Louisiana Privatizing Education

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:01 pm

While running the risk of being labeled as a bigot again, there was an interesting article in Science Daily about how public school math programs outperform private schools. Some of the same factors, such as teacher certification and program accountability apply in the Louisiana situation.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools in Math Instruction

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:06 pm

Accountable;1395635 wrote: Why don't YOU see if they show up. I'm not the one trying to justify my bigotry.You are trying to defend the indefensible.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:37 pm

Ahso!;1395675 wrote: You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I'm trying to discuss vouchers. YOU have turned it into an anti-religion fright-fest. You don't even see how you are identical to the religious zealots you demonize.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 12:43 pm

Wandrin;1395674 wrote: While running the risk of being labeled as a bigot again, there was an interesting article in Science Daily about how public school math programs outperform private schools. Some of the same factors, such as teacher certification and program accountability apply in the Louisiana situation.

Public Schools Outperform Private Schools in Math Instruction
OUTSTANDING! Something actually on the subject and center of the target. Well done! :yh_clap

Math and science have been a big problem here in TX. I'm sure it's the same in Louisiana. A competitive system would definitely expose a private school that was weak in math. I wonder if a private-public partnership could be struck, or possibly parents could choose half-days so that they could go to one school for math & science, and another for English and social studies.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:09 pm

Accountable;1395678 wrote: I'm trying to discuss vouchers.So am I and my point has been that taxpayer money in the form of vouchers should not be going to religious institutions.Accountable;1395678 wrote: YOU have turned it into an anti-religion fright-fest.No I haven't, you're simply going to great length mischaracterizing what's been said here.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:10 pm

Accountable;1395679 wrote: OUTSTANDING! Something actually on the subject and center of the target. Well done! :yh_clapWho do think you are?

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:17 pm

A simple thought:

I believe that we, as a society, should work to fix the public school system, rather than abandon it.

I have had this conversation many times with parents.

A majority of those parents who seek non-public education via the voucher systems are religious parents upset with the teaching of scientific curricula that stresses non-religious "World View" in the public school systems.

The examples in Article AHSO! posted, for the most part support that notion.

The state is not, "privatizing education" so much as making it easier for parents who want to pursue alternate education for their children to do so.

The argument is: I want my child to receive a private education, but I pay taxes to the public system. Why should I be required to support both?

I suspect many of the "private educators" will simply take the money. When it is time to prove accreditation, they will pack up and leave the state, leaving a bunch of poor, functional illiterates.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:56 pm

Accountable;1395679 wrote: OUTSTANDING! Something actually on the subject and center of the target. Well done! :yh_clap

Math and science have been a big problem here in TX. I'm sure it's the same in Louisiana. A competitive system would definitely expose a private school that was weak in math. I wonder if a private-public partnership could be struck, or possibly parents could choose half-days so that they could go to one school for math & science, and another for English and social studies.

Well, that's not condescending at all.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:52 pm

LarsMac;1395713 wrote: A simple thought:

I believe that we, as a society, should work to fix the public school system, rather than abandon it.

I have had this conversation many times with parents.

A majority of those parents who seek non-public education via the voucher systems are religious parents upset with the teaching of scientific curricula that stresses non-religious "World View" in the public school systems.

The examples in Article AHSO! posted, for the most part support that notion.

The state is not, "privatizing education" so much as making it easier for parents who want to pursue alternate education for their children to do so.

The argument is: I want my child to receive a private education, but I pay taxes to the public system. Why should I be required to support both?

I suspect many of the "private educators" will simply take the money. When it is time to prove accreditation, they will pack up and leave the state, leaving a bunch of poor, functional illiterates.

Good points. If the state feels that education is lagging other states, why not spend the time to investigate the good schools and why they succeed? It sounds like they are trying to "fix" a situation other than academic achievement or to appease a certain segment of the population, rather than addressing the problem.

As of now, there are 547 registered religious schools in Louisiana. It will be very interesting to see how many there are a year from now. As a point of comparison, there are 591 registered private schools. I wonder what the ratio will be in a year.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:39 pm

SnoozeAgain;1395733 wrote: Well, that's not condescending at all.
Sorry. I didn't mean that to be condescending, at least not to Wandrin. To him (her?) I was being sincere. I was excited that someone was discussing the subject of public v private education.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:43 pm

Wandrin;1395741 wrote: It sounds like they are trying to "fix" a situation other than academic achievement or to appease a certain segment of the population, rather than addressing the problem.
I agree. It seems to be the way politicians do things nowadays. Not too long ago someone asked the question of which country's education system had the highest scoring students. The answer was Finland, I believe. But rather than investigating to see what they were doing & how, our politicians simply asked how much they were spending per student.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:57 pm

Accountable;1395748 wrote: Sorry. I didn't mean that to be condescending, at least not to Wandrin. To him (her?) I was being sincere. I was excited that someone was discussing the subject of public v private education.

