9
   

England/Wales:Third of science teachers want creationism taught in school

 
 
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 03:15 am
Three in 10 science teachers believe creationism should be taught in science lessons, according to a survey published today.

And more than a third (37%) of primary and secondary teachers in general believe that the subject should be taught alongside evolution and the Big Bang theory.

The Ipsos Mori poll of more than 900 primary and secondary teachers in England and Wales found that while nearly half (47%) believe it should not be taught in science lessons, two thirds (65%) agree that creationism should be discussed in schools.

This rises to three quarters of teachers (73%) with science as their subject specialism.

Two in three science specialists (65%) do not think that creationism should be taught in science lessons.

But few teachers think creationism as an idea should be dismissed outright.
Just one in four (26%) agree with a view expressed by Professor Chris Higgins, vice-chancellor of Durham University that "creationism is completely unsupportable as a theory, and the only reason to mention creationism in schools is to enable teachers to demonstrate why the idea is scientific nonsense and has no basis in evidence or rational thought."

Would you Adama and Eva it?

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 9 • Views: 2,234 • Replies: 54
No top replies

 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 03:15 am
@Walter Hinteler,



Quote:
Steve Jones
I find this very depressing. Do those teachers believe that they should also teach the possibility that water is H3O, that Bacon wrote Shakespeare and that babies are brought by storks?

The logic is exactly the same: and there is just as little, or as much, scientific controversy about the idea of evolution as there is about those of physics and chemistry.

Next year is, of course, Darwin Year " the 200th anniversary of his birth and 150th anniversary of publication On The Origin of Species). It is my profound hope (likely to be disappointed) that teachers and everyone else should learn to stop treating him as a prophet, or a pariah, or a philosopher, or even as a trained ecclesiastic who turned to atheism " and just take him for what he was, the greatest biologist in history.

He made biology into a single science linked by the idea of evolution, rather than a bunch of ideologies.

Steve Jones is professor of genetics and head of the biology department at University College London. His lastest book " due for publication in the New Year " is Darwin's Island



Quote:
Richard Dawkins

The 'Michael Reiss position' is defensible. Just as a chemistry teacher might discuss the phlogiston theory, or a physics teacher might discuss the Ptolemaic theory of the planets as history of science, so it is defensible to teach that there are people called creationists, and they believe what they believe.

But if teaching creationism 'alongside' evolution means what it seems to mean, it is no more defensible than teaching the stork theory alongside the sex theory of the where babies come from.

If 29% of science teachers really think creationism should be taught as a valid alternative to evolution, we have a national disgrace on our hands, calling for urgent remedial action in the education of science teachers. We are failing in our duty to children, if we staff our schools with teachers who are this ignorant " or this stupid.

Prof Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist and fellow of New College, Oxford. He wrote The God Delusion

Source
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 05:58 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Lord can a third of science teachers be that idiotically?!

Somehow I question the poll results.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 06:07 am
@BillRM,
The number of Creationists is quite large in the US, so 33% isnt out of the question. Most of the schools in US handle the subject as reccomended by DAwkins. Creationism can be handled in its historical context and stand as an example of how scientific thinking has advanced along with technology.

Its going to be interesting to see how UK handles it. I know weve been getting advice from several UK colleagues on how "they would" dismiss the Creationist /ID challenges . Now they can deal with it also.Maybe the US approaches can stand as a series of bad examples , or not.
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 08:30 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Reports like this show just how important it is to repair education systems and to protect them from political and religious influence.

The teachers they polled today obviously weren't taught very well by the education system that produced them, and now they are perpetuating the problem into another generation. This is exactly why the Creationist religious organizations like the DI attack the elementary level education system.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 08:47 am
This article is full of crap.

And, it would be a good idea that the people on this thread who are allegedly defending "science" show a little of the critical thinking and healthy skepticism that are key parts of science.

First the article completely misses the boat on the educational issue involved. Actually there are two questions for science teachers that are not at all connected.

1) Do you believe that there is any doubt about the invalidity of Creationism?
2) Do you believe that educators should be sensitive to the cultural and religious beliefs of the communities they serve?

There is a big difference between the two issues here.... Even people who fully understand and fully accept Evolution as the only scientific theory of life can, as an educator, think about how to best serve their students and their families.

