Showing posts with label Louisiana Science Education Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Louisiana Science Education Act. Show all posts

Saturday, June 18, 2016

Is Louisiana's LSEA Bad Science?

It isn't, according to University of Shreveport political science professor Jeff Sadow. He argues:
[Senator Karen Carter] Peterson’s annual exercise persisted — until this year. With Democrat John Bel Edwards now governor, neither she nor anyone else filed a bill to repeal the act. That’s because the author of the law, former state Sen. Ben Nevers, a Bogalusa Democrat, serves as Edwards’ chief of staff. In the past, surely knowing her bill never would make it out of committee, Carter kept trying regardless as an apparent attempt to make Jindal look bad. She has no wish to do the same to Edwards.

But Peterson’s and others’ opposition to the act should disturb anybody who desires academic excellence in Louisiana education. The law creates a minor incentive for science classrooms to explore important issues and develop critical thinking skills. It also stands as a bulwark against the potential imposition of politically motivated orthodoxy masquerading as science. To oppose the act reveals an intolerance of freedom in academic inquiry — and a willingness to indulge a totalitarian impulse seeking to control information and knowledge.
Here is the problem that I see: the modern creationism movement has taken great pains to divorce the notion of creationism from the Bible, or any organized religion. They treat it as science, and promote it as such. They don't promote it as religion. To be sure, every court case that has been adjudicated has shown that it is, but because of this, the teaching of creationism now masquerades as “Teaching the Controversy” “Teaching the Full Range of views," or “Teach the Strengths and Weaknesses.”  Oddly, enough, these methodologies don't include all of scientific inquiry, but just happen to focus on evolution (and sometimes climate change).  Waiting in the wings is “scientific creationism,”  a view supported by a large number of legislators, it seems. 

Yes, it is true that we should keep science agenda free (and that is becoming increasingly hard in this over-politicized culture), but the LSEA does not do this.  If anything, it promotes the stealth agenda of ID and creationism.

Thursday, March 31, 2016

Louisiana Votes To Keep the LSEA

The Times-Picayune is reporting that the Louisiana legislature passed up an opportunity to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act.  Julia O’Donoghue writes:
State Sen. John Milkovich, D-Shreveport, made the case for teaching creationism in schools Tuesday night (March 29).

"Scientific research and developments and advances in the last 100 years -- particularly the last 15, 20, 10 years -- have validated the biblical story of creation," the freshman state senator said.

Milkovich, who is the vice chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said archeologists and scientists have verified the origin story of the Christian Bible. He said archeologists had found the remnants of Noah's ark recently. A study of rocks had verified that the earth was created in a week, Milkovich said.

Milkovich isn't the only member of Senate Education Committee who thinks creationism should be taught in schools. The panel voted 4-2 to reject legislation that would have repealed an unconstitutional -- and unenforceable -- law that requires creationism be taught in schools.
Archeologists have found the remnants of Noah's ark recently? Really? Here is what he is what he is referring to (BTW, read Todd Wood's ideas in that link of why we will never find Noah's Ark.  It is ingenious without quite rising to the level of conspiracy theory).  That boat's never going to be found.  The other thing that caught my eye was the letter in front of Milkovich's name, “D.”  This suggests that the teaching of creationism is so ingrained in this area of the south that it crosses party lines.  In fact, there is a healthy mix of Ds and Rs in the story, on both sides. 

Friday, December 18, 2015

Rise of Anti-Evolution Bills: UPDATE

PhysOrg also has a post on this research that includes an animated GIF to show the progression.  From the post:
The study also found that antievolution bills show evidence of 'descent with modification,' suggesting that anti-evolutionist legislators copy bills recently proposed or passed, rather than writing new bills from scratch. In addition, although the antievolution bills usually avoid mentioning creationism, most could be tied directly to creationism through statements in the legislation or by the bills' sponsors.

"Creationism is getting stealthier in the wake of legal defeats, but techniques from the study of evolution reveal how creationist legislation evolves," Matzke said.
I will be curious to see how the Discovery Institute spins this.

Nick Matzke Tracks the Rise of Anti-Evolution Bills in the United States

The Los Angeles Times is running a story about Nick Matzke's efforts to chronicle the rise of anti-evolution bills in the United States.  The catch: he is using evolutionary principles of descent with modification to show where they came from and how they "adaptively radiated."  Karen Kaplan writes:
The forces opposed to teaching evolution in U.S. public schools just got a new reason to resent the bedrock scientific theory: A researcher has used the principles of evolutionary biology to show that laws ostensibly aimed at improving science education are firmly rooted in efforts to make classrooms safe for creationism.

