Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cowardice, Creationism and Science Education: University Presidents
Harlequin
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 18 (197144)
04-06-2005 12:47 AM


Cowardice, Creationism and Science Education: An Open Letter to the Universities is written by John Rennie, editor of Scientific American. In it he mentions a forum he was at with many university presidents where not one was willing to publically support evolution. He proposes that the universities are part of antievolution problem because their unwillingness to speak up for fear of antagonizing those who dislike evolution.
So this brings a few questions for the board:
1) What should be the role of the university administration in the fight against anti-science and/or lack of good science education.
2) Are they part of the problem?
3) What should be done about it if they are?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2005 2:06 AM Harlequin has not replied
 Message 4 by Thor, posted 04-06-2005 7:58 AM Harlequin has not replied
 Message 5 by paisano, posted 04-06-2005 9:25 AM Harlequin has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 18 (197149)
04-06-2005 1:13 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 3 of 18 (197155)
04-06-2005 2:06 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Harlequin
04-06-2005 12:47 AM


i'm sure this is related and already been mentioned, but here in florida you can now sue your professor for teaching things contrary to your beliefs.
such as evolution.
this country is starting to scare me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Harlequin, posted 04-06-2005 12:47 AM Harlequin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Dr Cresswell, posted 04-06-2005 9:38 AM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 8 by JonF, posted 04-06-2005 10:43 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Thor
Member (Idle past 5910 days)
Posts: 148
From: Sydney, Australia
Joined: 12-20-2004


Message 4 of 18 (197207)
04-06-2005 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Harlequin
04-06-2005 12:47 AM


All I really know about the evolution/creation education issue is what I see on these forums, and it seems to be mostly an issue in high schools. Is that a fair assumption? Please correct me if I have the wrong impression.
1) What should be the role of the university administration in the fight against anti-science and/or lack of good science education.
I’d like to see them get involved. Perhaps, making submission to those who have the power to make decisions in these matters, clearly detailing the facts of the ToE, and that it is the accepted theory of the scientific community. Concluding therefore, that it cannot be excluded from any credible science course. In short, this is what science is, deal with it.
2) Are they part of the problem?
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that they’re part of the problem, they’re just not doing much to help solve it yet. The problem is mostly due to, if I may paraphrase George W, the ‘axis of ignorance’ that wants to inhibit the serious study of science with religious dogma.
3) What should be done about it if they are?
How about demanding a detailed explanation from the ID camp, as to how ID can be considered separate from divine creation. If (when) it is shown that ID is simply thinly disguised religion, then surely they can’t introduce law to make it part of science teaching. As I typed that it seemed a little obvious, has it already been attempted/done?
Maybe, they should publicly make ID supporters justify how ID meets the criteria of a scientific theory.
If all else fails, explain to the government how the USA will fall behind other parts of the world in the field of biological research, because professors and students have wasted valuable time dealing with mythology.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Harlequin, posted 04-06-2005 12:47 AM Harlequin has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6422 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 5 of 18 (197211)
04-06-2005 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Harlequin
04-06-2005 12:47 AM


I don't see this as surprising at all. University administrators tend to err on the side of academic freedom, perhaps to a fault in some instances. They would be reluctant to mandate that ID be off-limits as a topic of discussion on campus, even if they thought the case for it was weak.
Put it this way. If Ward Churchill, then ID.
Now if governemnt were to mandate the teaching of ID, or the non teaching of evolution, or even vice versa, I'd expect these administrators (at least at public institutions) to take a stronger stand, and be disappointed if they did not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Harlequin, posted 04-06-2005 12:47 AM Harlequin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 04-06-2005 11:13 AM paisano has replied

  
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 18 (197214)
04-06-2005 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by arachnophilia
04-06-2005 2:06 AM


quote:
here in florida you can now sue your professor for teaching things contrary to your beliefs.
such as evolution.
If your science professor tried to teach you ID or some other form of Creationism could you also sue over that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2005 2:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2005 8:57 PM Dr Cresswell has not replied
 Message 17 by Loudmouth, posted 04-07-2005 3:26 PM Dr Cresswell has not replied

  
Mespo
Member (Idle past 2884 days)
Posts: 158
From: Mesopotamia, Ohio, USA
Joined: 09-19-2002


Message 7 of 18 (197221)
04-06-2005 10:31 AM


Counter Suit
Dr Cresswell writes:
If your science professor tried to teach you ID or some other form of Creationism could you also sue over that?
Great idea. Here's a classic case of a law that can backfire against the sponsors. Take it to court and see how it holds up.
(:raig

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 8 of 18 (197224)
04-06-2005 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by arachnophilia
04-06-2005 2:06 AM


here in florida you can now sue your professor for teaching things contrary to your beliefs.
Not yet, if ever; the bill is in committee. House 0837: Relating to Student & Faculty Academic Freedom.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2005 2:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by kjsimons, posted 04-06-2005 10:57 AM JonF has not replied
 Message 15 by arachnophilia, posted 04-06-2005 8:56 PM JonF has not replied
 Message 18 by StormWolfx2x, posted 04-08-2005 4:19 AM JonF has not replied

  
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 821
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 9 of 18 (197228)
04-06-2005 10:57 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by JonF
04-06-2005 10:43 AM


