It's been a long time coming. There's been talk of this happening for years, even before I graduated in 2001, but it's still shocking to hear. I just feel so bad for the kids and parents this is affecting. My old high school was apparently the only one to get word before the school day let out, and from what I hear the sight wasn't pretty.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
Hmmm... it may be obvious to every one else, but what state/region is Clayton County?
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
I think it's GA... I remember an NPR bit about the schools in that district back in May.
edit: it's georgia - just checked.
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
Yeah, I'm sorry. I should have specified. South Metro Atlanta area.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
I'm not sure how taking away the school's accreditation will help matters. From the article, it appeared that the problem was the school board members; is taking accreditation away the only way to get new board members?
The article mentioned that the school board's actions were having a negative impact on teaching; I'd like to know what they did that was so profound as to have an effect on the classroom.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
There's a real Clayton County??
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
So what does this mean? If you graduate from these schools, universities won't consider that as a real certificate? And what did they do, anyway, teach creationism?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*applauds KoM* I was worried you wouldn't fulfill your quota of condescending, unpleasant remarks today, but you made it.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
KoM, I know people who get into universities without a diploma from an accredited school. However, it's harder; you have to go through additional steps sometimes.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Oh, good. I finally have proof to my argument that Georgia schools are the worst in the nation. It was purely anecdotal before.
Posted by TheBlueShadow (Member # 9718) on :
quote:Oh, good. I finally have proof to my argument that Georgia schools are the worst in the nation. It was purely anecdotal before.
One school system's problems is not the same thing as the state's problems. Clayton County is only one of many. And while they are having problems don't make generalizations that the entire state has lost its accreditation.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: *applauds KoM* I was worried you wouldn't fulfill your quota of condescending, unpleasant remarks today, but you made it.
Eh, what? My questions were perhaps a bit lazy, in that I didn't bother to read the article (I rarely click on links), but what was unpleasant or condescending about them?
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: Accreditors were particularly concerned that the board gave away its governing authority to superintendent John Thompson, Elgart said. In April, the board signed a contract that allowed the superintendent to violate board policies and circumvent the board, as long as it doesn’t violate state law.
Yeah, that's a pretty good reason to remove the Board. When you don't show up for work, you get fired. Looks like the same thing to me.
quote: School officials can regain accreditation if they show before Sept. 1, 2009, that have met all the mandates. If successful, accreditation would be restored and would be retroactive to Sept. 1, 2008.
So revoking accreditation at first is like a really serious warning? If they fix the problems, it doesn't count? That sounds like it's only dangerous to the seniors who can't afford to wait a year and see what happens.
I wonder if the surrounding counties will allow these students to attend out of zone or if they'll have to look for private and home schools?
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
quote: I wonder if the surrounding counties will allow these students to attend out of zone or if they'll have to look for private and home schools?
Fayette County (south of Clayton) at least has already stated they will not accept transfers from students who don't reside in Fayette County.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Is there something about this I'm missing that makes it national news, or is this post basically by/for people who lived in Georgia?
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
I think because it's the first time in 40 yrs a district has lost their accreditation.
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: *applauds KoM* I was worried you wouldn't fulfill your quota of condescending, unpleasant remarks today, but you made it.
I have to admit, my first thought, without reading the article, was that these schools lost their accreditation due to teaching creationism, or at the very least due to religious reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if that was the first thing to come to any intelligent person's mind before they educated themselves on what actually happened.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I wouldn't be surprised if that was the first thing to come to any bigoted, condescending person's mind before they educated themselves on what actually happened.
Fixed that for you.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
*pat pat* It's okay, BlueShadow. I was being funny.
That said, having attended school in several of the Georgia systems, I'd still say they're the worst. Ya know, on average.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Having gone to K-12 in Georgia schools, and having seen Indiana schools in comparison, I'd beg to differ with that.
Georgia public schools served me quite well. Then again, I lived in a county north of the city that is a) enormous, and b) quite well-funded, so that might have made the difference.
Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I *Still* don't know what they did to lose accredation, or who the group is that was given power to ruin student's futures by the wave of a magic power wand. All I have learned from the article is that the school board (elected if I understand correctly) gave some authority to a School Superintendant. Sounds like reasons were political rather than educational.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Yeah, I want to know what happened, really. Did the group/person who they turned the authority over to make poor educational choices? Are the kids failing to pass? What's going on?
Posted by TheBlueShadow (Member # 9718) on :
I'd still say all of Georgia's schools aren't the worst in the nation. However, I can't do much about anecdotal evidence. Despite having my own anecdotal evidence.
Anyway, this story has been cropping up on the news every so often since about February. If this article is believed, it's been an issue since 2003 when the county was first put on probation for misconduct by the school board. They replaced eight of the nine board members at that time.
quote: ...the initial review was instigated as a reaction to complaints filed by citizens of Clayton County and Board members against Board members. The issues in question are generally related to accusations of “abuse of power, micromanagement and conflicts of interests” resulting from these complaints
The SACS review did NOT result from questions related to academics, curriculum or student achievement. Rather, its scope at this time appears to be concentrated on possible violations of governance policies and actions not in compliance with SACS standards.
I do believe a big worry is what affect this will have on surrounding counties and real estate. Not to mention, all the concerns these children may or may not have after graduation.
Okay, here's some more info, from what I've read and seen on the news. Unfortunately and for some reason I can't seem to figure out, most of the articles covering this have little to no actual detail. You just kind of have to piece it all together.
Aside from the rumors over the past decade or so (probably due to actual warnings that the board never took seriously), the school board has known for six months now that they would lose accreditation if they did not meet some nine requirements by the end of August. SACS has attributed the county's problems to a "dysfunctional school board" (apparently board members have been submitting complaints on each other to SACS for years), but only two of the actual requirements mentioned seem to be public. One - the only one the board met - was that all board members must reside in Clayton County. Another was that the board needed to establish an acceptable ethics policy. That second one was made pretty obvious when Gov. Sonny Purdue fired four of the board members the day the county lost its accreditation specifically for ethics violations.
So yeah, basically some 50,000 students have to suffer now because the board members can't just get their crap together and do their jobs.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:I wouldn't be surprised if that was the first thing to come to any intelligent person's mind before they educated themselves on what actually happened.
Historically, the reason why the south has such problems with public education has to do with racism, not religion. Interestingly, as far as I know, only Virginia actually closed school districts in reaction to Brown vs. the board. But the general defunding of public education in the south has been due to a mass migration to private academies that began in response to Brown. There are school buildings in Alabama that used to belong to the public school system, which, due to a "lack of students," were sold to private academies who filled them immediately with white students, and staffed by teachers who had previously been employed by the public schools.
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
I was living in Alabama, and playing in the Air University Band at that time in history. We did get into many schools across the state and witnessed first hand the devestation of the public school system. I believe we lost at least one generation in the South, when the states refused to continue to fund public education, and substandard private schools became the norm. I was back in Montgomery last fall visiting friends, and was given the impression that they have worked through most of those awful problems in the insuing years. In Montgomery itself, the public high schools, appeared to be integreated. Of course, white flight has left the city itself less white than it was 30 years ago. It seems like most citys are. But, the public schools in that city had regular, gifted and talented, and remedial programs that seemed to be meeting the needs of a multi-racial studentbody.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:There are school buildings in Alabama that used to belong to the public school system, which, due to a "lack of students," were sold to private academies who filled them immediately with white students, and staffed by teachers who had previously been employed by the public schools.
Where? Which schools?
*honestly curious*
Posted by Artemisia Tridentata (Member # 8746) on :
No buildings changed hands. But Lowndes County closed their schools and opened Freedom Academys staffed with many of the same teachers in 1963 or 64.
[ August 30, 2008, 09:02 PM: Message edited by: Artemisia Tridentata ]
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina:
quote:I wouldn't be surprised if that was the first thing to come to any bigoted, condescending person's mind before they educated themselves on what actually happened.
Fixed that for you.
And if that's why they did lose their accreditation, I'm not saying it would be a good thing. I'm saying that, though I wouldn't be happy at all to hear that such an impactful decision was made based on such reasoning, I wouldn't be surprised. I think there's more than enough precedent for stupidity for that to at least cross, if even briefly, somebody's mind. It seems like KoM just voiced a kneejerk reaction before finding out; in fact, doesn't he describe his laziness above somewhere? Bigoted and condescending is a bit too far. Notwithstanding the irony of the latter.
