Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.

Lesson Plans


Fw: Fw: creationism vs. evolutionism

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI (occti)
Sat, 14 Aug 1999 00:27:25 -0400


----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence A. Parker/OCCTI <occti>
To: OPEN <open>; Lincoln Arts <lincarts>;
<artsednet>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 1999 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: creationism vs. evolutionism

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Lincoln Arts <lincarts>
> To: <artsednet.edu>
> Sent: Friday, August 13, 1999 3:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: creationism vs. evolutionism
>
>
> > I certainly don't want to get into a philosophical (sp?) discussion of
> > religion on this site (those discussions haven't always gone over too
well
> > on this site in the past).
>
> I understand what you're saying, but isn't it a sad state of affairs when
> such discussions do not 'go over well' on an educational discussion list?
> If teachers/educators were to be involved in any pursuit related to their
> profession, shouldn't it be this?
>
> Yes, your spelling was correct.
>
> > However, .... Hasn't the Kansas state school board determined that
state
> > tests will not have science questions that allude to/cover evolution in
> any
> > way?
>
> Strange, indeed. Do you, or anyone, have any idea why the state board
would
> take such a stand? Is everyone aware of what Darwin discovered, how and
> why, and why he was so vehemently attacked by the church and religious
> factions? What did Darwin find, and what did it imply?
>
> > And if that is true, doesn't this mean that most districts won't have
> > it taught in the classroom because they'll want teachers to concentrate
on
> > teaching what WILL be on the tests?
>
> This would not be a surprising consequence. Most schools are doing just
> that with the new proficiencies. Perhaps if we put questions which
require
> critical thought on the state tests, schools and teachers would teach
> thinking. What do you all think?
>
> Larry Parker
>
>