Judge: Teacher violated kids' rights by calling creationism 'nonsense'

[codeorama]

I don't know whether the judge got it right, but the teacher has no business telling students that creationism is superstitious nonsense. And I think creationism is superstitious nonsense.

Agreed... I believe creationism is nonsense as well, I teach world history and I'm very careful to be respectful of everyone's individual opinions.

What is amazing though, is that in every class I taught this year, at least 2 or 3 students made comments that religion was nonsense or something along those lines after seeing the progression of how many have used religion/mythology to explain the unexplained and to keep control of the population etc... they figure it out on their own, you don't have to make any derogatory comments...:evilg:

[PeterMP]

I still have a difficult time with this simply because it is really impossible to demand or expect perfect neutrality out of any individual for six hours a day, five days a week. Opinions need to be included in the classroom (they also need to be understood as opinions and have room for debate). More, kids are hungry and want to know what you think... and including a variety of thought and philosophy in a kid's educational diet is by and large a good thing.

I'd also point out that I doubt that anybody is asking him to even be neutral on a regular basis. This guy is a history teacher, did he even need to be talking about evolution? At most, I'd assume this was maybe a few classes. You know you're teaching evolution, you know it is a sensitive topic, just be actual careful for those couple of classes.

You want to express your opinion on the refusal of the corrupt Catholic Church to grant Henry VIII's annulment, go ahead. Nobody is going to care.

[Larry]

So, nobody seems to be answering the question that I didn't ask:

Is Creationism religion? Or isn't it?

Am I the only one who sees a problem with the position that when a teacher teaches Creationism, then it's science, but if he mocks it, then "You're insulting my religious beliefs!"?

Doesn't it have to be one or the other?

----------

And, since I know everybody wants to hear The Wisdom of Larry: Yeah, it really sounds like the teacher was attacking religion. (Although, granted, what we're reading is the plaintiff's complaint, in which he accuses the teacher of attacking his religion. But I'm assuming that the events happened as described.) He needs to be told that it's a classroom, not a soapbox.

IMO, the teacher's wrong. I even think it was unconstitutional. But the reason I think that, is because of the flat-out fact that Creationism is a religious belief.

(I guess it could be said that the fact that the teacher is right, that Creationism is superstitious nonsense, is the reason why his actions were wrong.)

[Larry]

You want to express your opinion on the refusal of what of the corrupt Catholic Church to grant Henry VIII's annulment, go ahead. Nobody is going to care.

Actually, I'd say that that event is not only appropriate to discuss in a history class, but that it's something that ought to be covered, since it's (according to what I was taught) the primary reason why we have the First Amendment.

[NavyDave]

I don't know whether the judge got it right, but the teacher has no business telling students that creationism is superstitious nonsense. And I think creationism is superstitious nonsense.

Hey even the godless have a right to their opinions. Even when they are wrong.

[81artmonk]

here's where I have an issue with this. If a teacher isn't allowed to share thier religious beliefs on a historical or scientific topic, than this teacher should be under the same rules.

When I was a T. A. in high school I had a teacher who went to my church and she was not allowed by law to discuss anything related to GOD or her opinion related to evolution or creationism. If a student asked, she would tell them to come talk to her after school.

The problem with some teachers and professors is that they feel THEIR activism is alright in the classroom. The classroom is for learning, not a forum for teachers to share their opinions on a certian subject.

[Springfield]

Well I guess I see the hypocrisy in this...

If there was a teacher saying that evolution was nonsense I would be outraged. I just believe that creationism is nonsense though. I'm honestly surprised that this thread hasn't been taken over by techboy yet. It will come in due time though, so I suppose that there is no point in my making a huge deal out of my point of view in this thread.

[Burgold]

But you know something? It's easy as pie for me to stay neutral.

However, I constantly engage the students in discussion and debate. But instead of participating in it, I DIRECT it. I ask probing questions for students to consider. If a student is so dead set on a position, whether I agree with it or not, I provide him/her with some food for thought. Perhaps some things to consider about opposite viewpoints.

