This is an old post that I never published. A while back Intelligent Design was pitted against Evolution in a very public court battle originating in a school district. Eventually ID was ruled against and out of the curriculum. It serves as an example of the strong bias many unbelievers have against anything that smacks of God. Original post follows:
CNN.com - Professor: Evolution cannot fully explain biology - Oct 17, 2005
This CNN article touches on but still falls short of why Intelligent Design (ID) deserves a fair shake in the science curriculum of our schools. It deserves fair treatment by science because it is science! The view that is constantly assumed in the media - that ID as a theory is somehow a non-scientific theory - is a false one. In fact, saying that ID is not scientific is unscientific.
Scienctific Method generally tries to assume nothing - not even the falsehood of a claim. It demands rational proof to call something a "fact," and this is where the communication breaks down. ID supporters aren't advocating that it be taught as a fact, merely a theory. One among others. Most ID supporters don't even mind that the time spent on each would be hugely unequal in favor of evolution. The ID camp merely says give it a fair shake because it has earned treatment in our curriculum by virtue of it's enormous historical influence and, more importantly, the fact that it is still a valid interpretation of existing evidence. Think of it like this - throwing out ID because it hadn't been conclusively proven by verifiable and replicable facts would also rule out Evolution!
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Friday, June 15, 2007
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Blog Dump: Thoughts on Teaching
The following are posts from another blog I kept for a very brief period on teaching. Enjoy!
Gambling for Tuition, WHAT?
Call for Entries for Absolute Poker's Free 'Win Your Tuition' Texas Hold'em Tournament Ends October 6: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance
Gambling for tuition?! What's next, Boxing for free health care? This Yahoo article left my jaw lowered for sure, but my spirits as well. The gambling business has never been much of a wholesome element in society, but this new ploy is downright horrible.
I have to say up front that I have moral problems with gambling to begin with. But, putting those to the side for the moment, there is another even more troubling issue: this is a crystal clear illustration of the blind pursuit of gain at all costs that pervades our society.
To be fair, my initial analogy is a bit off at face value. I compared this competition to a boxing match where people could win free health care. The point was that those people would be endangering their health in the process. Someone could rightly argue, "Wait, this tournament is free. Therefore, it would not be a risk to their tuition money." I would concede that the tournament isn't taking these students' money personally, but gambling in general will. This is not a moral contention - strictly economic. It's at this point where I'd take issue with this promotional stunt.
Ostensibly, college is supposed to be educating productive members of society - hopefully, members that are able make sound decisions and become self-sustaining in the economy. But gambling is antithetical to this. Gambling for all but a very few is a financial drain with no return beyond the entertainment value. If this were it's only harm it would be little more than the moral issue I mentioned above. But, for many, gambling is a serious factor in their finances and tends to cripple an individuals ability to be productive. The gambling industry is a monster than consumes its prey and is only sustainable by the injection of fresh victims each year. It's like a russion roulette club - your going to run out of members without adding new ones! Gambling establishment pit our psychology against us by engineering machines to dole out the precise amount of winnings to keep people coming back. They know they'll win in the end.
For this industry to begin to court the college crowd is despicable, but when college students come running it is indicative of a deeper problem - we've bought the 'money for nothing' lie that gambling is predicated on. College students: remember 'A fool and his money are soon parted' and nothing is ever free!
Gambling for tuition?! What's next, Boxing for free health care? This Yahoo article left my jaw lowered for sure, but my spirits as well. The gambling business has never been much of a wholesome element in society, but this new ploy is downright horrible.
I have to say up front that I have moral problems with gambling to begin with. But, putting those to the side for the moment, there is another even more troubling issue: this is a crystal clear illustration of the blind pursuit of gain at all costs that pervades our society.
To be fair, my initial analogy is a bit off at face value. I compared this competition to a boxing match where people could win free health care. The point was that those people would be endangering their health in the process. Someone could rightly argue, "Wait, this tournament is free. Therefore, it would not be a risk to their tuition money." I would concede that the tournament isn't taking these students' money personally, but gambling in general will. This is not a moral contention - strictly economic. It's at this point where I'd take issue with this promotional stunt.
