SBOE Mangling Texas Science TEKS -- Act Now

The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) revises it's science curriculum (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills -- or TEKS) once every ten years. That time is now and this year, new science TEKS (pdf) were written and recommended by science writing panels and experts appointed by the SBOE.

At their January meeting, Don McLeroy and members of his hard-right faction of the SBOE managed to make some unscientific amendments to the proposed recommended science TEKS. This SBOE revised document (pdf) was then approved as the first reading by the SBOE of the science TEKS and was filed with the Texas Register. On March 25, 26, and 27, the SBOE will meet again and could make these TEKS the final ones.

The National Center for Science Education has produced a detailed description and analysis of the January amendments and why they are scientifically unsound.

If you reside in Texas, you can help by writing, telephoning, or emailing your SBOE member (enter your zip code to look up). Check this page to see how your member voted on these amendments at the January meeting. If your member voted against these amendments, thank your member and encourage him or her to continue to support sound science at the March meeting. If your member voted for these amendments, encourage him or her to promote the best science education for Texas schoolchildren by voting to remove these unfortunate amendments and support the TEKS as drafted by the writing panels and experts. In either case, let your SBOE member know that you are their constituent and why you think the amendments that were passed in January should not become part of the new science TEKS.

Any member of the SBOE may be emailed via sboesupport@tea.state.tx.us. Email pertaining to details of the TEKS should be sent to sboeteks@tea.state.tx.us. Comments on the first reading TEKS may also be made online.

The SBOE will hear public testimony on March 25 from noon to 6pm, with registration starting at 8am Friday, March 20th. (Registration form here (pdf).) Please attend and/or testify, if you can. The SBOE meets at 1701 Congress Ave, Austin, TX 78701 (see map).

See the SBOE web page for more information.

Alternative Science?

It would appear that one of the tactics being employed by the Discovery Institute (DI) and others interested in keeping evolutionary science from being taught in public schools these days is to claim that there are alternative scientific explanations for science. Huh?

Read what Steven Schafersman, President of Texas Citizens for Science, writes in "What Critiques of Darwin?".

Maybe they figure if it works for quackery (CAM) it will work for creationism.

Don't Mess with Texas Education

As recent developments have shown, evolution denialist elements of the Texas State Board of Education (SBoE) are about to try and screw over the Texas science education standards which are due their 10-year review in 2008. This report makes it clear that there is an effort underway by some Texas Education Agency (TEA) administrators and some members of the SBoE to distort and diminish evolution instruction in Texas public schools by requiring that the "weaknesses" and "controversies" of evolutionary biology be presented. These are strategies which the Discovery Institute advocates and they dovetail with their Intelligent Design Creationism advocacy as part of their objective to subvert science education in public schools.

We are at a critical juncture in this process since there is currently a conservative majority on the SBoE and half of the SBoE seats are up for (re)election. At least seven members of the fifteen-member SBoE support the Discovery Institute's "teach the controversy" and teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution strategy. I urge anyone willing to defend science education in Texas and eligible to run for election to the SBoE in their district to unseat some of these folks and help bring sanity to science education in Texas. Please help us avoid the inanity of another Dover-like federal trial over the teaching of religious pseudo-science.

The districts up for (re)election in 2008 are:

SBOE       Name                         City
District
2          Mary Helen Berlanga (D)      Corpus Christi
6          Terri Leo (R)                Spring
7          David Bradley (R)            Beaumont
8          Barbara Cargill (R)          The Woodlands
11         Patricia Hardy (R)           Weatherford
13         Mavis B. Knight (D)          Dallas
14         Gail Lowe (R)                Lampasas

To enter the election you must file an application for a place on the ballot with your respective party by Jan. 2, 2008. The filing fee is $300. The primary election will be on March 4, 2008, the general election will be in November, 2008.

Republican Party (512)477-9821
Democratic Party (512) 478-9800

For more details on the election process, go here: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/demorrep.shtml

For more on the Chris Comer story, go here: http://www.wikio.com/news/Chris+Comer.

Barbara Forrest on the Chris Comer affair: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/ForrestComer.pdf.

Read Judge Jones's opinon on the Dover trial here: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

Resistance to Science in America

[The] developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific claims are contested within a society, and will be especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by people who are taken as reliable and trustworthy. This is the current situation in the United States with regard to the central tenets of neuroscience and of evolutionary biology. These clash with intuitive beliefs about the immaterial nature of the soul and the purposeful design of humans and other animals — and, in the United States, these intuitive beliefs are particularly likely to be endorsed and transmitted by trusted religious and political authorities. Hence these are among the domains where Americans' resistance to science is the strongest. P. Bloom & D. S. Weisberg

From WHY DO SOME PEOPLE RESIST SCIENCE? By Paul Bloom and Deena Skolnick Weisberg

Well worth a look.

Science for Judges

Judges generally do not have the training of a scientist, but may be called upon to make decisions involving scientific evidence.

The University of Nevada, Reno has published course material for Judges entitled A Judge's Deskbook on the Basic Philosophies and Methods of Science.

1. Introduction and Overview
   
2. The Judicial Role in Evidentiary Decision-Making
   
3. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science
   
4. Quantitative and Qualitative Research
   
5. An Introduction to the Experimental Method
   
6. An Introduction to the Scientific Methods of Survey Research
   
7. An Introduction to Qualitative Methods
   
8. Peer Review, Publication, and General Acceptance
   
9. Data Analysis: An Introduction to Statistics
   
10. Psychological and Psychiatric Evidence: A Brief Overview
    
11. DNA Evidence
    

This material has been available for several years, but I am just pointing out that I think it could be helpful to any non-scientist looking to become more familiar with science and scientific methods.

[edited 12/15/09 to link to the pdf]