Depending on how strongly a certain belief is held giving "food for thought" could be considered inflamatory, because if you are giving food for thought you are challenging their belief system. And I would bet that somewhere within tone, body language, or unconscious choice of adjectives, adverbs or use of proper nouns versus pronouns you occassionally slip and your kids have a good idea where you stand on at least a few issues.

But that's okay. A teacher is an instructor and also a guide. How you attack a problem and which questions you alot more time too suggest which issues are more important. Full neutrality, absolute objectivity is impossible (even though it is a semi-worthy goal)

(Did want to say that based on your post, you sound like a good teacher and one that I would have enjoyed learning from. Keep it up.)

[skinsfan2003]

I think creationism is wacky as well, but I'm mixed on this one. I don't think expressing his opinion was the problem, just the way he delivered it.

[Thiebear]

Fact:

it is a teachers *JOB* to tell students how very wrong they are on a daily basis.

Fact:

Your belief in the [insert mythical object here] is not a right that is untouchable to criticism.

Fact:

6000 years ago God gave you feelings so they could be hurt.

[scruffylookin]

I don't know whether the judge got it right, but the teacher has no business telling students that creationism is superstitious nonsense. And I think creationism is superstitious nonsense.

Agreed.

He should not initiate that.

He should just teach the class and not interject anything. If Creationism isn't brought up, he should not say a word about it.

However, if a student tries to challenge him with the Creationism BS, then it would be his job as an educator to address it and shoot it down as the superstitious nonsense that it indeed is.

[techboy]

I'm honestly surprised that this thread hasn't been taken over by techboy yet.

None of my buttons have been pushed yet.

I can speak to this issue as a science teacher in a high school, though.

Each year, I teach the big bang and stellar formation in Physics. Each year, I have students ask about God (or more annoyingly, simply reject anything to do with science out of hand because they have the misguided notion that science rejects God).

I tell them that what I am presenting is the best scientific explanation of the data we have, and that it represents what and how we think happened, and that the why is beyond the scope of the class.

I took the same approach with evolution the year I taught Biology.

People don't really believe this unless they've been in a classroom, but teachers have an inordinate amount of influence over their students (even the students don't believe it). I am an authority, and the students ask me all manner of questions, even on topics that have nothing to do with the class, and they give my thoughts a lot of weight.

It's not possible to be truly neutral on an issue, but it is possible to make an effort, and this teacher crossed the line, just as I would if, after presenting the Big Bang, I went into a rant against atheistic scientists that seem to believe that this happened from nothing, by nothing, and for no reason (and maybe tossed in a little Kalam at the end).

It might have been okay if he had presented both positions, and allowed the students to discuss and debate the merits of each (perhaps a recreation of the Scopes trial?), and perhaps brought it into the larger context of the current ID debates (the Dover trial could be discussed).

Nowhere in there, though, is there really a place for pushing his personal opinion. He abused his position of authority.

[#98QBKiller]

So, nobody seems to be answering the question that I didn't ask:

Is Creationism religion? Or isn't it?

Am I the only one who sees a problem with the position that when a teacher teaches Creationism, then it's science, but if he mocks it, then "You're insulting my religious beliefs!"?

Doesn't it have to be one or the other?

I vote yes.

[NavyDave]

Fact:

it is a teachers *JOB* to tell students how very wrong they are on a daily basis.

Fact:

6000 years ago God gave you feelings so they could be hurt.

Fact: Teachers are not infallible.

Fact: All of the liberal propoganda being taught in class err anti American revisionist history should be corrected.

[Zguy28]

So, nobody seems to be answering the question that I didn't ask:

Is Creationism religion? Or isn't it?

Like Techboy said, the why it all came about shouldn't even be a part of the discussion. But yet the teacher decided to present his dogma on it anyway.

Am I the only one who sees a problem with the position that when a teacher teaches Creationism, then it's science, but if he mocks it, then "You're insulting my religious beliefs!"?

Doesn't it have to be one or the other?

Nope. I see it too. I am often at odds with other evnagelicals who want to blur the lines between philosophy and science.

[HOF44]

I vote yes.

Me too. Everybody is ignoring poor Larry in this thread.

[Larry]

Fact: Teachers are not infallible.

Fact: All of the liberal propoganda being taught in class err anti American revisionist history should be corrected.

FACT: Thiebear's point went over NavyDave's head.