Posted by 0Megabyte (Member # 8624) on :
I believe Jesus had something to say about people criticizing people for things they themselves did... something about motes and logs, I think.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
It is ignorant and bigoted and condescending, because:
1. The controversies about teaching creationism in school have not been in the South. The most recent have been in Kansas and Pennsylvania.
2. Accreditation is not linked to the contents of biology classes.
3. There has absolutely no mention of the controversy at all in connection with the state, much less the county or this incident.
So, in order for that to be the first thing that would spring to mind, you would need to one 1) be wrong about where creationism in schools is an issue; 2) be wrong and uninformed about what goes into accreditation; and 3) be prejudicial and bigoted by assuming that because it takes place in Georgia, it must have something to do with creationism.
Your above statement only works if you define "intelligent people" as those who don't know current events, are unaware of the particulars of accreditation in general and this case in particular, who are prejudiced against the South, and who are dumb enough to assume their unexamined knee-jerk biases are correct.
Those are not qualities of intelligent people. They are, however, qualities of insular, arrogant, psuedointellectuals.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
This is not the first district to lose its accreditation in 40 years or such.
The state went further and dismissed the entire school board, replacing it with one selected by the governor.
The old school board claimed that was illegal and continued to meet, putting out all kinds of demands. The appointed one met and did the same. The poor schools didn't know who to listen too.
It seems to me that some school districts get so big they become magnets for the political wannabe's of the region. These people see themselves as movers and shakers with 20 or 30 million dollar budgets and lose track of the students, the teachers, and the tax payers they are supposed to be taking care of.
And since the school board is not much of a political position, nobody pays that much attention to them during election time.
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
Wow. I think I may actually understand the federal government more than I understand public education.
In before someone says they're one and the same Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:1. The controversies about teaching creationism in school have not been in the South. The most recent have been in Kansas and Pennsylvania.
Most recent I'll give you, but I've been following this for some time, and in general you are mistaken.
quote:2. Accreditation is not linked to the contents of biology classes.
quote:3. There has absolutely no mention of the controversy at all in connection with the state, much less the county or this incident.
As I showed above, you are wrong about the state. As for the county, this is the first I've heard of it. And given a news story from the US - not Georgia - with a school board in trouble, creationism is not an unreasonable first-pass guess.
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
Being aware of accreditation rules isn't criteria for being an intelligent person (the last time I checked, anyway), and neither myself nor KoM actually mentioned the South in our arguments. I didn't assume that my reaction was correct, either. I can't speak for KoM, but after my first thought I figured that I was probably wrong and read the article to see why.
I admit to being ignorant enough to not follow the current events and to not knowing accreditation rules -- but that doesn't mean I'm unintelligent, or a bigot. It just means that's the extent of my knowledge on the subject. In my head, it was "US School + creationism controversy = losing accreditation", not any combination of "US School in the South + creation (stupid belief) controversy = losing accreditation." I'm not prejudiced, nor do I belief creationism is stupid.
The reason I took issue with it is because KoM didn't actually put down a controversial opinion -- just a musing, and you're assuming that he's being prejudiced (in some form) because of his post history. Maybe you weren't, but you assumed that I was prejudiced against the South and that I believed my first reaction was correct.
I wouldn't have voiced my opinion otherwise -- but even if I had, I wouldn't expect to be called a bigot.