From the link in your message
(3) Students have a right to expect that their academic
freedom and the quality of their education will not be infringed
upon by instructors who persistently introduce controversial
matter into the classroom or coursework that has no relation to
the subject of study and serves no legitimate pedagogical
purpose.
Looks like you can teach things that contradict someone's religion, as long as it pertains to the "subject of study".
(6) Faculty and instructors have a right to academic
freedom in the classroom in discussing their subjects, but they
should make their students aware of serious scholarly viewpoints
other than their own and should encourage intellectual honesty,
civil debate, and critical analysis of ideas in the pursuit of
knowledge and truth.
It appears that the faculty only has to make students "aware of serious scholarly viewpoints", so creationism and ID don't qualify and don't have to be included in a science classroom discussion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by JonF, posted 04-06-2005 10:43 AM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Chiroptera, posted 04-06-2005 11:19 AM kjsimons has replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 18 (197234)
04-06-2005 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by paisano
04-06-2005 9:25 AM


quote:
They would be reluctant to mandate that ID be off-limits as a topic of discussion on campus, even if they thought the case for it was weak.
I don't think that anyone is asking university presidents to mandate anything as off-limits. The question is whether the university presidents should take a stand on the quality of academic research. If a university history faculty member were to teach Holocaust denial, I would not expect them to be dismissed except if it can be shown that the quality of their research were below acceptable standards. On the other hand, I would expect the president of the university to denounce it.
-
quote:
Put it this way. If Ward Churchill, then ID.
As I recall, the governor of Colorado is putting pressure on the university to dismiss Churchill. There is a university committee investigating his writings to see if they can scrape up some grounds for dismissal. So much for academic freedom, eh?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by paisano, posted 04-06-2005 9:25 AM paisano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by paisano, posted 04-06-2005 11:31 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 18 (197236)
04-06-2005 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by kjsimons
04-06-2005 10:57 AM


quote:
It appears that the faculty only has to make students "aware of serious scholarly viewpoints", so creationism and ID don't qualify and don't have to be included in a science classroom discussion.
It depends on who gets to decide what constitutes serious scholarly viewpoints. The purpose of these laws is to allow conservatives to "go after" supposedly biased liberal professors. But if the "liberal professors" and their "liberal colleagues" are the ones who determine what are the serious scholarly viewpoints, and what constitutes making the students "aware", then the whole bill is toothless. Somehow, I suspect that these "liberals" aren't going to be the ones to determine whether students are "made aware" of "scholarly viewpoints", or whether the "controversial matter" has a "legitimate pedagogical purpose" -- the purpose of the law is to allow people with an axe to grind to tie up these "liberals'" time in court.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by kjsimons, posted 04-06-2005 10:57 AM kjsimons has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by kjsimons, posted 04-06-2005 11:30 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 821
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 6.7


Message 12 of 18 (197240)
04-06-2005 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Chiroptera
04-06-2005 11:19 AM


I agree that this is an attempt by the conseratives to further mess up our education system, I'm just not sure that it will really have much effect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Chiroptera, posted 04-06-2005 11:19 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6422 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 13 of 18 (197241)
04-06-2005 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Chiroptera
04-06-2005 11:13 AM


Churchill shouldn't be dismissed solely for his views, no matter how odious. However, if it is determined that he faked credentials to get hired, he should be dismissed. Any business would do the same.
This isn't about Churchill per se. I think CU should be more concerned about trying to publicize the presence of, and retain, Weiman, Cornell , and Cech than Churchill. JMHO.
Back on topic, university administrators may feel that the evidence for ID is so weak, that it will tend to fall of its own accord, and professors in the relevant departments will show little interest in it.
I wasn't aware the Florida bill actually passed. It sounds like bad and unenforceable legislation. Wouldn't be the first time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Chiroptera, posted 04-06-2005 11:13 AM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 18 (197265)
04-06-2005 1:25 PM


The simplest solution, I think, is to put the onus on the scientific community, not the school administrators. What is taught in science classes (ie high school, undergrad, and graduate classes) should be taken from the primary, peer reviewed, scientific literature. The teaching of science has always dealt with theories that are well founded. The research of science has always dealt with expanding knowledge. ID could fit well into the research side of science, that is if the ID crowd could actually construct a testable model.
On the other hand, ID and creationism could fit into a "Philosophy of Science" class. Although the creationist crowd might not like to here this, but both ID and creationism would be great examples of what science is not, and how both fail in applying the scientific method.
And I think the Holocaust Denial analogy is a fair one. Bringing us back to the Dover situation, would it be condoned if a history teacher/professor told students that they could find a book on how the Jews faked the Holocaust in the school library? Would it be condoned if stickers were put in history texts stating that the Holocaust is just a theory and it's reality is hotly contested by many scholars? Of course not, on both accounts. So why should "Of Pandas and People" and anti-evolution stickers be condoned? The battle is fought in the realm of science, not in school board meetings or interviews with University BMOC's.

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1343 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 15 of 18 (197347)
04-06-2005 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by JonF
04-06-2005 10:43 AM


here in florida you can now sue your professor for teaching things contrary to your beliefs.
Not yet, if ever; the bill is in committee.
good to know. let's just pray it doesn't pass.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by JonF, posted 04-06-2005 10:43 AM JonF has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024