Holy Republic! Texas Board of Education Proposes Revision of U.S. History Curriculum

Yes, a conservative suggesting that the textbook refer to "republican values" instead of the standard "democratic values is most definitely a non-partisan proposal.

On that note, I have a non-partisan suggestion that we instead refer to "Miles Tegsian values".

Maybe instead of letting loonies (And Texas is the worst, simply because of the creationist thing) play tug-a-war, why don't we put teaching in the hands of professionals?

Is there something you don't understand about the term Representative Republic? Is there another term for our government that you think is more correct?

About putting teaching in the hands of professionals, you'd have the same arguments, just different people with different credentials.
 
About putting teaching in the hands of professionals, you'd have the same arguments, just different people with different credentials.

Better credentials, and who would hopefully be more objective.

Is there something you don't understand about the term Representative Republic? Is there another term for our government that you think is more correct?

Be right back... Ah, here we are:

America is a Republic with Democratic aspects, so from a purely educational standpoint, devoid of political context, I would say the change from stressing 'democratic' values to 'republican' ones is a good one.

However, we do not live in a world devoid of political context, and the proposed change seems to me to have been proposed for political reasons.
 
A Representative Republic does not necessarily include democracy. It isn't the Republican system that you are defending and working towards, but the democratic functioning of that system.
 
Better credentials, and who would hopefully be more objective.

Be right back... Ah, here we are:
1. There would be no more objectivity. The same fight would exist, just different folks fighting it.
2. Still can't find a more accurate description than Representative Republic.
 
This is completely ********. Thurgood Marshall, Cesar Chavez, and Anne Hutchinson aren't important? Maybe it's because they all challenged rich, white, orthodox males? ;)
 
Awesome.

This is what happens when you let people elect school boards I guess.
I don't agree. Political appointees can be just as religious/anti-religious/authoritarian/liberal as anyone else.

Example from the article:
"We're in an all-out moral and spiritual civil war for the soul of America, and the record of American history is right at the heart of it," said Rev. Peter Marshall, a Christian minister and one of the reviewers appointed by the conservative camp.
The guy's an appointee, appointed by the board as a reviewer.
 
Yeah no, I'll take the standards of a professionalised public service and education experts over "some priest who got voted for" when it comes to setting curricula.
 
Also, DT, do any of those proposals strike you as a good idea, or are they all crap?
Well, I'm not a CS specialist (most teachers are not), so I can't give a professional opinion. I know that these proposed changes mostly go against what I have been taught, or against the research I've read, particularly in dealing with minority/lower income students. All of them smack of political gaming.
In that context I would say that the changes would be a good thing. Ultra left California & ultra right Texas (everything is bigger there :lol:) should balance each other out.
No, that just means that everybody gets crappy textbooks then.
 
Regarding these:
* Replace references to America's "democratic" values with "republican" values

Reviewer David Barton suggests swapping out "republican" for "democratic" in teaching materials. As he explains: "We don't pledge allegiance to the flag and the democracy for which it stands."
It seems like a subtle way of making Republicans seem more important.

* Add more Latino historical figures

Reviewer Jesús F. de la Teja, a former state historian, calls for adding names such as Juan de Oñate, who led the Spanish expedition that settled New Mexico and José Antonio Navarro, a proponent of Texas independence. He also recommends a deeper study of Texas history.
If Oñate is Spanish, then he's a European, not a Latino.

* Reword references to minorities' "contributions" to society

Mr. de la Teja argues that it marginalizes women and people of color to talk about their "contributions to society," as though they are standing outside and only offering a few crumbs of value. He prefers standards to use the phrase "role in society," which he says emphasizes that minorities have a significant place in culture and history.
Probably a change for the better.
 
I say if they go through with it, the Federal government decertify Texas public schools for all purposes. That is, all "graduates" of the Texas public schools are listed as non-graduates for any Federal employment, including the military. None are considered graduates for application to the military academies. No student aid for college. No Federal money for the schools. Let the families pay for remedial education if they want their kids to be considered graduates. We'll see who runs the board of ed after a few years of that.
 
The real problem that most people seem to miss is that Texas is so large, the companies writing the textbooks get on their knees and give them whatever they want, then force those textbooks on the rest of the country. So if these changes go through, they'll be . .. .. .. .ing up schools nationwide.
 
Is it true that they had to include a sticker in textbooks dealing with evolution: Evolution is just a theory?

edit: Nevermind the question, already found this:

CobbDisclaimer.jpg
 
Is it true that they had to include a sticker in textbooks dealing with evolution: Evolution is just a theory?

Some business owner needs to donate a bunch of stickers saying 'Gravity is just a theory' to the schools...
 
Source....
 
It gets worse
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

August 17, 2005

KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.

Enlarge Image Evangelical

Rev. Gabriel Burdett explains Intelligent Falling.

"Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

Burdett added: "Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, 'I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.' Of course, he is alluding to a higher power."

Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world's leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.

According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.

The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."

"We just want the best possible education for Kansas' kids," Burdett said.

Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein's ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton's mathematics and Holy Scripture.

"Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world," said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. "They've been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don't know how."

"Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work," Carson said. "What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants.'"

Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.

"Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the 'electromagnetic force,' the 'weak nuclear force,' the 'strong nuclear force,' and so-called 'force of gravity,'" Burdett said. "And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus."

Source
 
Back
Top Bottom