Posted by TheBlueShadow (Member # 9718) on :
Anyone interested in the steps and rules for accreditation of schools or districts for the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) and the North Central Associations (NCA) can go here:
You can also definitely find the Creationism debate much more recent in Georgia. I just think most people are sick of listening to it.
quote:On December 19, 2006 Americans United for Separation of Church and State announced that the case had been settled out of court in favor of the plaintiffs. Cobb County school officials will not order the placement of "any stickers, labels, stamps, inscriptions, or other warnings or disclaimers bearing language substantially similar to that used on the sticker that is the subject of this action" and would not undermine science education in the future.[14] The school district also agreed to pay $166,659 towards attorneys' fees in the case.[15]The decision was hailed by the National Center for Science Education[16] and the American Civil Liberties Union.[17]
The website Answers in Genesis responded, "It’s definitely a victory for humanism and censorship, but it is not a victory for science or for parents or their children who are being told they cannot question or challenge evolution in the classroom."[18]. The Discovery Institute offered takes on the ruling that were viewed as "spin"[19] and issued an official opinion that an "incompetent defense by Cobb County attorney may have caused [the] school district loss."[20]
There are seven standards that school districts are evaluated with by SACS. Apparently all is well with six of them, with Governance being the one with all the trouble. The standards the governing board are expected to adhere to are:
quote: GOVERNANCE In fulfillment of this standard, the system operates under the jurisdiction of a governing board that: 2.1 Establishes and communicates policies and procedures that provide for the effective operation of the system 2.2 Recognizes and preserves the executive, administrative, and leadership authority of the administrative head of the system 2.3 Ensures compliance with applicable local, state, and federal laws, standards, and regulations 2.4 Implements policies and procedures that provide for the orientation and training of the governing board 2.5 Builds public support, secures sufficient resources, and acts as a steward of the system’s resources 2.6 Maintains access to legal counsel to advise or obtain information about legal requirements and obligations 2.7 Maintains adequate insurance or equivalent resources to protect its financial stability and administrative operations
LEADERSHIP In fulfillment of this standard, the system has leadership that: 2.8 Provides for systematic analysis and review of student performance and school and system effectiveness 2.9 Creates and supports collaborative networks of stakeholders to support system programs 2.10 Provides direction, assistance, and resources to align, support, and enhance all parts of the system in meeting organizational and student performance goals 2.11 Provides internal and external stakeholders meaningful roles in the decision-making process that promote a culture of participation, responsibility, and ownership 2.12 Assesses and addresses community expectations and stakeholder satisfaction 2.13 Implements an evaluation system that provides for the professional growth of all personnel
Which of these are the nine that Clayton County didn't uphold, I don't know. And which one refers to board members living within the county? Perhaps 2.3 (compliance with local, state, federal laws)?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
For all the passionate defenses for an opinion that turned out to be as mistaken as it was prejudiced, I think it would go over better if it weren't being held up as something "intelligent" people would think.
Because you like to think of yourself as intelligent, that does not mean your ignorant biases are a hallmark of intelligence.
As for KoM, I meant it - I'd be shocked if he managed to discuss an issue about Americans of any kind and Southerners in particular that didn't get in a spiteful, malicious little dig.
Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
You're either misunderstanding, or assuming the worst.
I wasn't saying that it would be something an intelligent person 'would' make, but that they 'could' make it. Everybody's ignorant about something, in fact most things, and I wasn't saying that my ignorance was a hallmark of intelligence.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
The first thing I thought of was creationist teaching too. Not because it's the South, but because creationism is the single most stupid, pointless thing schools in America keep trying to sneak in to the curriculum.
Any school that teaches ID should lose its accreditation.
Now if you'd like to call me ignorant, bigoted, or stupid, please just write it down on a piece of paper and I'll tell you where you can put it so I'll be sure to get it. Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
Er, I idly wondered whether it was a creationism issue too. Feel free to consider me ignorant, bigoted, stupid, spiteful, and/or malicious.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:The first thing I thought of was creationist teaching too. Not because it's the South, but because creationism is the single most stupid, pointless thing schools in America keep trying to sneak in to the curriculum.
This and KoM's thought that "with a school board in trouble, creationism is not an unreasonable first-pass guess" are examples of conclusions reached through a hugely distorted cultural lens. While there's a subgroup that focuses on fighting creationism/ID in public schools, there are lots of other issues that arise more often in schools.
