Creationist/ID Education should be allowed

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 went to a private high school in Georgia. We were required to take courses in Old Testament history and New Testament history to graduate. I don't remember anyone belly-aching about the classes, including the Jewish students. The 9th grade biology course was conventional in every respect including teaching the theory of evolution and discussion of abiogenesis. Neither being in the deep South nor being religious requires this crap.This is about a particular bunch of religious folk.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

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.

In these anti-evolution laws, "critical thinking" is a creationist code word that is applied to evolution and anything else that contradicts their religious beliefs. In practice it means letting their particular religious beliefs, and any ideas they can find to support them, no matter how contrary to evidence, be accorded equal weight when offered in opposition to agreed-upon scientific theory.In other fields of science creationists really have no interest. Its not as if they were fighting for better science education!Letting creationists dictate how science is conducted and taught is like letting first graders dictate their curriculum.

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?

I don't mean to rattle your cage, or set up straw men.I'm just venting against the inherent dishonesty of creationists pretending to improve science by the various things they come up with to destroy it."Teach the controversy" and "critical thinking" are two of my pet peeves.Under the guise of improving science, creationists are really trying to destroy it and to peddle their particular brand of woo in its place.That is dishonest from start to finish.

Did they denounce 'critical thinking' in the general sense?The platform of the Texas Republican Party is beyond stupid. But the Texas GOP actually qualifies the term to refer to the teaching they oppose. It is the rest of the world that understands the GOP to effective oppose 'critical thinking' in the general sense. The GOP wants to undermine any teaching that might cause a critical thinking student to question his religious beliefs. Criticizing science if fair game.

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.

---

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

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.

Yes, I realize we are on the same side.Critical thinking really is being pushed by creationists. It is a core part of the Discovery Institute's model law.

Seven states (Alabama, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Texas) have science standards that require learning about some of the scientific controversies relating to evolution. Texas’s science standards require that students analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations so as to encourage critical thinking.

​

Discovery Institute’s Science Education Policy | Discovery Institute

The second strain does not purport to be concerned with student rights, and cites the need to help students develop "critical thinking skills" on "controversial issues." To this end, it permits teachers to discuss "the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories." The listed "theories" often cover several topics of concern to the religious right: primarily evolution and abiogenesis, but also global warming, human cloning and stem cell research. One example of this strain is 2008’s Louisiana Science Education Act.

​

Access denied | National Center for Science Education

Good Academic Freedom Bills: MT, AZ, MO, OK

​

Following Tennessee's example, Montana's HB 183 would free K-12 public school science teachers from fear of administrative reprisal to teach objectively both sides of scientific controversies as such matters arise during the normal course of curricular instruction. Wait. What? What does that mean? How about an example.

​

Helena, MT, is considering, say, whether to protect at law, for the sake of advanced critical thinking instruction, a lesson plan on the biology unit on mutation and selection that involves questions (but no force-fed answers!) like those raised here. Teacher-led memorization by students of the statements in the textbook is a banal, unexciting and ultimately ineffective way to learn. And it is completely protected. What needs protecting, and a bit more press, is a less deferential approach to the textbook writers: open inquiry. That's the policy end that academic freedom law serves.

​

State of the Union: An Academic Freedom Bill Roundup | Evolution News

Creationists are not pushing laws around the country that would help science. Quite the opposite.

Naughty fellow. You have ellipsis dotted away some very relevant qualifiers. I'll restore the qualifiers and add italics and bold font for emphasis.

quote:

---

We oppose the teaching of ... 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

---

In other words, these wing nuts have some particular critical thinking programs in mind. Namely, programs that challenge religious and progressive beliefs.

Thank you for a well thought-of reply. My point was exactly that the creationists have hijacked the term critical thinking to mean the absolute opposite. I could not find a better literary vehicle than to put it in quotations.
Having followed the disputes abroad I am just glad that my kids do not have to be involved.More often than not it seems we Scandinavians and you are both literally and figuratively worlds apart. I really wish it wasn't so.

What I meant was that you wouldn't pass this law without being influenced by religion, not that being influenced by religion would make you pass this law.And I went to Catholic schools. We too had both religion and conventional biology classes.

Understood. I wasn't questioning your point. I was just dumping out some more ridicule for the anti-science group, by pointing out that what they do isn't about Jesus.

This is a lovely example of Newspeak, with the addition of some confusion on the part of some of the fundies as to what the script is supposed to be this week. "Critical thinking" is good when the Discovery Institute uses it to mean teaching discredited biological or meteorological bullshit as an "alternative viewpoint" to science. But "critical thinking" is doubleplus ungood if it means teaching kids to, y'know, think critically about things like religion, democracy, what would constitute a just society........anything that might challenge the authoritarian mindset that the Fundipublicans (among others) hold so dear.And our dear Texas legislature is dominated by these shitheads that have never even read Orwell, along with a couple that could and did read 1984, but thought it was an instruction manual.