information about Veritas Academy in Austin (private school, deal, teachers)

[corntortilla]

I talked to a mom who sends her son there, and I got the feeling that religion was worked into all subjects somehow. She relayed this information enthusiastically, like "They teach that even math is related to God!" It seemed like a bonus point to her, but definitely stopped me from looking further into the school.

[traceyr13]

Originally Posted by theloneranger

No, the vote was to ADD it to the curriculum, and it failed for the most part.

And despite the wording of the curriculum, the vast majority of science teachers in the state will continue to do their jobs and actually teach science rather than the garbage that the religoius right want them to.

That's not my understanding of it from my science colleagues. They say that the "strengths and weaknesses" have been part of the TEKS standards for many years - the vote was to solidify the teaching of intelligent design, thus adding it to the state sanctioned textbooks The vote in March was a strengthening and solidifying of policy that has already been in the TEA objectives for years (again, according to my colleagues.)

I followed the controversy closely this year because it was absolutely shocking to me coming from the Northeast where teaching anything other than the theory of evolution would only be found in religious schools, and even then without more than a cursory mention.

[thesonofgray]

Originally Posted by theloneranger

No, the vote was to ADD it to the curriculum, and it failed for the most part.

And despite the wording of the curriculum, the vast majority of science teachers in the state will continue to do their jobs and actually teach science rather than the garbage that the religoius right want them to.

Yeah, I hope you're right. From the NCSE it sounds like the religiously motivated on the board got only far enough to add some wordage to make an impression of "doubt" surrounding the validity of evolution (we might as well do the same with gravity).

Anyways, I went to public schools and I only recall my science teachers teaching evolution as the scientifically sound theory (or fact in layman's terms) it is. I feel very sorry for the students who have the "16% of US science teachers that believe humans were created by God in the last 10,000 years," since their being taught someone's personal religious beliefs and being deprived of an important education in sciences.

This just goes to show how important parental involvement in your kid's education is. Find out what your kid's teacher intends to teach, and if you don't like it, raise hell (no pun intended) and/or move your kid to a different school. (I know, I know, if only it were as easy as it sounds.)

[theloneranger]

Originally Posted by traceyr13

That's not my understanding of it from my science colleagues. They say that the "strengths and weaknesses" have been part of the TEKS standards for many years - the vote was to solidify the teaching of intelligent design, thus adding it to the state sanctioned textbooks The vote in March was a strengthening and solidifying of policy that has already been in the TEA objectives for years (again, according to my colleagues.)

I followed the controversy closely this year because it was absolutely shocking to me coming from the Northeast where teaching anything other than the theory of evolution would only be found in religious schools, and even then without more than a cursory mention.

Strengths and weaknesses of evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OK, so that clause has been there since the 1980s. However, they have never taught intelligent design in Texas, and that's what they wanted to add to the curriculum.

I don't know, nor have I personally heard of, a teacher who has a scientifically-valid "weakness" of evolution to teach, and I've never heard of any teacher in the Dallas area teaching it.

One of my friends in Wofforth said her school avoided the controversy by avoiding the topic altogether--whether that's the way I'd want to avoid getting intelligent design in science curriculum is another thing.

[thesonofgray]

Sweet! It looks like that McLeroy character was denied Perry's reappointment attempt last week. Maybe the Texas State Board of Education can stop pushing people's political and religious agendas now.

[theloneranger]

Originally Posted by thesonofgray

Sweet! It looks like that McLeroy character was denied Perry's reappointment attempt last week. Maybe the Texas State Board of Education can stop pushing people's political and religious agendas now.

He's still on the board, just not chairman. Perry gets to pick whoever he wants for the chair and the senate has to confirm them.

He will probably pick one of the moderate Republicans for the job, because the Democrats won't let any creationism wackos be appointed.

[Raskolnikov]

Moderators can this thread be locked? Seems like it's really devolved away from the original topic of discussion. We're not going to solve the debate here about teaching evolution as the only possible option in schools, maybe this would be better discussed somewhere else? Mods, I've seen you lock threads for far less reason than this.

[thesonofgray]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

Moderators can this thread be locked? Seems like it's really devolved away from the original topic of discussion. We're not going to solve the debate here about teaching evolution as the only possible option in schools, maybe this would be better discussed somewhere else? Mods, I've seen you lock threads for far less reason than this.

There is still an opportunity for people on this forum to voice their opinions about how evolution and creationism are taught in regards to Veritas Academy, and locking this thread would prohibit that. The fact that this thread also includes conversation about how/if evolution and creationism are taught in ALL our schools should not be surprising, and I don't think it diverts from the original topic beyond useful levels.

[mimimomx3]

This topic does bring up an interesting point on the differences between private schools, especially relgious ones, in how they address controversial teachings, like evolution/creationism, homosexuality, gender roles, etc. Just because two schools are relgious in nature doesn't mean they have similar curriculums. Regents/Veritas/Hyde Park vs. St. Stephens/St. Andrews/St. Francis for example.

[thesonofgray]

Originally Posted by theloneranger

He's still on the board, just not chairman. Perry gets to pick whoever he wants for the chair and the senate has to confirm them.

What's the significance of the chairmanship? I assume the role comes with additional powers and privileges.