Ostensibly, college is supposed to be educating productive members of society - hopefully, members that are able make sound decisions and become self-sustaining in the economy. But gambling is antithetical to this. Gambling for all but a very few is a financial drain with no return beyond the entertainment value. If this were it's only harm it would be little more than the moral issue I mentioned above. But, for many, gambling is a serious factor in their finances and tends to cripple an individuals ability to be productive. The gambling industry is a monster than consumes its prey and is only sustainable by the injection of fresh victims each year. It's like a russion roulette club - your going to run out of members without adding new ones! Gambling establishment pit our psychology against us by engineering machines to dole out the precise amount of winnings to keep people coming back. They know they'll win in the end.
For this industry to begin to court the college crowd is despicable, but when college students come running it is indicative of a deeper problem - we've bought the 'money for nothing' lie that gambling is predicated on. College students: remember 'A fool and his money are soon parted' and nothing is ever free!
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Incentive to Fail
I love the word "incentive." As a teacher I get to hear it often. Not so much from the official channels broadcasting out of Washington and Austin, but more locally. I get to hear it most around testing time. We're going to give the students an "incentive" to study, to work harder, to try to do their best, to eat the morning of and sleep the night before. And, the incentives are great! We've done drawings for things like CD players and movie tickects among those who would attend tutorials. We've offered free breakfast for all. We've even taken to giving final exam exemptions to students that do well on the standardized tests. It's a great time to be a student!
One thing is missing though. Where's my incentive. I've handed out tickets, ballots, and prizes, but I've never been incentivized myself. I don't really need a new CD player, but the point is that we're forgetting about the people who matter most to improving learning and grades - the teacher in the room.
What is my incentive? Our motivational posters and coffee cup slogans all seem to think that our incentive is the incredible opportunity to "touch a life" or "expand a mind." I'm all for that. I do really get some serious job satisfaction when a kid has an epiphany that I was a catalyst to. But if we're going have to be motivated by shear altruism and these lofty motives, then everyone else should do their part. No more beefy salaries to keep that Superintendent in the district. No more super stipends to retain the coach who has won so many games. They need to get down in the trenches with the rest of us and endure the meager salaries because the satisfaction of helping a student is all we need. There really are incentives here, but not ones that we would be too excited about.
Take my annual evaluation for instance. I've been in the highest category most of my years of teaching. I should expect a bonus, maybe? How about a few days off? Nope, I get nothing that any other teacher of any ability level doesn't get. So, the incentive here is this: be mediocre; do just enough to get by and go home.
Or take the extracurricular activities that I sponsor. I spend countless hours outside of the normal school day and on weekends enriching the opportunities available to students at our school. I'll grant you that I do get a stipend. But when you compare hours to reward I'm getting far less than even minimum wage. The incentive: do the minimum and leave; don't get involved unless your willing to give up your own time to do so.
There's many more examples but the sum of them is this: the current systems promotes excellence in anything but teaching. We'll pay administrators and feed children, but we aren't ready to invest in the people who will have the greatest impact on our students.
One thing is missing though. Where's my incentive. I've handed out tickets, ballots, and prizes, but I've never been incentivized myself. I don't really need a new CD player, but the point is that we're forgetting about the people who matter most to improving learning and grades - the teacher in the room.
What is my incentive? Our motivational posters and coffee cup slogans all seem to think that our incentive is the incredible opportunity to "touch a life" or "expand a mind." I'm all for that. I do really get some serious job satisfaction when a kid has an epiphany that I was a catalyst to. But if we're going have to be motivated by shear altruism and these lofty motives, then everyone else should do their part. No more beefy salaries to keep that Superintendent in the district. No more super stipends to retain the coach who has won so many games. They need to get down in the trenches with the rest of us and endure the meager salaries because the satisfaction of helping a student is all we need. There really are incentives here, but not ones that we would be too excited about.
Take my annual evaluation for instance. I've been in the highest category most of my years of teaching. I should expect a bonus, maybe? How about a few days off? Nope, I get nothing that any other teacher of any ability level doesn't get. So, the incentive here is this: be mediocre; do just enough to get by and go home.
Or take the extracurricular activities that I sponsor. I spend countless hours outside of the normal school day and on weekends enriching the opportunities available to students at our school. I'll grant you that I do get a stipend. But when you compare hours to reward I'm getting far less than even minimum wage. The incentive: do the minimum and leave; don't get involved unless your willing to give up your own time to do so.