The analysis of dozens of bills introduced in state legislatures around the country reveals how a single innovation from a small Louisiana parish (population 156,325) was incorporated into 32 subsequent bills through a process the study describes as “descent with modification.” Two of those 32 bills became law and now “negatively affect science education” for students throughout Louisiana (population 4.7 million) and Tennessee (population 6.5 million)
The article is a phylogenetic masterpiece, showing stem and crown groups, based on the wording of different bills in different states.  There is one takeaway that is obvious, based on looking at the graph.  Bills have been forwarded in the following states:
  • Alabama
  • Florida
  • Indiana
  • Iowa
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • Michigan
  • Missouri
  • Montana
  • New Mexico
  • Oklahoma
  • South Carolina
  • South Dakota
  • Tennessee
  • Texas
  • Virginia
In other words, “all over the map.”  Only five of those are southern states, belying the notion that the Bible Belt is the only place you find this kind of legislation. His conclusion:
The creationist antievolution movement has reinvented itself not once but twice in the decade since Kitzmiller. The first guise was “academic freedom,” but after the success of the Louisiana SEA [Science Education Act], AFA [Academic Freedom Act] proposals were almost completely replaced with SEAs. The inclusion of global warming in the SEAs indicates that societal debate over evolution education has the potential to leak into other societal debates where high-quality science education is inconvenient to certain established interests. The passage of SEAs in Louisiana and Tennessee have spread language devised in Ouachita Parish, population ~150,000, to negatively affect science education in two states with ~11.2 million people. Additional policies on the books in other states (table S1) indicate that science educators have substantial work to do to ensure that science classes teach the best science available, rather than false critiques and controversies promoted by creationists. Advocates for science education should not be dissuaded by the strategic vagueness of SEAs: The creationist origins of modern antievolution strategies are clear (table S1), and at least 63 of 65 antievolution bills considered here can be tied directly to creationism through statements in the legislation or by sponsors (SM).
The article is free to non-subscribers (or at least it is at the present moment) and, despite being somewhat technical, is a good snapshot of how these bills have proliferated.

Tuesday, June 09, 2015

Christianity Today: In Louisiana, students read the Book of Genesis in their science classes

Christianity Today has a very matter-of-fact account of young earth creationism being taught in Louisiana.  Marvie Basilan writes:
When a student in Louisiana opens his or her textbook in biology class, he or she may not learn about evolution but the "creation point of view" instead.

For some Louisiana public school students, their science textbook is the Bible. They read the Book of Genesis in their biology class.

Zach Kopplin of Slate.com was able to acquire several emails from the Bossier Parish which discussed the teaching of creationism.
The rest of the account reads like something out of Bizarro World, where parents complain that the kids are being taught evolution and the principal informs them that “it will not happen again.”  As I suspected, Livingston Parish was not unique. 

One of the defenses of the LSEA was that it did not open the door for creationism but, rather, allowed for teaching “the full range of views” on a subject, a position belied by what Basilan writes:
The Louisiana Science Education Act, which was passed by the state legislature in 2008, allows teacher to use other materials to "critique" evolution. This state law opened doors for teachers to teach creationism. Though illegal under federal law, the lessons are permitted under Louisiana law.
Opponents of the law argued that it was stealth creationism. Guess they were right.  The problem is that no amount of evidence will be enough if the legislature thinks evolution is wrong.  This is what happens when politicians get ahold of science education.  Bad things happen. 

UPDATE: more from Zack Kopplin, at Slate.  

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Louisiana Still Trying To Get LSEA Repealed

The Times-Picayune of New Orleans is carrying a story about the latest attacks on the Louisiana Science Education Act.  Danielle Dreilinger writes:
The Botanical Society of America devoted a symposium Monday in New Orleans to railing against and ridiculing the Louisiana Science Education Act. Panelists said the 2008 law allows the teaching of creationism in science class and has made the state an international laughingstock.
Supporters of the law claim that it doesn't allow the teaching of religion but fail to explain why the entire text of the law is aimed squarely at biology and evolution, as if other scientific disciplines are exempt. To the writers of the law, only the areas of evolution and climate change are "controversial." This speaks as much to their comparative lack of education as anything. As Zack Kopplin has stated: "You don't need a law to teach critical thinking in science." Or you shouldn't anyway.

