Hurrah, creationism in the UK

[Cain]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/sep/11/creationism.education

Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society, says excluding discussion of creationism and intelligent design from science lessons could put some children off science completely.

The Rev Prof Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society, said that excluding alternatives to scientific explanations for the origin of life and the universe from science lessons was counterproductive and would alienate some children from science altogether.

He said that around one in 10 children comes from a family with creationist beliefs. "My experience after having tried to teach biology for 20 years is if one simply gives the impression that such children are wrong, then they are not likely to learn much about the science," he said.

"I think a better way forward is to say to them 'look, I simply want to present you with the scientific understanding of the history of the universe and how animals and plants and other organisms evolved'."

[LMNO]

Sounds like they were already alienated from science before they got there.

[Voodoo]

repost:

[Vene]

If this isn't a repost I will be sorely disappointed.

[Kai]

If this isn't a repost I will be sorely disappointed.

I haven't seen this one or the one above it before.

[Vene]

I've got more:



link for massive

[Iason Ouabache]

From what I've heard the story has been blow out of proportion by the media.  He wasn't saying that Creationism should be taught as a "competing theory".  He was saying that if kids bring it up in class that the teachers shouldn't just dismiss them out of hand because that will alienate the kids even more.  It's the teacher's responsibility to explain exactly why Creationism is bad science.

Then again, this sentence makes no sense at all:  "Just because something lacks scientific support doesn't seem to me a sufficient reason to omit it from the science lesson."

 

[Cain]

Still, I would say that is kind of serious.  What are you meant to do?  Last time I checked, teachers were not paid to humour delusions that crackpot parents have told their children.  They were meant to teach the facts, to the best of their knowledge.  In science, this means evolution.  In Religious Studies, this means religious theory.

On the other hand, I am not overly concerned if the UK gets overrun by retards who cannot tell the difference between a scientific hypothesis and a mythological story.  That just means the job market for places needing people who aren't morons just got a little bigger.

[Kai]

Still, I would say that is kind of serious.  What are you meant to do?  Last time I checked, teachers were not paid to humour delusions that crackpot parents have told their children.  They were meant to teach the facts, to the best of their knowledge.  In science, this means evolution.  In Religious Studies, this means religious theory.

On the other hand, I am not overly concerned if the UK gets overrun by retards who cannot tell the difference between a scientific hypothesis and a mythological story.  That just means the job market for places needing people who aren't morons just got a little bigger.

The funding for scientific institutions goes down though.

[Iason Ouabache]

I'm still having trouble finding a good stories that explains what Reiss was trying to say.  Most stories just say "OMG! The Royal Society wants Creationism to be taught in science class!!1!!" I assume that he just meant, if a kid brings it up just go ahead and have the discussion and don't tell the kid to STFU.

I did find an interesting story that quotes the Church of England, the British Humanist Association, and the Movement for Reform Judaism making official statements against Creationism. I'd kill for something like that to happen in the US.  Sure most of the denominations have made official statements in favor of evolution but they don't seem to speak up much when things like this happen so as to not ruffle feathers.

[Iason Ouabache]

OK, found the BBC story on it:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7612152.stm

They seem to be the only ones to have long quotes from Prof. Reiss.

He says that in his experience it is more effective to include discussion about creationism alongside scientific theories such as the Big Bang and evolution.

"An increasing percentage of children in the UK come from families that do not accept the scientific version of the history of the universe and the evolution of species.

"What are we to do with those children? My experience after having tried to teach biology for 20 years is if one simply gives the impression that such children are wrong, then they are not likely to learn much about the science that one really wants them to learn.

"I think a better way forward is to say to them 'look, I simply want to present you with the scientific understanding of the history of the universe and how animals and plants and other organisms evolved'.

He also added a clarification on his position regarding creationism in schools.

"Some of my comments about the teaching of creationism have been misinterpreted as suggesting that creationism should be taught in science classes. Creationism has no scientific basis.

"However, when young people ask questions about creationism in science classes, teachers need to be able to explain to them why evolution and the Big Bang are scientific theories but they should also take the time to explain how science works and why creationism has no scientific basis.

"I have referred to science teachers discussing creationism as a worldview'; this is not the same as lending it any scientific credibility."

Also, I am jealous that the UK is "only" 10% Creationist.

[Requia ☣]

As best I can tell, most (as in more than half) of the creationists in the US are part of denominations that demand that the bible is the literal truth.  You do have catholics (especially older ones) that still believe in creationism for example, but the big chunk of them is the 1/3rd of the country that are evangelical of some sort, or pentacostals or mormons etc.  None of whome are going to be terribly happy about what the episcapal or chatholic church says.

Please excuse my butched spellings of the denominations, IE sucks

[Iason Ouabache]

As far as I can tell, the Young Earth Creationist/Bible-Humpers are mostly: Baptist, Pentecostal, Seventh-Day Adventists, Jehovah's Witlesses, and various non-denominationals.

The ones that support evolution are: Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterianism, Methodist, Church of Christ. That's just on the official stance of the churches though.  There is plenty of crossover among congregants, of course.

[Kai]

Church of Christ is sometimes ultra fundie as well.

Depends on the part of the US you are in.

[Iason Ouabache]

Church of Christ is sometimes ultra fundie as well.

Depends on the part of the US you are in.

Ah, I meant to say the United Church of Christ.  I didn't realize that there was a difference until just now.