There's many more examples but the sum of them is this: the current systems promotes excellence in anything but teaching. We'll pay administrators and feed children, but we aren't ready to invest in the people who will have the greatest impact on our students.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Not so Immature, After All
Teaching is tough. Teaching teachers is no different, and the similarities are stunning between how teachers behave and how students behave. I've had the opportunity in the last week to start teaching a course consisting of two one-hour sessions to my colleagues. The training has been "required" by our administration and that brings out a certain level of ill will toward the course. Now, this course is not something that they "already know" - this is on building a webpage for their classes.The similarities jumped out at me right out of the gate; it was hard to get started because of all the talking ... even when I began to teach! The nerve! Then, during a series of instructions, there where those that would race ahead and inevitably skip a critical step - so impatient.
I soon began to realize something. It was not so much something about the teachers as about my students. I'm guilty of lamenting these qualities in my students and ascribing it to "immaturity," but these adults were far from immature. Most of them were good friends and had no ill intent, either. I began to realize that many of their behaviors were not functions of immaturity. Just like my teaching friends, my students are all on different paths and at different points - not so immature, after all. I hope that I can give them the same respect I do my colleagues!
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Unintelligent Decision
CNN.com - Court rejects 'intelligent design' in class - Dec 20, 2005
Wow - this is scarey! A US District Court banning discussion of an idea in our classrooms.
The courts have made clear that they reject Intelligent Design because it is associated with religion, and that is somehow unconstitutional. But, the court itself is the one injecting the specific religious abuse into the ID argument. The ID community consists of many disparate people - christians, to be sure, but also muslims, jews and even a few who perceive something greater behind the universe while remaining outside of any religion. Admittedly, Christians are the biggest proponents of ID in America, but no one today calls the civil rights movement 'racist' simply because it was most strongly supported by African Americans. Christians just happen to be the largest part of the group unfairly affect by the status quo.
Science rejects ID as non-scientific, but I beg to differ. Science is about proof, but it begins with a hypothesis - venturing to explain the world around us and by testing our thoughts to learn. Science has certainly never avoided a hypothesis because it could not be proven (That would eliminate Evolution itself!). Instead, science carries on testing what it can. But, somehow an "intelligent designer" in the universe is outside the realm of circumstances science can evaluate. Honestly, many scientists are committing intellectual suicide just as much as the unquestioning religious zealots they resent. Who's close minded now?
Interestingly, this does illustrate the true nature of our constitutional protections: they are little stronger than the prevailing national sentiment. Almost 100 years of slavery sanctioned under our current constitution bears witness to the fact that we the people aren't as altruisticly democratic as we like to think.
Christians have been 'on top' for a long time in this country - long enough for hem to forget that this is just not normal. True Christianity has been consistently under attack and reviled since Christ himself was crucified. In fact, he even said as much. In John 15, He says not to be surprised if the world hates [Christians, ergo Christianity] - it hated Him first (my paraphrase).
Wow - this is scarey! A US District Court banning discussion of an idea in our classrooms.
The courts have made clear that they reject Intelligent Design because it is associated with religion, and that is somehow unconstitutional. But, the court itself is the one injecting the specific religious abuse into the ID argument. The ID community consists of many disparate people - christians, to be sure, but also muslims, jews and even a few who perceive something greater behind the universe while remaining outside of any religion. Admittedly, Christians are the biggest proponents of ID in America, but no one today calls the civil rights movement 'racist' simply because it was most strongly supported by African Americans. Christians just happen to be the largest part of the group unfairly affect by the status quo.
Science rejects ID as non-scientific, but I beg to differ. Science is about proof, but it begins with a hypothesis - venturing to explain the world around us and by testing our thoughts to learn. Science has certainly never avoided a hypothesis because it could not be proven (That would eliminate Evolution itself!). Instead, science carries on testing what it can. But, somehow an "intelligent designer" in the universe is outside the realm of circumstances science can evaluate. Honestly, many scientists are committing intellectual suicide just as much as the unquestioning religious zealots they resent. Who's close minded now?
Interestingly, this does illustrate the true nature of our constitutional protections: they are little stronger than the prevailing national sentiment. Almost 100 years of slavery sanctioned under our current constitution bears witness to the fact that we the people aren't as altruisticly democratic as we like to think.
Christians have been 'on top' for a long time in this country - long enough for hem to forget that this is just not normal. True Christianity has been consistently under attack and reviled since Christ himself was crucified. In fact, he even said as much. In John 15, He says not to be surprised if the world hates [Christians, ergo Christianity] - it hated Him first (my paraphrase).
Friday, February 25, 2005
Prayer in School Part 3: "What we should do"
Simply put, the answer to how Christians can "put prayer back in school" is to just do it! There are no laws barring prayer in school. There'd be no way to enforce them if there were. No one can stop a person, Christian or otherwise, from praying. The only beef the law has with prayer is whether the state can mandate it ... and that answer is NO!