Accountable, since 92.5% of the private schools registered in Louisiana are religious schools, don't you think that it is reasonable to discuss religious private schools as an integral part of the overall discussion?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:13 pm

Wandrin;1395750 wrote: Accountable, since 92.5% of the private schools registered in Louisiana are religious schools, don't you think that it is reasonable to discuss religious private schools as an integral part of the overall discussion?
To discuss, sure, but it's no more reasonable to cast blanket condemnation over all religious private schools than it is to make general racist remarks. It's not reasonable to assume that the state will change it's curricular standards to match the most extreme minority religious view. It's not reasonable to assume that because the state wants to issue vouchers that it will close all public schools, "abandoning" the kids to religious zealots. It's not reasonable to assume that states will suddenly lower certification standards when it hasn't done so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These schools are in competition with each other. If by some weird chain of events a private school was to insist on ignoring state and federal mandate to teach evolution (to the level that the students will pass a test the teachers are not allowed to see) and instead teach creationism, intelligent design, or whatever, then the students will not pass ... will not graduate. How long will such a business survive? Most parents would be pulling their kids out before the end of the first semester. They would be out of business in short order.

The paranoia is unfounded and illogical.

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:41 pm

Accountable;1395751 wrote: These schools are in competition with each other. If by some weird chain of events a private school was to insist on ignoring state and federal mandate to teach evolution (to the level that the students will pass a test the teachers are not allowed to see) and instead teach creationism, intelligent design, or whatever, then the students will not pass ... will not graduate. How long will such a business survive? Most parents would be pulling their kids out before the end of the first semester. They would be out of business in short order.

The paranoia is unfounded and illogical.

My worry is that it will be handed to churches and pastors who are not qualified to teach science. I mean, we could as well create a jobs program to have the homeless teach these classes. A lot of the religious "educational" materials for science are filled with outdated information and quackery (see Pahu's epic thread).

As for competition being the solution, from what I've recall, the majority of businesses are out of business in 5 years. Most lose the competition. Those that don't are often getting special breaks or taxpayer money.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:46 pm

Accountable;1395751 wrote: To discuss, sure, but it's no more reasonable to cast blanket condemnation over all religious private schools than it is to make general racist remarks.

...

The paranoia is unfounded and illogical.

I don't recall anyone suggesting that all religious private schools were substandard. I even know of a couple of top-ranked religious private schools, although not in Louisiana.

Let's look at one aspect for a comparison. All public school teachers must have teaching credentials that meet a certain minimum level. Is that the case for private schools?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:55 pm

Wandrin;1395754 wrote: I don't recall anyone suggesting that all religious private schools were substandard. I even know of a couple of top-ranked religious private schools, although not in Louisiana.The condemnation wasn't because they might be substandard, but that they're religious. But your first post certainly seemed to imply you thought they were sub-par.

Wandrin;1395754 wrote: Let's look at one aspect for a comparison. All public school teachers must have teaching credentials that meet a certain minimum level. Is that the case for private schools?

http://www.edchoice.org/Documents/Schoo ... isiana.pdf

All teaching faculty must have at least a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution,

with at least 12 hours of education classes, a major in the primary teaching field or

certification in field they teach.
That's more than I had to provide to certify for TX public school teacher.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:25 pm

Accountable;1395755 wrote: The condemnation wasn't because they might be substandard, but that they're religious. But your first post certainly seemed to imply you thought they were sub-par.

http://www.edchoice.org/Documents/Schoo ... isiana.pdf

That's more than I had to provide to certify for TX public school teacher.

So, to get funding a private school must be on the approved list?

The only religious schools I have experience with are the one in Florida where a relative teaches and the uber right wing Christian bootcamp type boarding school I was sent to as a child. (side note: Do you know how hard I had to work at it to get kicked out of that hell hole?) I do have a friend whose kids attend a very highly ranked religious school in California with a great science program. Perhaps I let my personal experience shape my wording. I didn't intend to offend anyone.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:04 am

Accountable;1395751 wrote: To discuss, sure, but it's no more reasonable to cast blanket condemnation over all religious private schools than it is to make general racist remarks. It's not reasonable to assume that the state will change it's curricular standards to match the most extreme minority religious view. It's not reasonable to assume that because the state wants to issue vouchers that it will close all public schools, "abandoning" the kids to religious zealots. It's not reasonable to assume that states will suddenly lower certification standards when it hasn't done so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These schools are in competition with each other. If by some weird chain of events a private school was to insist on ignoring state and federal mandate to teach evolution (to the level that the students will pass a test the teachers are not allowed to see) and instead teach creationism, intelligent design, or whatever, then the students will not pass ... will not graduate. How long will such a business survive? Most parents would be pulling their kids out before the end of the first semester. They would be out of business in short order.

