Freethought & Rationalism Archive

RufusAtticus · 01-18-2004, 11:25 AM

I've replaced the previous letter with a newer one.

wildlifer · 01-18-2004, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by secular buddhist
Very nice letter, RufusAtticus. Nicely written, and makes your point well. I, for one, wouldn't recommend any changes.

Of course, someone is going to rebut that "evolution" is not necessary to do pharmaceutical research, but not much you can do about that. Also, I would think that someone is going to make a big deal about your comparison of creationists with "holocaust-deniers" - although it's clear what you mean it is pretty much a "hot button" that someone is sure to push.

I would think a thorough understanding of biological evolution would be required in pharmaceutical research, especially in the light of the ever-growing numbers of drug-resistent "bugs."

Nice job on the letter!

Asha'man · 01-18-2004, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
I'd appreciate any comments.

The transition between the first sentence (Merck decision) and the 2nd (new standards) seems abrupt. Maybe a stronger transition is needed? How about pushing the reason for Merck's decision (better educated workers) into it's own sentence?

You used the AAAS to support the position of evolution, are there any other really strong organizations that make a similar statement? National Academy of Science or something? I think you need to show that all the top science organizations in the country (world?) accept evolution without doubt or compromise.

RufusAtticus · 01-18-2004, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Asha'man
You used the AAAS to support the position of evolution, are there any other really strong organizations that make a similar statement? National Academy of Science or something? I think you need to show that all the top science organizations in the country (world?) accept evolution without doubt or compromise.

Yes there are other organizations, but the reason why I bring up AAAS is that they sponsered the national benchmarks that Georgia based this new curriculum off of. By comparing the two standards (AAAS and Georgia) one can tell what the state has intentionally removed. It is very obvious from these changes that the state had a pro creationism/id bias in making the benchmarks.

How about "Then earlier this month. . . "?

Asha'man · 01-19-2004, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
How about "Then earlier this month. . . "?

I would break the first sentence into two.

"Last month pharmaceutical giant Merck & Co. chose North Carolina over Georgia for the site of a new vaccine manufacturing facility. Merck cited the better skilled workers and better education system of our neighbor as justification for this decision. Then earlier this month...."

This provides greater emphasis on the reason behind the decision (education quality) and thus provides the transition into the main thread of the letter.

RufusAtticus · 01-19-2004, 05:45 AM

How about?

"Last month Merck & Co. chose North Carolina over Georgia for the site of a new vaccine manufacturing facility. The pharmaceutical giant cited the better skilled workers and better education system of our neighbor in making their decision. Then earlier this month...."

RufusAtticus · 01-19-2004, 06:55 AM

New Version:

Quote:

Last month Merck & Co. chose North Carolina over Georgia for the site of a new vaccine manufacturing facility. The pharmaceutical giant cited the more highly skilled workers and better educational system of our neighbor in making their decision. Then earlier this month the Georgia Department of Education (DOE) released drafts of the proposed science standards for K-12 public school education. These standards are supposed to be �stronger� and the foundation of a �world-class curriculum.� Sadly they verge on being a joke. The DOE has gutted biology education by removing the very basis of modern biology, more than likely for the religious and political controversy around it. Instead of enlightening opponents of modern science through education, the DOE seeks to perpetuate ignorance through silence. We do not compromise history education for holocaust deniers, why should we compromise biology education for evolution deniers?

The DOE utilized the Project 2061 benchmarks of the American Association for the Advancement of Science as the foundation of the Georgia draft standards. Instead of strengthening these national benchmarks to create a truly world-class curriculum, the state of Georgia has weakened them by removing sections concerning the history of life, common descent, human origins, the role of we play in the ecosystem, the big bang, the age of the earth, etc. The intent is clear, and the pseudoscientific sympathies our governor and state school superintendent expressed during their campaigns are now threatening our state�s educational and economic future.

The DOE has even eliminated the mere mention of evolution in the biology standards and is certainly clueless if it thinks that entering college freshman are not expected to know what evolution is. Good biology teachers will still prepare their students for college, but we do not adopt standards because of our good teachers. The lack of proper standards means that, as most teachers choose to teach only the standards, the majority of high school students in our state will not graduate with a proper education.

What students know when they get out of high school directly impacts what they know when they get out of college. The more time that is spent in college learning things that should have been learned in high school, the less chance there is to succeed, and the less time there is to prepare for employment after college. Compromising K-12 science education directly compromises the economy of Georgia. At a time when the state is desperately trying to court the biotech industry, these science standards encourage them to look elsewhere. Merck was not the first company to bypass Georgia because our public education avoids modern biology. It probably will not be the last unless we actually adopt a world-class curriculum. Incorporating the entirety of the AAAS benchmarks, including the sections that ignorance finds controversial, is the best and easiest way for the state to proceed at this point. A decade from now with such improved standards the companies will come to us, instead of us going to them.

The Georgia Department of Education needs to hear from the people that these proposed standards are not world-class and that the entirety of the AAAS benchmarks need to be adopted. The standards and links for public comment can be found at http://www.glc.k12.ga.us/spotlight/gps2.htm. Further information and links about can be found on the website of Georgia Citizens for Integrity in Science Education, www.georgiascience.org.

Shpongle · 01-19-2004, 10:20 AM

Quote:

"...including the sections that ignorance finds controversial..."

I like the letter overall, but have a nit to pick regarding the above sentence.

It sounds like you want to say, "the sections that the ignorant find controversial", but are softening it by referring to this abstract entity, "ignorance". I suggest either be more to the point or simply remove that part.

RufusAtticus · 01-19-2004, 11:57 AM

I originally wrote "sections that ignorant parts of society find controvercial." I decided to shorten it by using "ignorance." I'll consider "the ignorant."

RufusAtticus · 01-26-2004, 09:01 AM

Bump: From an email today.

Quote:

GCISE will meet this Saturday at Emory 2-4 PM in the
Anthropology/Geosciences bldg rm 303 to hear from George Stickel
(Cobb County science chair) on the standards rewriting process. We
have invited Steven Pruittbut have not yet had a response. Let me
know if you need directions. It is important for us to have a good
size group there, please come if you possibly can.

The AJC will run a special on the Science curriculum this Thursday
1/29. Perfect time to send those letters to the editor that you've
prepared. Send them today or tomorrow so they can print them
Thursday. However, letters sent later are also useful.

Attached (if the listserver does not strip them-I can send
individually) are color-coded comparisons of AAAS Benchmarks and GA
version for High School and middle school that were done for us by
NCSE. They make it easier to see what was omitted.

In the actual standards, evolution is not mentioned, nor is common
descent, human origins, actual age of the earth, plate tectonics (for
the most part), Big Bang, etc etc. Human reproduction has also been
eliminated. Some of these terms are mentioned in the description of
the Hiogh School curriculum for teachers.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-18-2004, 11:25 AM	#11
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	I've replaced the previous letter with a newer one.

01-19-2004, 05:45 AM	#16
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	How about? "Last month Merck & Co. chose North Carolina over Georgia for the site of a new vaccine manufacturing facility. The pharmaceutical giant cited the better skilled workers and better education system of our neighbor in making their decision. Then earlier this month...."

01-19-2004, 11:57 AM	#19
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	I originally wrote "sections that ignorant parts of society find controvercial." I decided to shorten it by using "ignorance." I'll consider "the ignorant."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.