tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1489181034686966075.post3166995319142753976..comments2023-09-28T08:52:04.435-07:00Comments on Great Lakes Skydock: Science as an adventureOmegaPaladinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16031663925500964350noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1489181034686966075.post-61131355895815934992008-07-12T14:55:00.000-07:002008-07-12T14:55:00.000-07:00Jason,Not necessarily. Global warming has its sha...Jason,<BR/><BR/>Not necessarily. Global warming has its share of skeptics who advance rational arguments. If someone wanted to have students debate global warming and show both <I>An Inconvenient Truth</I> and the <I>The Great Global Warming Swindle</I>, this law would protect him from being proclaimed a denier and fired.<BR/><BR/>I'd also disagree with your assertion that only the scientific orthodoxy should be taught. I wouldn't advocate this kind of structure at the primary school level, but at the high school level this kind of discussion is worthwhile. Teaching the great debates in science both historical (DNA vs. protein as genetic material or the development of quantum mechanics) and current is valuable in developing an appreciation for science as a process.<BR/><BR/>I'd present evolution by starting with previous theories, move on to Darwin's principal findings and the support he offered for them, the scientific criticism of his theory, and the new evidence for and against. Students in honors classes would be required to either write a paper on the subject or engage in a debate. Global warming could be presented in a similar fashion.OmegaPaladinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16031663925500964350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1489181034686966075.post-55849295805032723092008-07-11T10:28:00.000-07:002008-07-11T10:28:00.000-07:00If we going to be direct about this, we're talking...If we going to be direct about this, we're talking about teaching <B>creationism</B> in public schools. Not adventures, viewpoints, debate, or any other verbal evasion. <BR/><BR/>Promoters of creationism should at least have the integrity to state their agenda plainly.<BR/><BR/>Note that primary and secondary education isn't about independent research; it is about the transmission of scientific orthodoxy, the purpose being to get students up to speed when they go off to college. Education should not be democratic, but authoritarian. If the students know it all, education has no point. I blame Dewey's progressive teaching about "student-centered" education; the relativist liberals pushing this stuff are finally reaping the Dark Age mentality they have sown.jhbowdenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12377271992125388319noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1489181034686966075.post-29018417451895479332008-07-10T11:34:00.000-07:002008-07-10T11:34:00.000-07:00One thing that seems pretty good about this law, f...One thing that seems pretty good about this law, from the article at least, is that the teaching of a particular viewpoint is not mandated, only permitted. This should hopefully prevent viewpoints that have become very marginalized in a few decades from hanging around in schools. Nonetheless, the fact that we're talking about viewpoints rather than methods or history probably says something about the quality of high school science education.<BR/><BR/>Mises was right about the school being a political prize...Nic Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11939432456843917010noreply@blogger.com