Christian schools angry over ban on teaching creationism

[davo]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/christian-schools-angry-over-ban-on-teaching-creationism-20100302-pgjb.html

MALCOLM BROWN

March 3, 2010
Australian Christian schools will campaign against what they see as the thin end of the wedge - a decision by the South Australian Non-Government Schools Registration Board to effectively ban the teaching of creationism.
Under policies published in December, the board said it required ''teaching of science as an empirical discipline, focusing on inquiry, hypothesis, investigation, experimentation, observation and evidential analysis''.
The board said it ''does not accept as satisfactory a science curriculum in a non-government school which is based on, espouses or reflects the literal interpretation of a religious text in its treatment of either creationism or intelligent design''.
The chief executive of Christian Schools Australia, Stephen O'Doherty, said the board statement was too strident, removing the right to teach ''biblical perspectives'' as part of science.
He said the policy set a precedent which might be taken up in other states, including NSW, where the issue had been the subject of intense debate two years ago.
A spokeswoman for the NSW Board of Studies, Rebecca Lloyd, said the NSW board had made its policy clear last June that science teaching which was not scientifically or evidence-based would not be part of assessment for the School Certificate or Higher School Certificate.
But the NSW Board of Studies had a policy of not loading so much mandatory work on to schools that there was no time for anything else, and other non-core activities offered to students could include extra religious instruction.
The acting executive director of the NSW Association of Independent Schools, Michael Carr, said: ''Our view is that NSW independent schools must follow the Board of Studies curriculum, which dictates that creationism cannot be taught as science. ''Schools wishing to teach creationism must teach it as part of their religious studies.''
But Mr O'Doherty said a close reading of the South Australian policy indicated it was going a step further and banning teaching of the subject altogether. It was the only such subject singled out, he said.
In NSW courses, there was scope in science courses to include cultural or historical aspects, such as the ''Dreamtime'', the theories of the ancient Greeks, or biblical perspectives on the nature of the universe.
He said if the South Australian policy was taken literally, ''it means you cannot mention the Bible in science classes''.
A spokesman for the South Australian Non-Government Schools Registration Board said it was not banning teaching of creationism full-stop. ''It can be taught in religious studies.''

[c2009]

GOOD. At last, some good news this week.

[Dane]

Wow, and this is from South Australia? Maybe there's hope after all.

[wolty]

Under policies published in December, the board said it required ''teaching of science as an empirical discipline, focusing on inquiry, hypothesis, investigation, experimentation, observation and evidential analysis''. That would make it......science. Excellant move.
The board said it ''does not accept as satisfactory a science curriculum in a non-government school which is based on, espouses or reflects the literal interpretation of a religious text in its treatment of either creationism or intelligent design''.Well that is very very good.

The chief executive of Christian Schools Australia, Stephen O'Doherty, said the board statement was too strident, removing the right to teach ''biblical perspectives'' as part of science. What exactly are
''biblical perspectives'' as part of science? I haven't seen any.





He said the policy set a precedent which might be taken up in other states, including NSW, where the issue had been the subject of intense debate two years ago. Hopefully science will actually be taught as it should.
But Mr O'Doherty said a close reading of the South Australian policy indicated it was going a step further and banning teaching of the subject altogether. I defer to someone (Bertrand Russell?) who said " I am not sure it is even a subject" ''it means you cannot mention the Bible in science classes''. How cool is that.

[Seamus]

Wow, and this is from South Australia? Maybe there's hope after all.


Oi,watch yourself sonny. I live in Aunty Adelaide. If you can survive the boredom,it's a great place to live.

One rarely actually meets a Christian here. Apart from my 84 year old Catholic mum,I only know one. The daughter of an atheist friend has been infected with an irritating case of evangelical Christianity.I don't know how her poor father copes with all that praise the lording and judgment of every aspect of his life. I think they may have had words.

[Justin]

Adelaide Atheists are in the process of writing an article on this.

So far:
Today AdelaideAtheists.org (http://AdelaideAtheists.org) President Jason Allen expressed his shock that Christian Schools Australia would bring "US-style" anti-scientific evangelism to our shores by demanding that the South Australian Non-Government Schools Registration Board repeal its stand against Creationism, Intelligent Design or other Biblical stories being taught as "Science".

The board quite rightly took the stance that science taught in our schools should be based on the ''teaching of science as an empirical discipline, focusing on inquiry, hypothesis, investigation, experimentation, observation and evidential analysis''.

Stories from the Bible should strictly be kept outside Science classes as they do not meet these criteria.

Externally CSA portrays itself as an organisation aimed at "fostering excellence" in education in Christian Schools. This demand shows that underneath this veneer their intentions are actually to undermine real education with Old Testament Christian Dogma. This organisation has effectively disgraced itself in the eyes of the general public who do not easily tolerate this ugly style of US evangelism.

The President went on to congratulate the Board for defending our children from the anti-scientific ideas being pushed upon us by these lobby groups.

Any ideas we can add?

[Loki]

ABORIGINAL Dreamtime stories will be removed from the national science course on the orders of curriculum head Barry McGaw, who said religious and spiritual beliefs had no place in the science classroom.

