I would like to know more so please feel free to provide examples.I f.ind this matter quite discomforting, to say the least.

Not quite sure I understand your point or the nuance.

quote:

---

Knowledge-Based Education — We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

---

Perhaps this would help:"We oppose the teaching of . . . , critical thinking skills. . ."Seems pretty clear to me.Edited by anglagard, : OK, the qualifier "have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority."

​

So that's what they are going on about. Guess they don't want their kids to grow into adults and leave the nest.

​

Pathetic.

First, I would like to thank saab93f, Coyote, and NoNukes for making me aware of how the term "critical thinking" is being abused.I truly had no idea and apologize for any arrogance shown in what I mistakenly thought was a rather clear-cut definition. That was essentially my conclusion before I even read your post.How much lower can this scum get after not only declaring war against science but also against the English language.I will now be very vigilant against this Orwellian abuse.Once again, thanks all for the tip.