Wednesday, June 05, 2013

More Bad News For Louisiana Science Education

Zack Kopplin has written a piece for Slate in which he relates recent legislative attempts to derail legitimate science education.  The situation is much worse than I thought:
Last month, for the third year in a row, Louisiana’s Senate Education Committee killed a bill to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act. LSEA is stealth legislation that creates a loophole for creationism to be snuck into public school science classes. LSEA allows classroom use of supplemental creationist materials that “critique” evolution.

To get a sense of the supplemental materials approved under this law, you need look no further than its proponents. Suzanne Passman, who runs CreationEvidence.info, testifies in support of LSEA every year. (You can see her testimony here and here.) She highlights LSEA on her website and suggests supplemental materials from the Institute for Creation Research, Answers in Genesis (source of the Creation Museum), and the Discovery Institute, a think tank for intelligent design creationism. She also offers to provide notes from creationist lectures she has attended; my favorite is “Jurassic Prank,” which discusses “dragons as real creatures” and shows that “people saw dinosaurs and not so long ago.”
This certainly sheds light on the legislature's unwillingness to strike the equal treatment law from the books, even though it has been ruled unconstitutional.  The flat earth religion crowd simply won't give up!  The coup de grace, though is the video in which the poor science teacher is trying to explain basic evolutionary principles using E. coli and the legislator asks if it turns into a human.


I once thought that Louisiana science education would have trouble moving out of the 19th century into the 20th. Now I wonder if it will be perpetually stuck in the 18th century.  How tragic for the students of this state to be stuck with adults who don't know any better. 

Monday, May 06, 2013

Louisiana Chooses Badly, Again

According to the New Orlenans Times-Picayune, the bill to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act has failed to get out of committee.  Lauren McGaughy writes:
The Science Act allows teachers to introduce "supplemental textbooks and other instructional materials" into the classroom. These materials are meant "to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner," according to the law.

While the Act specifically prohibits materials that promote religious doctrine, opponents of the legislation say the supplemental materials allowance gives teachers the ability to question accepted scientific theories, such as evolution, based on religious ideology.

"The LSE Act is a bad law, not because of its spirit, but because of its failure to provide the necessary restrictions, standards, and guidelines required in order for the original intent to be successfully realized," said Tammy Wood, a Zachary-area teacher who received the 1991 Louisiana Presidential Award for science education.
It is sad that this bill will continue to bedevil the state of Louisiana. Even more unfortunate, however, is the secondary piece of legislation that will further stigmatize Louisiana in the eyes of the science community and make it much easier to get creationism in the classrooms:
Speaking after the meeting, Wood said another piece of legislation that passed in committee Wednesday, House Bill 116, along with the Science Act would mean teaching materials that include religious doctrine would more easily make their way into classrooms.
The bill, sponsored by Rep. Frank Hoffman, R-West Monroe, would remove much of the oversight the Department of Education has over textbooks purchased by schools. It would also eliminate current law that requires state-approved textbooks to be available for public inspection.
 What is the sense in this legislation, if not to further hide what is going on in Louisiana and to remove any sort of accountability for science standards.  This smacks of the actions of the Dover School Board which smuggled in copies of the dreadful Of Pandas and People in the dead of night, when nobody was looking in the hopes that nobody would notice.  This ended badly for Dover, at their considerable expense.  Hopefully, it won't get that far in Louisiana.

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Bobby Jindal, Stupidity and Creationism

Joanna Weiss has a column in the Boston Globe about Bobby Jindal and his recent comments on the stupidity of the Republican Party (no disagreement here). The article is really more about Zack Kopplin than it is about Jindal but that is her lead-in. She writes:
The first time Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said that the GOP needed to “stop being the stupid party” — in an interview with Politico last fall, a few days after the presidential election — I got an e-mail from Zack Kopplin.

I had just written that Jindal was an intriguing potential face of the GOP: young, smart, Indian-American, with Southern roots and a background in health care wonkery. Kopplin, a 19-year-old college student from Baton Rouge, wanted to remind me that Jindal had signed the Louisiana Science Education Act, the Orwellian-named law that permits creationism to be taught in Louisiana public schools.
Jindal is sort of between a rock and a hard place. He has made a name for himself by declaring what is fast becoming self-evident—that the Republican party is losing touch with its base and implementing policies that are self-serving rather than people-serving—and gained some of the national spotlight as a result. The catch is that he is also on record as having signed the Louisiana Science Education Act, which has been pilloried as being anti-science and has already led to flirtations with creationism that have made the news and probably countless cases that have not. It was only when a close study was done on neighboring Texas that it was revealed that numerous school districts were teaching creationism as science. Gov. Jindal cannot have it both ways. If he wants the Republican party to be more intelligent, it must divorce itself from laws such as these.