[MEANDWARF]

Agreed.

He should not initiate that.

He should just teach the class and not interject anything. If Creationism isn't brought up, he should not say a word about it.

However, if a student tries to challenge him with the Creationism BS, then it would be his job as an educator to address it and shoot it down as the superstitious nonsense that it indeed is.

So your idea of a teacher duty during a debate with a student is to mock his or hers beliefs? In other words you disagree with the court ruling?

[Larry]

So your idea of a teacher duty during a debate with a student is to mock his or hers beliefs? In other words you disagree with the court ruling?

If the student asserts in class that the Earth is flat, should the teacher not mock that assertion?

(No, I'm not asserting that this scenario accurately reflects how the subject of creationism arose in this particular class. I'm going along with the hypothetical scenario that scruffy raised, and which Dwarf was responding to.)

[PeterMP]

If the student asserts in class that the Earth is flat, should the teacher not mock that assertion?

(No, I'm not asserting that this scenario accurately reflects how the subject of creationism arose in this particular class. I'm going along with the hypothetical scenario that scruffy raised, and which Dwarf was responding to.)

No. The teacher should clearly and intelligently explain why the student is wrong. The teacher might also take a less direct approach at trying to get the same information across by first asking the student about the information that has caused them to come to that belief.

[Larry]

No. The teacher should clearly and intelligently explain why the student is wrong. The teacher might also take a less direct approach at trying to get the same information across by first asking the student about the information that has caused them to come to that belief.

So, the Rule of the Classroom should be that all claims have equal merit, no matter how ludicrous or how long disproven?

I can see some reasons to have rules like that. Open discussion. The concept that just because "everybody knows" something doesn't make it so. The belief that if you can't prove something, then maybe you don't know as much about the subject as you claim to.

OTOH, rules like that are the reason Tailgate winds up with 147 threads claiming that Barack Obama isn't a US Citizen. The belief that "no matter how many times something's been proven, I can still wait a few days, then assert it, again, and demand that everybody prove it to me, again."

[TimmySmith]

So, the Rule of the Classroom should be that all claims have equal merit, no matter how ludicrous or how long disproven?

Shouldn't the rule of the classroom be about honest, relevant, mature discourse? If that rule is true, then was it not the teacher who violated it. Or is it generally acceptable for a teacher to openly and vocally label a student's opinion as nonsense these days? I admit I have not been in a classroom in a while.

[Larry]

Shouldn't the rule of the classroom be about honest, relevant, mature discourse? If that rule is true, then was it not the teacher who violated it. Or is it generally acceptable for a teacher to openly and vocally label a student's opinion as nonsense these days? I admit I have not been in a classroom in a while.

Sorry, should have reiterated my position, there.

IMO, the teacher in this case was wrong. It certainly appears (subject to revision if additional information appears later) that the teacher has an established pattern of taking opportunities to attack the Christian religion.

I was still discussing the hypothetical scenario, in which the student initiated the discussion of a matter of fact or science. I was still responding to the question of whether mockery is ever appropriate, in response to a student's assertion of some ludicrous position. (I used the example of the assertion of a Flat Earth.)

We were discussing the scenario of "But what if the student's position is nonsense?"

[PeterMP]

So, the Rule of the Classroom should be that all claims have equal merit, no matter how ludicrous or how long disproven?

No because the teacher shouldn't give the claim equal merit. The teacher should make the point that the student is wrong and give the evidence so that everybody can see that it is wrong. That isn't done by declearing that it is 'superstitious nonsense'.

The same discussion does NOT have to occur if a student proclaims the Earth is round.

They aren't equal and the teachers actions shouldn't be the same.

[techboy]

I actually don't see why a history teacher needs to be opining about scientific theories in the first place. If he's teaching the historical (or current) court cases, he can share the arguments of both sides in the context of the class discussion. Beyond that, it's not a science class.

If a student in my Physics class says that the Earth is 6000 years old, I'm going to correct him and tell him that the best data available is that it's 4.5 billion years old, and share some of that data. That's appropriate, because it's a science class.

In neither case is it necessary to call a view stupid. The stupidity should be evident (or not) in the analysis of the data. Students should be taught to think for themselves.