The quotes posted clearly blur the issue in an attempt to make a political point.

I suspect the study was a push poll to make a one-sided political argument that is very unscientific indeed.
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:02 am
Quote:
"School science lessons provide wonderful opportunities for students of all ages to be introduced to scientific thinking about the origins of the universe and evolution of life. At the same time, some students have creationist beliefs. The task of those who teach science is then to teach the science but to treat such students with respect."


This quote is the key point in the article.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:28 am
@farmerman,
Farmerman we are not talking about the whole population we are talking about science teachers who should know bettter!
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:41 am
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:

This article is full of crap.


Which one? I posted from two.

It's more or less a summary of the press release. Publish like above or very similar in various British media.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:42 am
@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

First the article completely misses the boat on the educational issue involved. Actually there are two questions for science teachers that are not at all connected.

1) Do you believe that there is any doubt about the invalidity of Creationism?
2) Do you believe that educators should be sensitive to the cultural and religious beliefs of the communities they serve?

There is a big difference between the two issues here.... Even people who fully understand and fully accept Evolution as the only scientific theory of life can, as an educator, think about how to best serve their students and their families.



Actually there were three questions:

Quote:
Q1.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that, alongside the theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory, creationism should be TAUGHT in science lessons?
Q2.
To what extent do you agree or disagree that, alongside the theory of evolution and the Big Bang theory, creationism should be DISCUSSED in science lessons?
Q3.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement: "Creationism is completely unsupportable as a theory, and the only reason to mention creationism in schools is to enable teachers to demonstrate why the idea is scientific nonsense and has no basis in evidence or rational thought"?
Ipsos MORI

The DCSF Guidance on Creationism and Intelligent Design says [according to all online sources I found online and confirmed as true by a teacher from England I asked today]:
"Creationism and intelligent design are not part of the science National Curriculum programmes of study and should not be taught as science. However, there is a real difference between teaching ‘x' and teaching about ‘x'. Any questions about creationism and intelligent design which arise in science lessons, for example as a result of media coverage, could provide the opportunity to explain or explore why they are not considered to be scientific theories and, in the right context, why evolution is considered to be a scientific theory".



0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:42 am
@ebrown p,


ebrown p wrote:
I suspect the study was a push poll to make a one-sided political argument that is very unscientific indeed.


Quote:
What is the Ipsos MORI Teachers Omnibus?
It is the only Omnibus survey of its type. We interview a representative sample of 900-1,000 maintained primary and secondary school teachers across England and Wales. It is a multi-client survey and is therefore a highly cost-effective way of reaching this audience: administration costs are shared between all the clients who buy space in the questionnaire but your questions are confidential to you. Interviews are done by telephone and last a maximum of 15 minutes.


Ipsos MORI were the first research agency in the world to gain ISO 20252, the new international quality standard for research.
Why, do you think, they run a -very successfully- program, which is not scientitfic?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:46 am
@BillRM,
That is the occasion here BillRM. Whether we like it or not, its a fact. You may wish to denigrate theCreationists for their beliefs (as I frequently do) HOQWEVER it doesnt change the fact that THIS GROUP IS WELL ORGANIZED AND FUNDED to simply cherry pick their facts, filter them through their beliefs, and pull the results out of their asses .
Our jobs are to keep the state ed boards and local schoolboards balanced in favor of good science and away from the Creationist/ID mindset. In the US, weve had several really good court decisions forbidding Creationist and ID teaching (as directed in Amendment 1 of the US Constitution)and that hardly stops the efforts of the CReationists. WHen faced with a new court decision against them, they merely take a break and retool their "sales pitch".

I dont waste a damn bit of time in incredulity to their numbers, Im busy enough in PA helping several professional organizations to bring about enlightened science education and keeping the Creationists at bay. We can all get involved in our various states and help. NCSE is a good clearing house of the organizations involved.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:47 am
@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:

Quote:
"School science lessons provide wonderful opportunities for students of all ages to be introduced to scientific thinking about the origins of the universe and evolution of life. At the same time, some students have creationist beliefs. The task of those who teach science is then to teach the science but to treat such students with respect."