Those issues are more mundane and don't excite the passions of KoM like ID does. KoM sees creationism as the likely source because he spends a far greater percentage of the thought he gives to public schools on creationism than other people do.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Google "school board controversy", and the first ten hits are distributed like so:
Looks pretty dominant to me.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
It is a good example of how coverage skews perception.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
But this is not just some completely random school board case picked from the entire population of such; it is a controversy that has in fact reached the national media - to wit, Hatrack. So my guess had, by these admittedly low statistics, a 50% chance of being correct. Those are betting odds.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
So you not only do not know about the common causes of loss of accreditation and the nature of school board controversies, but you do not know that you do not know.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Considering how often religious-related school issues crop up here I'd say the fact that we're reading about it on Hatrack gives it a much greater than average chance to have a religious element.
Had I seen the headline discussed somewhere else, Creationism might have been further down the list.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:But this is not just some completely random school board case picked from the entire population of such; it is a controversy that has in fact reached the national media - to wit, Hatrack. So my guess had, by these admittedly low statistics, a 50% chance of being correct. Those are betting odds.
But the reason it was reported nationally is that the town lost accreditation - an event in and of itself noteworthy enough to warrant national press. The accreditation agency is unlikely to be swayed by skewed coverage in rendering its decision.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: So you not only do not know about the common causes of loss of accreditation and the nature of school board controversies, but you do not know that you do not know.
And you know nothing about correlations. The data set of interest is not "all accreditation cases", but "accreditation cases that make it onto the Internets". I provided numbers to back up my case. What have you got other than a desire not to admit it when you're wrong?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:The data set of interest is not "all accreditation cases", but "accreditation cases that make it onto the Internets".
This is the first loss of accreditation by a public school system in 40 years. It was guaranteed to get into national headlines. There's nothing else in the total population during the period the internet has existed.
quote:I provided numbers to back up my case.
None of the top-10 links using the search you provided had anything to do with accreditation. You provided nothing.
quote:Considering how often religious-related school issues crop up here I'd say the fact that we're reading about it on Hatrack gives it a much greater than average chance to have a religious element.
Had I seen the headline discussed somewhere else, Creationism might have been further down the list.
This is the strongest argument against it being about creationism: there's little chance the word "creationism" or "ID" wouldn't have made it into the headline had it been at all relevant. There's almost no chance it would have appeared on Hatrack without an explicit mention.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:But this is not just some completely random school board case picked from the entire population of such; it is a controversy that has in fact reached the national media - to wit, Hatrack. So my guess had, by these admittedly low statistics, a 50% chance of being correct. Those are betting odds.
But the reason it was reported nationally is that the town lost accreditation - an event in and of itself noteworthy enough to warrant national press. The accreditation agency is unlikely to be swayed by skewed coverage in rendering its decision.
If you check back to my original post, you'll observe that I started out unsure about what accreditation meant. So the category for me was 'school board trouble', not 'accreditation trouble'. Which indicates a certain amount of ignorance, certainly; I am ignorant of many things. Hence my sincerely meant question, "What does this mean?" Which is how I intended to become less ignorant on the point.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
quote:The data set of interest is not "all accreditation cases", but "accreditation cases that make it onto the Internets".
This is the first loss of accreditation by a public school system in 40 years. It was guaranteed to get into national headlines. There's nothing else in the total population during the period the internet has existed.
(...)
None of the top-10 links using the search you provided had anything to do with accreditation. You provided nothing.
Again, this sort of thing is why I asked the question in the first place.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Aren't we all arguing for the sake of arguing or the chance to make snippy remarks at each other?
None of us have any hard data to back up our assumptions. This is pretty silly.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: Any school that teaches ID should lose its accreditation.
Make that any public school, and further specify that they are teaching ID as part of a science class, and I'll agree with you.
If you try to include private schools, I'll just laugh at you, and assume you know nothing about accreditation. (I have been involved in working to get/keep accreditation of private schools at the elementary, high school, and college level.)
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Any school that teaches ID should be grouped with schools that teach Flat Earth and the Dome of Stars which revolve around the earth. It's junk, pure and simple. If a religious school wants to teach religious classes, good for them.
If they teach ID as science, they should lose accreditation - public, private, home school, whoever.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
You misunderstand what accreditation means and/or how it works.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
It's my understanding that accreditation is a process by which an outside agency determines that a school provides a quality education to its students.
Accreditation is simply a standard which is set, so that without having to examine each particular school, a person can have some degree of certainty that a student who has graduated from an accredited school has received an education within specific standards.