So, why aren't Christians satisfied with this? Because, the fight over prayer in school is a comfortable alternative to true spirituality. How many times has a passel of parents shown up at the school board meeting demanding a prayer before the football game. How many times have they shown up early to the game and pray in the parking lot instead? They don't. If you want to join other believers in prayer before the game, it's not illegal. The laws only have a problem with it when those who do not choose to pray are obligated to.
So, why aren't Christians satisfied with this? Because, the fight over prayer in school is a comfortable alternative to true spirituality. How many times has a passel of parents shown up at the school board meeting demanding a prayer before the football game. How many times have they shown up early to the game and pray in the parking lot instead? They don't. If you want to join other believers in prayer before the game, it's not illegal. The laws only have a problem with it when those who do not choose to pray are obligated to.
Why do we cling so dearly to this prayer at the beginning of the game or school-day anyway? Is it sacred or called for scripturally? No. Is it honestly our belief that somehow we might convert someone to a truthful, saving knowledge of our Creator by exposing them to our prayers? I certainly hope not. Prayer is a communication between the believer and God, not an evangelistic tool. If we were serious about leading people to God, we'd spend a lot less time trying to coerce them into praying and a lot more in private prayer for them.
Let me be clear here about my beliefs. I believe in Jesus Christ as my Savior. His sacrifice on the cross served my penalty for falling short in the eyes of God, and His resurrection was the proof that He had the power to do that. My belief compels me to be a witness of this truth to the world around me. I see mandating prayer in school as an abdication of this responsibility and on those grounds I must oppose it.
Sunday, December 05, 2004
Prayer in School - Part 2 "So What Are You Trying to Do?"
When I hear comments calling for prayer to be put back in schools, I wonder, "So what is it that we are really trying to achieve here?" Let's face it, humans have a nasty habit of digging in when we feel attacked and issues tend to polarize quickly. The finer points of our beliefs are often lost in the act of closing ranks against our opponent. In the end, the cause we're fighting for has little resemblance to the original source of the conflict. This is what has happened to the fight over prayer in schools.
When Christians, who are at the heart of this issue, really think about their faith, they find that their motivation comes from a desire to see others come to know the truth about God and Christ. Among the highest Christian goals are the desire to know God and to see others come to know Him. Our desire to proselytize is natural and a healthy expression of true faith in the God who has saved us from eternal separation by offering Christ as a sacrifice. Of course we want to share that with others. This is the goal that should underlie our interactions with society as Christians. But this honest desire to share Christ with the world around us seems to have gone out of focus.
When America began, it's influences were predominantly Christian. The large Christian majority grew comfortable with a State that was sympathetic to their values. That became a norm within the Christian community. But, as our population has grown in diversity, Christians are no longer such a powerful majority. As our laws and institutions have matured, we've refined a Constitutional moray that government should not be involved in religion. Whatever its other faults, this moray rightfully bars state institutions from mandating a religious exercise. Accomodating religion is fine but we can't demand religiousity as a state.
Here is where Christians have lost focus. Our energies have shifted from sharing our faith to maintaining a stronghold on the government. But, this is not legitimately ours to claim. A huge debate still rages over whether our country was founded as a Christian Nation. But regardless of our origins, everyone needs to look at where our country is today. The country we live in is a pluralistic democratic republic. While Christians may know the truth of Christ, we cannot expect our government to to give us any favor because of that.
John Rawls provides some strong support for this in his discussion of the "veil of ignorance." In crafting (or debating) the morals/laws of society we should try to decide what prejudices the law has without knowledge of which side of the prejudice we will be on. Therefore, we will theoretically choose laws that are generally fair for fear that we suffer under any unfair law we create. In considering the issue of prayer in school, we must stop and think, "What if the tables were turned and Christianity were not the dominant religion?"
In the end, I have to say that I can't honestly advocate state mandated prayer. Accomodation is a different story entirely. But, I would not want my children to be obligated to pray contrary to our family's beliefs.
When Christians, who are at the heart of this issue, really think about their faith, they find that their motivation comes from a desire to see others come to know the truth about God and Christ. Among the highest Christian goals are the desire to know God and to see others come to know Him. Our desire to proselytize is natural and a healthy expression of true faith in the God who has saved us from eternal separation by offering Christ as a sacrifice. Of course we want to share that with others. This is the goal that should underlie our interactions with society as Christians. But this honest desire to share Christ with the world around us seems to have gone out of focus.