The paranoia is unfounded and illogical.Louisiana has been in the forefront in trying to discredit science ever since Jindal became governor. The funny thing is he was a biology major.

New Bill Aims to Repeal Louisiana's Anti-Evolution Law | Mother Jones

Louisiana's Science Education Act, passed in 2008, was the first of its kind to be approved in a state legislature. It claims to promote "critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied including evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning." Attempts to pass similar legislation, which are often called "Academic Freedom" bills, have failed in a number of other states including Iowa, Florida, Oklahoma, and New Hampshire.http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008 ... dom-law/As we noted last month, a number of states have been considering laws that, under the guise of "academic freedom," single out evolution for special criticism. Most of them haven't made it out of the state legislatures, and one that did was promptly vetoed. But the last of these bills under consideration, the Louisiana Science Education Act (LSEA), was enacted by the signature of Governor Bobby Jindal yesterday. The bill would allow local school boards to approve supplemental classroom materials specifically for the critique of scientific theories, allowing poorly-informed board members to stick their communities with Dover-sized legal fees. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/ ... s/Teaching a narrowly Biblical version of biological development in public school science classrooms is legally unconstitutional, but creationists have adapted their their efforts. After the failure of intelligent design in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, proponents turned to the mechanisms of textbook approval.

Louisiana’s biology textbook review is the first to be conducted under the Louisiana Science Education Act, passed in 2008 to “promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories.”

http://www.theind.com/index.php?option= ... &Itemid=93

A bid to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act has failed for the second consecutive year in a Senate committee in Baton Rouge, falling in a 2-1 vote despite the testimony of the science community and the backing of more than 75 Nobel laureates in the sciences.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:21 am

Ahso!;1395763 wrote: Louisiana has been in the forefront in trying to discredit science ever since Jindal became governor. The funny thing is he was a biology major.
Assuming all the fearmongering about allowing *gasp!* open discussion in a science class is accurate, it kinda makes your argument against religious school moot, dunnit?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:28 am

Accountable;1395768 wrote: Assuming all the fearmongering about allowing *gasp!* open discussion in a science class is accurate, it kinda makes your argument against religious school moot, dunnit?How so?

eta: if it's accurate it isn't fearmongering, is it?

Post by **spot** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:34 am

Accountable;1395768 wrote: Assuming all the fearmongering about allowing *gasp!* open discussion in a science class is accurate, it kinda makes your argument against religious school moot, dunnit?

That depends on whether the class teacher is teaching the science or subverting it, I'd have thought.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:06 am

Accountable;1395748 wrote: I was excited that someone was discussing the subject of public v private education.Unfortunately public vs private education is a facade for what's actually going on in Louisiana. This is merely the next step in an orchestrated effort (by God, no less) to sabotage the validity of science.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:47 am

Ahso!;1395770 wrote: How so?
Jindal runs the public schools. If open discussion isn't being squelched in public schools any more than in religious schools, then you have no argument against religious schools.

Ahso!;1395774 wrote: Unfortunately public vs private education is a facade for what's actually going on in Louisiana. This is merely the next step in an orchestrated effort (by God, no less) to sabotage the validity of science.
There's your paranoia, born of your bigotry.

Here's a thought. Try this one: Jindal majored in Biology, right? Maybe he believes that open discussion of these different theories (wacked out or not) using the scientific method, will teach the students to question when adults say "Accept this and stop questioning" (much like fundamentalist Christians are reputed to do, and you are doing), and then make their own decisions.

Contrary to your apparent stance, maybejustmaybe Jindal thinks Darwinian evolution is strong enough to withstand challenges and questions and doesn't need to be preached as something to be accepted by faith simply because the teacher says it's so.

Scientists have to question conventional thinking. That's how advancements are made. Don't be afraid of it.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:30 am

Accountable;1395779 wrote: Jindal runs the public schools. If open discussion isn't being squelched in public schools any more than in religious schools, then you have no argument against religious schools.

There's your paranoia, born of your bigotry.

Here's a thought. Try this one: Jindal majored in Biology, right? Maybe he believes that open discussion of these different theories (wacked out or not) using the scientific method, will teach the students to question when adults say "Accept this and stop questioning" (much like fundamentalist Christians are reputed to do, and you are doing), and then make their own decisions.

Contrary to your apparent stance, maybejustmaybe Jindal thinks Darwinian evolution is strong enough to withstand challenges and questions and doesn't need to be preached as something to be accepted by faith simply because the teacher says it's so.

Scientists have to question conventional thinking. That's how advancements are made. Don't be afraid of it.