Quote from todays Australian.

Good, I've spent since Saturday trying to work out how the advanced technology of the ancient aboriginals in regard to the dreamtime myths could possibly help in the teaching of science.

[gruber]

Good, I've spent since Saturday trying to work out how the advanced technology of the ancient aboriginals in regard to the dreamtime myths could possibly help in the teaching of science.


goodluck your talking about a fractured civilisation that didnt have a wheel or even pottery

[Atrax Robustus]

I sense a "black armband" vs "white armband" discussion is developing here! :cool:

Great news from SA - Well done the Crow Eaters! ;)

[Seamus]

goodluck your talking about a fractured civilisation that didnt have a wheel or even pottery
Neither civilisation nor the value of a culture has been measured by technology since the C 19th.

Your patronising dismissal of aboriginal culture overlooks one salient point: It is the oldest society on earth,and lacked nothing it needed to survive for around 50 thousand years.

I have no idea what you mean by 'fractured civilisation'. Are you perhaps referring to the fact that traditional aboriginal society was made up of relatively small family groups instead of large communities,and was spread all over the entire continent?

The term 'fractured' implies damaged or inferior as indeed does the criticism of not having the wheel and pottery. Neither the the great meso American civilisations nor ancient Egypt use the wheel.(Egypt did eventually,but not to build the pyramids)

[Atrax Robustus]

Goodonya Mr Black!

That comment will confuse 'em! :D

"Black, Grey, White, Rainbow - What the hell are spidey and black talking about anyway?" :eek:

[Seamus]

I sense a "black armband" vs "white armband" discussion is developing here! :cool:

I hate the phrase "the black armband view of history". It's a simplistic and simple minded slogan. Blainey should have known better.

Cynical person might observe that Blainey knew precisely what he was doing in making such a provocative statement.

My position is that there is no correct historical view,only varying degrees of probability and that dominant views change over time. New evidence is found constantly, and history is always filtered [to some degree] through the personal bias of the historian.

Dominant historical views which are taught in schools are influenced by religion,politics, ideology and presently by the burden of bourgeois political correctness.

[Atrax Robustus]

Dominant historical views which are taught in schools are influenced by religion,politics, ideology and presently by the burden of bourgeois political correctness.

Yup!

Perhaps this thread needs splitting? There's a major derail occurring!

[davo]

What is so smart about 'inventing' a wheel if it's not of any benefit to your quality of life?

[Loki]

I'm concerned about how an in depth knowledge of Aboriginal technology will be any advantage to the next generation of particle physicists or evolutionary biologists. Surely it would be better to teach currently accepted theory than what the ancients thought was right. The theory behind the lever is good, but an in depth knowledge of ancient civilisations which used it hardly adds anything useful. Some science history would of course be useful, to put things in perspective, but surely that is largely history, not science?

I'm just glad that someone worked out (eventually) that dreamtime myths are religion, the same as creationism, and therefore have no part in the teaching of science.

[AngryAtheist]

Surprising come from a state where their capital is called the "The City of Churches"

Good on them.

There may be hope for us all yet.

[DavidB]

I noticed this news item and became a little bit encouraged. Should I be encouraged or will the Right rebel and conquer?

http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/christian-schools-angry-over-ban-on-teaching-creationism-20100302-pgjb.html

[davo]

http://www.atheistfoundation.org.au/forums/showthread.php?t=4147

:P beat you too it.

Usually you can find news items in the news section, handy addition to the forum and a great place to have a quick squiz to see if already posted. A lot of folk troll the news as it hits for stuff. it is good news isn't it?

[eccles]

Oi,watch yourself sonny. I live in Aunty Adelaide. If you can survive the boredom,it's a great place to live.

One rarely actually meets a Christian here. Apart from my 84 year old Catholic mum,I only know one. The daughter of an atheist friend has been infected with an irritating case of evangelical Christianity.I don't know how her poor father copes with all that praise the lording and judgment of every aspect of his life. I think they may have had words.

Yet they still call Adelaide the "City of Churches". I HATE THAT.

[Seamus]

I'm concerned about how an in depth knowledge of Aboriginal technology will be any advantage to the next generation of particle physicists or evolutionary biologists. Surely it would be better to teach currently accepted theory than what the ancients thought was right. The theory behind the lever is good, but an in depth knowledge of ancient civilisations which used it hardly adds anything useful. Some science history would of course be useful, to put things in perspective, but surely that is largely history, not science?

I'm just glad that someone worked out (eventually) that dreamtime myths are religion, the same as creationism, and therefore have no part in the teaching of science.

Could not agree more. Aboriginal technology was just spiffy for a stone age anarchic people. It has no value for a post industrial urbanised society in any pragmatic sense.. By all means teach it as part of social studies and Anthropology at university,which is were the study of religion also belongs. (Aboriginal culture and mythology formed part of my studies towards my degree in Anthropology. (double major)

I don't actually have a problem with creationism being taught in say biology,as long as it is taught as the Phlogiston theory was taught to me in physics.IE a quaint but badly mistaken idea--and explain why.