<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Just When You Thought It Was Safe to Learn Science&#8230;</title>
	<link>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science</link>
	<description>Religion and spirituality from a Unitarian Universalist perspective</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:55:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Shelby Meyerhoff</title>
		<link>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7622</link>
		<dc:creator>Shelby Meyerhoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7622</guid>
		<description>Hi Ms. Theologian,
Wow, it's hard to imagine a life science textbook wihtout the word "evolution," at all. As you said, it's the "big idea," without which the "little ideas" can't be tied together.

H Sofia,

Yes, I think the opposition to teaching evolution may be related to a larger lack of appreciation for public schooling, and a sense in the right wing that there should be no shared, secular standards for public school curriculum.

It also may be related to the home schooling movement. For some home schooling parents, the decision to home school comes out of hostility to the public school system and a desire to teach "intelligent design" and other dubious ideas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Ms. Theologian,<br />
Wow, it&#8217;s hard to imagine a life science textbook wihtout the word &#8220;evolution,&#8221; at all. As you said, it&#8217;s the &#8220;big idea,&#8221; without which the &#8220;little ideas&#8221; can&#8217;t be tied together.</p>
<p>H Sofia,</p>
<p>Yes, I think the opposition to teaching evolution may be related to a larger lack of appreciation for public schooling, and a sense in the right wing that there should be no shared, secular standards for public school curriculum.</p>
<p>It also may be related to the home schooling movement. For some home schooling parents, the decision to home school comes out of hostility to the public school system and a desire to teach &#8220;intelligent design&#8221; and other dubious ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: h sofia</title>
		<link>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7587</link>
		<dc:creator>h sofia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 17:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7587</guid>
		<description>This is ridiculous. 
Public school in the US is in danger. I know that there are some notables who would like to do away with the Dept of Education altogether (e.g. Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul) so that communities get to decide what is taught in their schools; when I read things like this, the dissolution of the Dept of Education seems more and more a possibilty.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is ridiculous.<br />
Public school in the US is in danger. I know that there are some notables who would like to do away with the Dept of Education altogether (e.g. Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul) so that communities get to decide what is taught in their schools; when I read things like this, the dissolution of the Dept of Education seems more and more a possibilty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ms. Theologian</title>
		<link>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7584</link>
		<dc:creator>Ms. Theologian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2007 15:43:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.lookingforfaith.org/blog/2007/just-when-you-thought-it-was-safe-to-learn-science#comment-7584</guid>
		<description>I edit science textbooks, and this is such a huge issue that doesn't get a lot of press, but is part of my professional depression. Texas is not actually the most backward state. It's somewhere in the middle. For example, in Tennessee, we don't even use the word evolution in life science textbooks because it's not in the state education standards (and it's not there because of religious reasons). And, as we all know, evolution is the "big idea" in biology/life science. Everything relates to evolution and natural selection. Everything. So we teach the little ideas and don't connect them to the fundamental concept. Luverly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I edit science textbooks, and this is such a huge issue that doesn&#8217;t get a lot of press, but is part of my professional depression. Texas is not actually the most backward state. It&#8217;s somewhere in the middle. For example, in Tennessee, we don&#8217;t even use the word evolution in life science textbooks because it&#8217;s not in the state education standards (and it&#8217;s not there because of religious reasons). And, as we all know, evolution is the &#8220;big idea&#8221; in biology/life science. Everything relates to evolution and natural selection. Everything. So we teach the little ideas and don&#8217;t connect them to the fundamental concept. Luverly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