So, if the intent is really "open discussion", I presume that they would discuss the variety of creation myths/theories/stories and the problems with each. But somehow, I doubt that that will happen. Yes, I am being cynical and yes there is a difference between cynical and bigotry.

Has Louisiana spent any effort researching what makes the science programs in some school systems better than average? What have they tried?

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:33 am

Or maybe Jindal believes that he has to do whatever the religious right tells him to do, despite his better judgement. If he wants to get elected in the GOP that is. Most these politicians in the GOP I suspect do not actually believe what their puppeteer tells them to say.

There's no conflict to be found between religion and science, unless the religious groups want there to be a conflict. One may view evolution as the mechanism in which a God acted to create humans. Or they could view the Big Bang as when God created light.

The problem with this discussion then, is you have one side (scientists) who want to understand a natural phenomena, and another side (fundamentalists, not broadly all christians) that really has no interest in science, but wants to teach a very specific religious view. "Teach the conflict" is the catch-phrase, but there is no conflict ... it's a religious teaching that there is a conflict.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:39 am

Accountable;1395779 wrote: Jindal runs the public schools. If open discussion isn't being squelched in public schools any more than in religious schools, then you have no argument against religious schools.In the private religious school the environment is religious with prayer, preaching in the hallways and religiously biased conversations and opinions unchecked.

Accountable;1395779 wrote: There's your paranoia, born of your bigotry.I realize you think you're insulting me with your continued accusation of paranoia, but you're not. My paranoia is a healthily developed adaptation which makes me aware of certain things that perhaps you're not. We all benefit by the healthy paranoia of others. Of course there are extremes in some due to variation, but mine is actually a healthy balance. As for your accusation of bigotry, wrong again. What you're calling bigotry is in fact experience. I was religiously enthusiastic during periods of my life. I understand the mindset and the goals and the determination of the religious right.

Accountable;1395779 wrote: Here's a thought. Try this one: Jindal majored in Biology, right? Maybe he believes that open discussion of these different theories (wacked out or not) using the scientific method, will teach the students to question when adults say "Accept this and stop questioning" (much like fundamentalist Christians are reputed to do, and you are doing), and then make their own decisions.

Contrary to your apparent stance, maybejustmaybe Jindal thinks Darwinian evolution is strong enough to withstand challenges and questions and doesn't need to be preached as something to be accepted by faith simply because the teacher says it's so.

Scientists have to question conventional thinking. That's how advancements are made. Don't be afraid of it.I'm not concerned about whether or not the science will stand up to scrutiny, my concern is for the kids who are innocent pawns of the religious right and who are the future.

The science itself is tested through peer review and competing theories by people qualified to examine the evidence. What, may I ask, is to be scrutinized in the classroom by students who are at the learning stage of the subject and educators who not only barely understand the subject themselves but are in many cases deluded in their thinking of it? The only type of critiquing which can occur in that setting, understanding the furor of the subject, is whether or not they agree with it. That's not critiquing, that's sabotage.

Religion and science don't mix well in America. Let's respect that fact and bypass it and get to fixing the education problem instead of worsening it. This will only cause more conflict within and without the individual, the classroom and society.

Besides you, there are two other American educators that visit this forum that I know of, and not a one of you understand evolution beyond definitions and what little is in watered down textbooks that don't contain proper explanations of the processes by which evolution works because of political fights financed by the religious right.

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:50 am

Accountable;1395779 wrote:

What might be beneficial is to have a whole course on the Philosophy of Science. The traditional model of science that is explained in most high school classes is greatly oversimplified.

Science doesn't really operate by method of refutation alone, since it takes additional assumptions to refute a theory. As a result no theory is completely provable or refutable. A theory can always be saved from refutation by the addition of additional assumptions (ad hoc).

Also, some assumptions are by their nature neither verifiable nor falsifiable (are we all dreaming? are our senses accurate?).

What makes one theory better than another is a broad range of characteristics, such as simplicity, fecundity, risky predictions, etc.

The main problem with creationist theories is that they offer no interesting research topics. It's not fertile as far as generating new theories.

With evolution on the other hand, we can look for mutations that protect against specific disease, or create new organisms. The discovery of DNA and genome research came from questions asked in the context of evolutionary theory, not creationism. Creationism has a dead research program, it's been stagnant for thousands of years.

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:23 am

Ahso!;1395784 wrote: I realize you think you're insulting me with your continued accusation of paranoia, but you're not. My paranoia is a healthily developed adaptation which makes me aware of certain things that perhaps you're not. We all benefit by the healthy paranoia of others. Of course there are extremes in some due to variation, but mine is actually a healthy balance. As for your accusation of bigotry, wrong again. What you're calling bigotry is in fact experience. I was religiously enthusiastic during periods of my life. I understand the mindset and the goals and the determination of the religious right.