When America began, it's influences were predominantly Christian. The large Christian majority grew comfortable with a State that was sympathetic to their values. That became a norm within the Christian community. But, as our population has grown in diversity, Christians are no longer such a powerful majority. As our laws and institutions have matured, we've refined a Constitutional moray that government should not be involved in religion. Whatever its other faults, this moray rightfully bars state institutions from mandating a religious exercise. Accomodating religion is fine but we can't demand religiousity as a state.
Here is where Christians have lost focus. Our energies have shifted from sharing our faith to maintaining a stronghold on the government. But, this is not legitimately ours to claim. A huge debate still rages over whether our country was founded as a Christian Nation. But regardless of our origins, everyone needs to look at where our country is today. The country we live in is a pluralistic democratic republic. While Christians may know the truth of Christ, we cannot expect our government to to give us any favor because of that.
John Rawls provides some strong support for this in his discussion of the "veil of ignorance." In crafting (or debating) the morals/laws of society we should try to decide what prejudices the law has without knowledge of which side of the prejudice we will be on. Therefore, we will theoretically choose laws that are generally fair for fear that we suffer under any unfair law we create. In considering the issue of prayer in school, we must stop and think, "What if the tables were turned and Christianity were not the dominant religion?"
In the end, I have to say that I can't honestly advocate state mandated prayer. Accomodation is a different story entirely. But, I would not want my children to be obligated to pray contrary to our family's beliefs.
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
Prayer in School - Part 1 "Prayer is illegal! What?"
As a teacher, a member of an evangelical church, and part of a family that has Christian roots, I get a pretty good view of the whole "Separation of Church and State" debate from several sides - fellow teachers, students, administrators, ministers, citizens of all stripe, and my own family. Most issues have more or less predictable and logical battle lines. But, when the issue of Prayer in School comes up, I tend to get ready for some hard core tongue-biting because I find myself outside the traditional camp.
In Christian circles the topic usually comes up in the form of a sarcastic, somewhat bitter lament. "Well, you can't even pray in school anymore!" or, my personal favorite (sarcasm intended), "They've taken God out of Schools." The understanding that seems to be pervasive among Christians is that somehow a law now exists (and is being enforced) that says prayer will not be tolerated. The image of children being rapped on the back of their little bowed heads comes to mind. You can imagine the cafeteria monitors trying to ferret out those that might say grace.
In reality, Prayer, per se, has not been affected at all. The only thing that has drawn the attention of our laws and courts is Mandating Prayer. Let's make this clear: "praying" - legal, "forcing others to pray" - not legal. If its still not clear, take this as an example. Little Billy praying in school is legal. Principal Smith praying in school is legal. Principal Smith requiring Little Billy to pray is NOT legal.
The issue here is not prayer. It is about coercion. Schools and their employees are "agents of The State." The 1st Amendment says The State shall not "establish" any one religion. No one minds the individual volunteering to pray, but when the school as an agent of The State requires its students to adhere to a religion or religious activity, it is tantamount to establishing that particular religion.
So. Students, Teachers - pray! Pray often! It's perfectly legal! Just don't try to use the State to coerce others to do so!
Keep the faith!
In Christian circles the topic usually comes up in the form of a sarcastic, somewhat bitter lament. "Well, you can't even pray in school anymore!" or, my personal favorite (sarcasm intended), "They've taken God out of Schools." The understanding that seems to be pervasive among Christians is that somehow a law now exists (and is being enforced) that says prayer will not be tolerated. The image of children being rapped on the back of their little bowed heads comes to mind. You can imagine the cafeteria monitors trying to ferret out those that might say grace.
In reality, Prayer, per se, has not been affected at all. The only thing that has drawn the attention of our laws and courts is Mandating Prayer. Let's make this clear: "praying" - legal, "forcing others to pray" - not legal. If its still not clear, take this as an example. Little Billy praying in school is legal. Principal Smith praying in school is legal. Principal Smith requiring Little Billy to pray is NOT legal.
The issue here is not prayer. It is about coercion. Schools and their employees are "agents of The State." The 1st Amendment says The State shall not "establish" any one religion. No one minds the individual volunteering to pray, but when the school as an agent of The State requires its students to adhere to a religion or religious activity, it is tantamount to establishing that particular religion.
So. Students, Teachers - pray! Pray often! It's perfectly legal! Just don't try to use the State to coerce others to do so!
Keep the faith!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)