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Zack Kopplin on School Vouchers

No sooner had I gotten the last post written when an email from Zack Kopplin appeared in my inbox (mailing list, not personal note) about his attempts to get school vouchers vetoed.  Unfortunately, it shows up on MSNBC, a station I generally avoid.  Kopplin writes:
Over the past few months, I’ve learned creationist vouchers aren’t just a Louisiana problem—they’re an American problem. School vouchers are, as James Gill recently wrote in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, “the answer to a creationist’s prayer.”
Liberty Christian School, in Anderson, Indiana, has field trips to the Creation Museum and students learn from the creationist A Beka curriculum.  Kingsway Christian School, in Avon, Indiana, also has Creation Museum field trips.  Mansfield Christian School, in Ohio, teaches science through the creationist Answers in Genesis website, run by the founder of the Creation Museum.  The school’s Philosophy of Science page says, “the literal view of creation is foundational to a Biblical World View.”  All three of these schools, and more than 300 schools like them, are receiving taxpayer money.
Kopplin then proceeds to give a list of examples, most of which are truly hair-raising.  One would hope that these schools are the exception to the rule and, as I mentioned last post, if this becomes widely known, it will spell doom for the voucher program constitutionally, unless each state passes laws such that the vouchers cannot be used at religiously-based schools.  That is a shame since it will leave quite a few schools in the dark that would, otherwise, benefit from the program.  This is nothing more than an end-run around the court-mandated prohibition of teaching creationism in the public schools.  Surely those that are engaging in this deception know this.  

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Zack Kopplin Vs. the Creationists

io9 has a story on Zack Kopplin and his continued war against the teaching of young earth, anti-evolution creationism in Louisiana.  George Dvorsky writes:
Encouraged by Barbara Forrest, a philosophy professor at Southeastern Louisiana University — and a staunch critic of intelligent design and the Discovery Institute — Kopplin decided to write a letter that could be signed by Nobel laureate scientists in support of the repeal. To that end, he contacted Sir Harry Kroto, a British chemist who shared the 1996 Nobel Prize in Chemistry with Robert Curl and Richard Smalley. Kroto helped him to draft the letter — one that has now been signed by 78 Nobel laureates.

In addition, Kopplin has introduced two bills to repeal the LSEA, both of which have been sponsored by State Senator Karen Carter Peterson. He plans on producing a third bill later this spring. And along with the Nobel laureates, he has the support of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), New Orleans City Council, and many others.
Next on the agenda, according to Dvorsky, is the vouchers program. I am of two minds about this because, ordinarily, I support vouchers as a means of getting kids out of failing public schools who would not ordinarily have the opportunity and to push these schools to improve.

I do not, on the other hand, like the idea of the money being used by private schools to teach creationism. The recent Loch Ness Monster story attracted attention to the curriculum that is being used by at least one of the schools receiving vouchers, Accelerated Christian Education.  As this story demonstrates, science is not exactly these folks' strong suit.  It is depressing to see a basically good idea misused by people who should but do not know better.  While Kopplin's campaign won't change the minds of those who will not honestly look at the science, it is the right thing to do.  

Thursday, December 20, 2012

Orleans Parish Does Away With Young Earth Creationism and ID

HuffPo is reporting that the Orleans Parish school board has informed their teachers that they are not to teach ID or young earth creationism in any science class.  Cavan Sieczkowski writes:
The newly approved policy bans teachers from including "any aspect of religious faith" in science courses and from using history textbooks adjusted to include Christianity.

The first part regarding textbooks reads: “No history textbook shall be approved which has been adjusted in accordance with the State of Texas revisionist guidelines nor shall any science textbook be approved which presents creationism or intelligent design as science or scientific theories."

The second part delves specifically into teaching: “No teacher of any discipline of science shall teach any aspect of religious faith as science or in a science class. No teacher of any discipline of science shall teach creationism or intelligent design in classes designated as science classes.”
Such an act, while not in contradiction to the Louisiana Science Education Act, which specifically stated that local school boards could choose whether or not to include “supplemental” material in the classroom, is clearly not in the spirit of “academic freedom” as envisioned by those championing the bill. It is also in stark contrast to the route that Livingston Parish took when they toyed with the idea of teaching creationism in the schools. It is interesting to see two very disparate approaches to this legislation and it is tempting to suggest that the bad press that has been heaped on Louisiana in the wake of the bill's passing is at least some impetus for the Orleans ruling.