It's interesting on this thread, I think everyone that's raised concerns has come from a religious background or is speaking from past experience with a religious background. It's a bit like saying Cornell West is a racist when he criticizes Obama.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:57 am

Wandrin;1395782 wrote: So, if the intent is really "open discussion", I presume that they would discuss the variety of creation myths/theories/stories and the problems with each. But somehow, I doubt that that will happen. Yes, I am being cynical and yes there is a difference between cynical and bigotry.I wonder at the panic here (not necessarily with you) at opening discussion. If the kids don't learn about evolution, they don't pass the tests. They don't pass the tests, they don't graduate. They don't graduate, parents won't bring kids to them. Parents stop bringing kids, school goes out of business.

Since the process is painfully obvious, then it stands to reason the schools approved to receive these funds in question see it too. I don't understand the panic. I really don't.

Wandrin;1395782 wrote: Has Louisiana spent any effort researching what makes the science programs in some school systems better than average? What have they tried?
Dunno. You wanna research it?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 12:07 pm

yaaarrrgg;1395783 wrote: Or maybe Jindal believes that he has to do whatever the religious right tells him to do, despite his better judgement. If he wants to get elected in the GOP that is. Most these politicians in the GOP I suspect do not actually believe what their puppeteer tells them to say. :)That's probably it right there. But the guy still wants to be president, and he knows that what he does here will be ammunition for himself or his competition in any future national race.

yaaarrrgg;1395783 wrote: There's no conflict to be found between religion and science, unless the religious groups want there to be a conflict. One may view evolution as the mechanism in which a God acted to create humans. Or they could view the Big Bang as when God created light.

The problem with this discussion then, is you have one side (scientists) who want to understand a natural phenomena, and another side (fundamentalists, not broadly all christians) that really has no interest in science, but wants to teach a very specific religious view. "Teach the conflict" is the catch-phrase, but there is no conflict ... it's a religious teaching that there is a conflict.Right. Thanks, btw, for narrowing this from everyone else's "religious schools" to fundamentalists.

Here's the thing I don't think anybody is considering: these fundamentalists don't need state approval or federal funds to run a fundamentalist school. They run them already. The schools so many here are in a panic over already exist. Criteria is in place to weed out the charlatans, regardless of whether we agree with the criteria.

Louisiana is trying something new to improve a dismal education system. People should be applauding them instead of demonizing them. Alternatively, they should move down there and open a school they think would be more appropriate, but applause is cheaper.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 12:17 pm

Ahso!;1395784 wrote: In the private religious school the environment is religious with prayer, preaching in the hallways and religiously biased conversations and opinions unchecked.OMG!! Burn them all down!!

The hallway conversations in my public school are biased toward one drug-selling gang or another, making plans to fight or have sex, and sometimes where to go when skipping class. There are worse things than religious conversation.

Ahso!;1395784 wrote: I realize you think you're insulting me with your continued accusation of paranoia, but you're not. My paranoia is a healthily developed adaptation which makes me aware of certain things that perhaps you're not. We all benefit by the healthy paranoia of others. Of course there are extremes in some due to variation, but mine is actually a healthy balance. As for your accusation of bigotry, wrong again. What you're calling bigotry is in fact experience. I was religiously enthusiastic during periods of my life. I understand the mindset and the goals and the determination of the religious right. What I call bigotry is bigotry. Paranoia is not healthy. Maybe cynicism, but that's not what I see in you. You'v taken your own personal life drama and apply it generally to all things religious. That is bigotry. You are a bigot. It's not an insult unless you accept it as an insult. It is fact whether you accept it or not.

Ahso!;1395784 wrote: I'm not concerned about whether or not the science will stand up to scrutiny, my concern is for the kids who are innocent pawns of the religious right and who are the future.I'm more concerned with modeling the appreciation for our First Amendment rights and the scientific method.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Thu Jun 07, 2012 12:23 pm

yaaarrrgg;1395791 wrote: It's interesting on this thread, I think everyone that's raised concerns has come from a religious background or is speaking from past experience with a religious background. It's a bit like saying Cornell West is a racist when he criticizes Obama.

Not a bit. Not at all. No one is criticizing a single preacher, but all religion.

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:08 am

Accountable;1395808 wrote: Not a bit. Not at all. No one is criticizing a single preacher, but all religion.

I'm in the Bible Belt, so when I talk about religion, I'm referencing what is around me locally. There are a couple "liberal" churches though these are struggling for money and members. These churches don't have much oxygen in the debate, they are working mostly to survive. The churches that dominate the political dialog -- the largest churches -- are the ones that are well-funded and anti-science. On a national level this is reflected as well, with the largest denominations I would guess would be baptists, catholics and methodists.

