Friday, January 2, 2009

Texas Science Curriculum Final Proposal

It looks like we are headed to victory in the battle over Texas science standards. Gone are the old "strengths and weaknesses" stealth creationist nonsense.

...the new plan makes it clear that supernatural explanations like creationism and intelligent design have no place in public classrooms, said Dan Quinn with the Texas Freedom Network, an Austin-based nonprofit group that opposes religious influence on public education.

The third and final draft says students should be able to analyze and evaluate scientific explanations. There is also a new requirement that students should be able "to evaluate models according to their limitations in representing biological objects or events," but it would take a mind-boggling leap for anyone to interpret that as applying to evolution, Quinn said, particularly when viewed through the plan’s new definition of science.

The old definition — which included phrases like "a way of learning about nature" and "may not answer all questions" — has been replaced with a definition from the National Academy of Sciences. It states that science involves using evidence to form explanations and make predictions that can be measured and tested. It also warns that questions on subjects that cannot be scientifically tested do not belong in science.

Let's hope there isn't some last minute shuffling as there has been in the past.


memphisto said...

Could it be that all the attention that ID has focused on the scientific method and what science does is actually a good thing?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your information. Most of the posts in the blog is really valuable. Regards

ScienceAvenger said...

Thanks BCWE. Mephisto, I think it could be a good thing if it wakes a lot of the scientifically literate public up and gets us more involved. We should all care a lot more about issues like school board membership, or having a creationist running an organization in charge of educating. It matters.