Which part of accreditation am I misunderstanding?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: It's my understanding that accreditation is a process by which an outside agency determines that a school provides a quality education to its students.
Yes and no. It is a process by which an outside agency (usually one of the six regional accreditors) determines whether a given school meets a set of criteria (or shows sufficient evidence of progress towards doing so since the last visit to warrant a temporary reprieve). Those criteria vary greatly between segments (i.e., public non-profit v. private non-profit v. for-profit), and for the latter two need not meet any outside body's criteria (usually with the specific exception of certain minimums in mathematics and reading/writing). That is, if School XYZ can satisfy their local accrediting agency that they are meeting their own criteria, are measuring incoming students' math/language abilities and attempting to bring them to at least minimum standards, and that they are fulfilling their stated mission, they will probably get/keep accreditation. The problems usually come up with schools that are not actually sticking within their own stated parameters (claiming to be college prep and not offering math above algebra, etc.). This includes public schools, whose parameters are set by outside groups, such as the state or city school board, as well as by state and/or federal laws. (Occasionally a school's mission will be viewed as the accreditors as outside of their purview, and the school will be referred to one of the religious or other specialized accreditors.)
Oh, and you may not be aware that school visits and report reviews are primarily conducted by a school's peers -- private schools get reviewed by principals/deans/board members of fellow private schools, public schools by those of public schools, and religious schools by folks from other religious schools.
To summarize the point I was trying to make: public schools have criteria set by public groups (local, state, and federal), and the accreditors will expect them to stick with them. Private schools have very few criteria from public sources, and for the most part will be expected to concern themselves with sticking to their own criteria.
IMO, that is exactly how it should be.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I see the distinction. You're correct, I was not aware of those differences before. Thank you for the additional information.
I still think it's a disgrace if any school teaches ID as a science course. It goes to my argument in the other thread, which is that it's intentionally keeping the students ignorant. That should abhorrent to the goals of ANY school.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
From those schools' perspectives, it is not so much keeping the students ignorant as protecting them from being influenced by evil lies.
And to be clear (in case my position on this issue has not been made clear before), I disagree with them. But I still think they should have the right to do so.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
quote:From those schools' perspectives, it is not so much keeping the students ignorant as protecting them from being influenced by evil lies.
This doesn't matter because they're wrong. Apparently.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
Rakeesh: So you support control through ignorance?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*sigh*
Posted by krynn (Member # 524) on :
i grew up maybe 30-40 minutes away from clayton county in gwinnett and i had never heard of this. i feel kind of bad for the families living in that district.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
MightyCow,
Of course I don-hey, wait a minute! Wow! I just reconsidered my entire position thanks to your penetrating analysis of the situation. Whew! What a dumbass I was until you came along! Whatever it was I actually thought about the situation, that is.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
quote: I still think it's a disgrace if any school teaches ID as a science course.
I'm ok with it, though my reasoning is a bit twisted.
See, the moment you teach a kid the Scientific Method, they now have the ability to decide for themselves what counts as science. And much as I believe in God and Him doing something unspecifically different with Adam and Eve, I don't believe ID is science. It half explains the how (sort of) but not the why, and it's certainly not repeatable.
So if part of science is learning to question the conventional assumptions of our time, then anyone who learns ID but fails to apply the Scientific Method to it hasn't really learned any science at all. Those that really learned what science is won't need to be told that ID isn't it. It will be obvious.
Evolution's the one that's really in danger from being taught badly. As I've said in other threads, I didn't buy it for the longest time because it was presented as the same kind of quasi-scientific bunk. And most science-y shows don't help since the narrator tends to say idiotic things like, "The pteradon recognizes that it is losing it's ecological niche and must evolve to survive." Really? The bird decides to evolve and does, so those other species died out from a lack of foresight? It's obnoxious and doesn't help clear up the confusion any.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I was taught creationism in my school, and like millions of other children who became interested in the dinosaurs, noticed that somehow Adam and Eve lived several thousand years ago but the dinosaurs were hundreds of millions of years old.
Having said that, I agree with what Rivka has been saying in this thread.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)