Of these groups, catholics are the friendliest to science, but not even the pope will come out and admit that modern biology is correct. The previous pope came close to admitting this, but the new pope quickly threw water on the idea.

To say that religion is hostile to science is for the most part a correct perception, based on the groups that are consuming the most oxygen of the debate. Unfortunately the silent moderates of a religion don't do a whole lot to reign in the more radical members of the religion. As a result the whole group gets lumped together.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:50 am

Being even more embedded in the religious scene than most of the folks here, I have to agree with Yaaarrgg, and even somewhat with AHSO!.

The majority of the population in the church we spent most time with before our move was deeply anti-science. Well, perhaps, not ao much "anti-science" as agnostic to science. They simply refused to acknowledge science. The only way I found I could get along with most of the people was to just never discuss anything that dealt with scientific principles.

Where we are now, I found a church with members who are far more liberal. (Professors from CU, scientist from NOAA, and the Bureau of Standards, to name a few) attend this church. Not all Christians are bound to ignorance.

However, the majority of those who insist on abandoning the Public School system are the ones who fear their children being "indoctrinated with Evolutionist lies"

Post by **spot** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:51 am

Accountable;1395808 wrote: Not a bit. Not at all. No one is criticizing a single preacher, but all religion.

There's a whole lot of acceptable Christian religion which rejects as vile and hellish all notion of a God independent of those who explore Him. You can recognize these vile and hellish perversions of reality by a dogmatic belief in a pie-in-the-sky afterlife and Judgement. The Gospels might describe Jesus as believing in those things, it doesn't mean either he or they were right. You're wrong in claiming all religion is being criticized or repudiated here.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 11:38 am

It is interesting that the question of whether to teach creationism over evolution is a hot issue in Turkey right now.

The national Education and Science Workers’ Union (Egitim Sen ) claims that some of its 125,000 teacher-members now face pressure from religious parents, school administrators and Turkey’s Ministry of Education not to teach evolution. The union is warning that instruction of evolution theories is now under threat.

The teachers are blaming the pressure on fundamentalist Muslims.

Turkey: Creationists Want to Airbrush Darwin Out of Evolutionary Picture | EurasiaNet.org

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:42 pm

Accountable;1395806 wrote: OMG!! Burn them all down!!

The hallway conversations in my public school are biased toward one drug-selling gang or another, making plans to fight or have sex, and sometimes where to go when skipping class. There are worse things than religious conversation.What's this, your version of "can you top this?"?

The answer to the difficulties you witness in public schools is not to throw the kids into a religious setting, it's to educate them. Educate them in what appeals to them, and you know what that is? Them! Who and what they are, but not using some fairy tale. Evolutionary Theory can do just that in many of these cases. Explaining to these kids why they group and why they desire the opposite sex in a setting that makes them feel like they're part of conversation instead of being lectured to about "right and wrong" and what some invisible and unprovable God dictates.

The most pressing problem with our education system is not where the kids are being taught, rather, it the fact that the religious right has tied up the education process with political wrangling because they fear knowledge. The other problem is the fact that the parents of these children were fed the same misinformation we're trying to rid the system of. Most of those adults are lost but we can begin now. Religiously biased people teaching our kids is not the answer, it's the problem.

Accountable;1395806 wrote: What I call bigotry is bigotry. Paranoia is not healthy. Maybe cynicism, but that's not what I see in you. You'v taken your own personal life drama and apply it generally to all things religious. That is bigotry. You are a bigot. It's not an insult unless you accept it as an insult. It is fact whether you accept it or not.What you call bigotry is anything you want to call bigotry. Yet you want bigots to educate our children.

Accountable;1395806 wrote: I'm more concerned with modeling the appreciation for our First Amendment rightsOf course you are and that's precisely why you're blinded to the reality of the situation. You've got tunnel vision.Accountable;1395806 wrote: ...and the scientific methodAnd what scientific method are you referring to?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:02 pm

LarsMac;1395863 wrote: Being even more embedded in the religious scene than most of the folks here, I have to agree with Yaaarrgg, and even somewhat with AHSO!.

The majority of the population in the church we spent most time with before our move was deeply anti-science. Well, perhaps, not ao much "anti-science" as agnostic to science. They simply refused to acknowledge science. The only way I found I could get along with most of the people was to just never discuss anything that dealt with scientific principles.

Where we are now, I found a church with members who are far more liberal. (Professors from CU, scientist from NOAA, and the Bureau of Standards, to name a few) attend this church. Not all Christians are bound to ignorance.