This quote is the key point in the article.



The Guardian quoted Reiss' response to the poll there.
Reiss didn't take part in the poll.

I suppose, you followed the discussion about Reiss and his resignation.
Do you have more insight than published?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 05:23 pm
@farmerman,
Farmerman if memory service me correctly my old birth state/commonwealth had a school board taken over by the far rights religious nuts a few years ago and they when in some manner try to open the door to Creationism.

Lord I can not remember the details except that at the next election they was thrown out and the courts did stop them before that.

It seem a pattern where they will get elected because most people are not all that caring about the local school board make up until they wake up to find that their school system is being turn into a world wide laughing stock and a great deal of money is going to lawyers.


0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 05:47 pm
@farmerman,
BILL RM---If you are referring to PA, then its the Dover PA case that you were speaking of. The fact that the Creationist schoolboard got into power was from perpetration of a fraud. The schoolboard was taking a lean to the Conservative side by all new candidates preaching a platform of fiscal frugality . Once they were elected, the schoolboard majority, led by the President (Mr Buckingham) unwrapped their stealth mission and began all the shenanigans that led to the Fed trial and the final step of voting them out.
In actuality they were not voted out because everyone was so dead set against Creationism but for the fact that the approach that the schoolboard used had caused the schooldistrict to go further into the red dueto all their legal bills and at least hlf of the 2 million $ judgement against them (plus expenses).

The Discovery Institute, initially was associated with the Dover case (later they tried to back out but were stuck) and they were the ones in the background that were whispering to Mr Buckingham and presenting him with strategy and resources (which included , among other things,a 2 week trip to Seattle so that he could confer with the Discovery Institute for a day)
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 05:49 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Is it possible that the Brits want to ingratiate their nation to more of the U.S. population, that seems to have an ever larger contingent of Creationists (by adopting Creationism as a topic to be discussed; perhaps, not in a science class though)?

During the 1800's Britain was still anathema to many Americans. Towards the end of the 19th century there was a Rapprochment with the U.S. This might have been due to Britain's realization that in the 20th century she would need a friendly, and able resource, in the way of the U.S.

So, I take this news with the thought as to whether there is an ulterior motive on some level. The 60 million Bible believing Evangelicals, in the U.S., make for good allies in uncertain times.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 06:27 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie people in the mass do not think that way.

And we had always had a love/hate family relationship with the mother country.

Right after our first little war with them we knife the French in the back and they not the French was our major trading partner. In fact trade increased with them after we was no longer tie to them


Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 11:42 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Foofie people in the mass do not think that way.

And we had always had a love/hate family relationship with the mother country.

Right after our first little war with them we knife the French in the back and they not the French was our major trading partner. In fact trade increased with them after we was no longer tie to them



Britain is the "mother country"? The largest white ethnic group in the U.S. are German-Americans, I thought. Perhaps, there are more WASP's; however, if Britain is their mother country, I am not sure our breaking away from them qualifies everyone to wax nostalgic over Britain being the mother country.

As of today, based on our President-elect, Kenya and Hawaii are the mother countries.

And, the statement that Britain is the mother country might be interpreted to disenfranchise those non-WASP Americans that harken from some other bastion of ethnicity.

To be scientific, the mother country may have been Asia, across the Siberian Straits. Yep, Native Americans might just get the right to determine what the mother country is!
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 12:19 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
Native Americans might just get the right to determine what the mother country is!


Then they would say you are all trespassing and that you've devastated the natural resources to make money, buy houses and send your kids to college to learn how to assert and that Hollywood, Wall Street, Mom and apple pie are a load of shite. That's what I would say if I was one of them.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 01:04 pm
@spendius,
The majority culture and government forms of this country is base on England not any other country in the world with some very small credit going to France and to Spanish culture thrown in.

As far as Native Americans go what wave of migration of Native Americans, do we give credit for having some moral superior rights to the land?

If memory service me correctly, DNA had indicted that there was many waves over many thousands of years.

As far as taking the poor native Americans lands we did not do anything to them that they was not cheerfully doing to each other over thousands of years, we just happen to be far better at it then they was.


 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » England/Wales:Third of science teachers want creationism taught in school
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 10/21/2014 at 10:42:51