However, the majority of those who insist on abandoning the Public School system are the ones who fear their children being "indoctrinated with Evolutionist lies"
But the issue isn't fundamentalists abandoning the public school system. The issue is parents having options on where to send their children for school. If parents (the kind that care enough to go to the trouble to find better education opportunities than the local public school affords, remember) found that their little cherubs were being indoctrinated rather than taught the curriculum, don't you think they would pull their kids out, or more likely not enroll them at all?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:17 pm

Accountable;1395900 wrote: But the issue isn't fundamentalists abandoning the public school system. The issue is parents having options on where to send their children for school. If parents (the kind that care enough to go to the trouble to find better education opportunities than the local public school affords, remember) found that their little cherubs were being indoctrinated rather than taught the curriculum, don't you think they would pull their kids out, or more likely not enroll them at all?You're amazing, you know. One of the benefits of this idea is to get the students whose parents cannot afford the religious school but want it for their kids is to get them in on the taxpayer's dime. Those people don't give a damn about testing. What these parents care about is getting their kids out of the public school system.

When considered from that perspective it goes against everything you stand for politically.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:26 pm

Accountable;1395900 wrote: But the issue isn't fundamentalists abandoning the public school system. The issue is parents having options on where to send their children for school. If parents (the kind that care enough to go to the trouble to find better education opportunities than the local public school affords, remember) found that their little cherubs were being indoctrinated rather than taught the curriculum, don't you think they would pull their kids out, or more likely not enroll them at all?

That list includes some of the most prestigious schools in the state, which offer a rich menu of advanced placement courses, college-style seminars and lush grounds. The top schools, however, have just a handful of slots open. The Dunham School in Baton Rouge, for instance, has said it will accept just four voucher students, all kindergartners. As elsewhere, they will be picked in a lottery.
The school willing to accept the most voucher students -- 314 -- is New Living Word in Ruston, which has a top-ranked basketball team but no library. Students spend most of the day watching TVs in bare-bones classrooms. Each lesson consists of an instructional DVD that intersperses Biblical verses with subjects such chemistry or composition.

Well, sure, I suppose parents ought to have the right to decide who is going to indoctrinate their children.

Though, I would much prefer that they worked at making sure their kids, as well as everyone else' kids got a decent education.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:34 pm

Ahso!;1395902 wrote: You're amazing, you know. One of the benefits of this idea is to get the students whose parents cannot afford the religious school but want it for their kids is to get them in on the taxpayer's dime. Those people don't give a damn about testing. What these parents care about is getting their kids out of the public school system. Where do you get that from, assuming that it's not from your fertile imagination.

Ahso!;1395902 wrote: When considered from that perspective it goes against everything you stand for politically.You'll have to explain this one, too.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:36 pm

LarsMac;1395903 wrote: Well, sure, I suppose parents ought to have the right to decide who is going to indoctrinate their children.

Though, I would much prefer that they worked at making sure their kids, as well as everyone else' kids got a decent education.
What in my post or anywhere else indicates that they're not?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:37 pm

Ahso!;1395902 wrote: You're amazing, you know.
I forgot to thank you. :yh_blush

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:44 pm

Accountable;1395905 wrote: Where do you get that from, assuming that it's not from your fertile imagination.People who enroll their kids in religious schools are religious people. What's difficult to understand about that?

Accountable;1395905 wrote: You'll have to explain this one, too.I'd think It goes against your principle of capitalistic living. If one wants their kid to get a private education, or any education for that matter, they ought to pay for it themselves.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:53 pm

Accountable;1395907 wrote: I forgot to thank you. :yh_blushNo problem, Sweetie!

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:10 pm

Accountable;1395906 wrote: What in my post or anywhere else indicates that they're not?

(Now, YOU'RE getting paranoid.)

I got that impression from the article in the OP, and from direct exposure to many of those parents.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jun 08, 2012 4:22 pm

Ahso!;1395908 wrote: People who enroll their kids in religious schools are religious people. What's difficult to understand about that?

I'd think It goes against your principle of capitalistic living. If one wants their kid to get a private education, or any education for that matter, they ought to pay for it themselves.

I don't really have a problem with the idea of the voucher system. It bears a certain logic.

But I do have a problem with the quality of education children are getting.

If all the schools that will be accepting vouchers can demonstrate qualifications for educating their children as well, if not better than the state, then I'm all for it. I have seen some of the schools, though, and my concern is that poorly educated children are a drag on society as a whole. They generally struggle to provide for the family, and they produce children who are generally less prepared for education, themselves.

They tend to be less able to secure the general welfare of their children and the cycle continues.

The task, in my opinion is not to provide alternatives to state education, but to make state education a quality education.

Taking tax money from the education system to feed these sucker schools simply makes the task harder.

Edit: These schools should be required to show that their education is accredited, before they are allowed to receive the state vouchers.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Jun 09, 2012 6:16 am

LarsMac;1395910 wrote: (Now, YOU'RE getting paranoid.)

I got that impression from the article in the OP, and from direct exposure to many of those parents.Well of course, because the article in the OP was written to give you that impression. If you read other more objective write-ups .... sorry, forgot what times we're in ... if you read other articles on the subject, you'll be able to form a more objective view.

LarsMac;1395911 wrote: The task, in my opinion is not to provide alternatives to state education, but to make state education a quality education.I believe this is a good way to do that, and should be far more effective than throwing ever more money at them and saying "do better." Where's the incentive? If a school gets more money by attracting more students (meaning more parents, not by making recess longer) then there is real incentive to improve.

Hell, our system now of "closing schools" is not realistic and everybody knows it. What they end up doing is having the same faculty get in line to interview, but it's the same ol' boys (& girls) interviewing their friends who have worked in the district for 30+ years, so the same people get rehired, with the exception of a few newbies who weren't part of the problem in the first place.

LarsMac;1395911 wrote: Edit: These schools should be required to show that their education is accredited, before they are allowed to receive the state vouchers.

Now this is distressing:

Accreditation/Registration/Licensing/Approval

 No requirements for Accreditation.

 Registration is mandatory.

 If a nonpublic school chooses not to seek state approval the school must

register with the state in order to be in compliance with Louisiana‘s

compulsory attendance law. La. R.S. Ann. §17:232(C) and (D).

 To register a nonpublic school must submit a signed letter, include the name

of the school, contact information, and total number of students enrolled to the

Department of Education by the thirtieth day after the school session begins.

La. R.S. Ann. §17:232(C)

 No requirements for Licensing.

 Approval is optional.

 The Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education approves any

private elementary, secondary, or proprietary school upon application, if such

school meets and maintains a sustained curriculum or specialized course of

study of quality at least equal to that prescribed for similar public schools. La.

Const. Art. VIII, § 4; La. R.S. Ann. §17:11.

 After initial approval the board will annually determine whether the private

school is maintaining such quality, and if not, shall discontinue approval of

the school. La. R.S. Ann. §17:11.

 A school can be classified ―approved‖, ―provisionally approved‖ if there are

minor deficiencies in meeting state requirements, ―probationally approved‖ if

the school has more serious deficiencies, or ―unapproved.‖ Schools are

evaluated annually. A school that is provisionally or probationally approved

for more than one consecutive year loses its approved status and its eligibility

for state funding. Louisiana Department of Education Bulletin 741:

Louisiana Handbook for Nonpublic School Administrators §107.
http://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/r ... ivschl.pdf

This link, btw, a goldmine for people interested in private schools in each state.

*a little later*

That pdf was published in '09. In May 2012 the state issued this handbook for non-public schools. Be forewarned, it is a Word document 46 pages long.

http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/osr/lac/28v79/28v79.doc

which I found here:

Policies and Bulletins - BESE - Louisiana Department of Education

I now know more about the Louisiana private school system than I know about the public system in which I work.

One thing I noticed on page 1 (page 5 of the doc):

A. In order to benefit from state and federal funds, each approved school shall meet and maintain the following standards:

1. the school must have a state approval classification;

2. the school must be in compliance with Brumfield vs. Dodd; and

3. the school must be a nonprofit institutional day or residential school that provides elementary education, secondary education, or both.
That should settle all that earlier discussion about for-profit institutions.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Jun 09, 2012 8:19 am

Accountable;1395929 wrote: Well of course, because the article in the OP was written to give you that impression. If you read other more objective write-ups .... sorry, forgot what times we're in ... if you read other articles on the subject, you'll be able to form a more objective view.

I believe this is a good way to do that, and should be far more effective than throwing ever more money at them and saying "do better." Where's the incentive? If a school gets more money by attracting more students (meaning more parents, not by making recess longer) then there is real incentive to improve.

Hell, our system now of "closing schools" is not realistic and everybody knows it. What they end up doing is having the same faculty get in line to interview, but it's the same ol' boys (& girls) interviewing their friends who have worked in the district for 30+ years, so the same people get rehired, with the exception of a few newbies who weren't part of the problem in the first place.

Now this is distressing:

http://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/r ... ivschl.pdf

This link, btw, a goldmine for people interested in private schools in each state.

*a little later*

That pdf was published in '09. In May 2012 the state issued this handbook for non-public schools. Be forewarned, it is a Word document 46 pages long.

http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/osr/lac/28v79/28v79.doc

which I found here:

Policies and Bulletins - BESE - Louisiana Department of Education

I now know more about the Louisiana private school system than I know about the public system in which I work.

One thing I noticed on page 1 (page 5 of the doc):
Thanks.

Accountable;1395929 wrote: That should settle all that earlier discussion about for-profit institutions.
Well, most.

yaaarrrgg · Post by **yaaarrrgg** » Sat Jun 09, 2012 1:12 pm

If the science scores do not improve, the next round of pressure will be to dumb down the tests, or increase cheating.