Thursday, January 8, 2009

Public Education Ethical Dilemma

Columbus Dispatch Editorial: Teaching moment

Mount Vernon school district learning the hard way to nip problems in the
bud

Wednesday, January 7, 2009


"Supporters of fired Mount Vernon Middle School teacher John Freshwater are
right about one thing: It's a shame the school district has spent $200,000
to date to defend the firing.

Since the Mount Vernon City Schools Board of Education voted in June to
fire Freshwater, the district has racked up legal expenses. The appeal
hearing, to which Freshwater is entitled by state law, began in October and
has been delayed two months by attorneys' scheduling issues.

This is an expensive lesson.

The unfortunate experience should be a cautionary lesson to other school
districts dealing with teachers whose personal beliefs get in the way of
their responsibility to educate: Don't look the other way for years, even
if the teacher is well-liked and personable. The mistake was not in firing
Freshwater but in waiting so long to do it.

Freshwater, who was hired to teach science, lost his job because an
independent report concluded that he pushed his Christian beliefs onto
students in his classroom and that he used an electrical device to burn
marks onto students' arms.

Though Freshwater says the marks were meant to be Xs, branded students say
they were to represent crosses.

The complaint of the "branding," brought by one student's parents, was
shocking, but it wasn't new to school officials; neither were the
complaints about Freshwater's religious comments nor, most important, that
he used a science classroom to promote nonscientific, religiously based
ideas of creation.

The controversy gained notoriety last spring, when Freshwater defied orders
to remove a Bible from his desk and other religious items from his
classroom. His popularity throughout the case has been evident. Some
parents and students have denied that he pushed his religion on anyone;
others have said that, even if he did, he was representing the beliefs of
most people in the school district.

Even if that's true, it doesn't excuse Freshwater's actions. All
public-school students are entitled to education free of religious
indoctrination, yet he told students that homosexuality is a sin and
declared that some non-Christian religions are false. He told his students
that the law required him to teach the theory of evolution but that it
can't be true because it isn't supported by the Bible.

A high-school teacher testified that she often had to re-teach the basics
of evolution to students who had been in Freshwater's classes, for fear
that they would fail that part of the state proficiency test.

Parents had been complaining of Freshwater's proselytizing for at least 11
years. If officials had reined in his behavior when it first surfaced,
perhaps he would have been more likely to respect his bosses' orders to
stick to science.

Allowing him to become entrenched made a warranted dismissal much harder.

The supporters packing the hearing room where Freshwater's appeal is being
heard show that he has lots of community support. That suggests he could
build a career as a motivational speaker, an activist for Christian causes
or a teacher in a religious school.

But his demonstrated disregard for science, not to mention his poor
judgment with the electrical device, disqualifies him to teach in public
schools.

Other school districts with budding John Freshwaters should take heed.
Confronting a popular teacher is controversial, but preserving sound
education is essential."


If you were on the school board 11 years ago, what would you have done?

Monday, January 5, 2009

Meetings for Winter Quarter

UPDATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MEETINGS are held weekly on Wednesdays at 6:10PM in Baker 341 for the Winter Quarter.

For any other information or any other questions just email us @ ohiouskepticsociety@gmail.com.

Thanks,

David

Sunday, January 4, 2009

Anecdotal evidence and Expelled!

At OU Skeptic Society meetings, we’ve discussed the problems associated with anecdotal evidence, and how this sort of evidence is not enough when trying to establish greater phenomena as a fact. Examples of this include UFO accounts, faith healing stories, superstition, alternative medicine testimonials, etc. Usually someone who is giving such an account believes that their experience is attributable to some greater, mystical occurrence when usually this isn’t the case. Although shocking anecdotes can serve as a starting point to an investigation as to what is going on – they do not serve as proper conclusions.

As it turns out, a shocking anecdote is what inspired the financiers of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed to make their movie. Walt Ruloff, the idea man behind the film, was inspired by an account given by a few friends of his in biotechnology that basically said they weren’t allowed to think outside the box in science, especially on origin-of-life issues and especially not to question the “atheistic materialism” that dominates science.

"You're supposed to question the current paradigm, the orthodoxies, of science. But we're not allowed to challenge the premises of so-called neo-Darwinism. It's crazy," Ruloff said.

Ruloff was not happy about this – properly so. Especially when he later had his fears confirmed by university professors who claimed to have been fired for being intelligent design supporters. He then went on to create a film to show that this was happening, and that it was a serious problem.

However, in making the film – Ruloff and his associates went off the deep end.

I’ve seen the movie, and the claims it makes are so absurd and exaggerated that it’s tough to even imagine. After adding Ben Stein to the mix, the crew making the movie decided to spice it up by making the climax/conclusion less about science and university professors and more about how Darwinian thinking bee lines society to Nazi Germany and eugenics. This blurring of the lines between the insane, mad scientist-like application of the concepts of evolution and what evolutionary fact/theory actually says is rather insane.

They do actually cover the claims of the college professors that maintain they lost their jobs due to being ID proponents, and that evolution has nothing to say about how life began – but the central theme is that Darwin’s ideas are evil and false.

Those who have claimed to have been ‘expelled’ for being ID supporters have turned out to have been lying. They were university professors who, mostly, were simply denied tenure for not publishing enough to contributing enough to the university or scientific research. However, they would wish we believe the reason is because they believe in intelligent design. To be granted tenure, one has to really prove they are worthy of the honor by contributing in terms of research, education, and service. These professors hadn’t, thus they weren’t given tenure. The anecdotes given by these people have been shown to misleading and even outright false. From this, Ruloff made his conclusion – and I would assume it was because it was confirming some sort of bias he has.

And it’s true, evolutionary theory/fact does not have much to say about the origin of life. This is something covered by a different field called abiogenesis.

Anyway, the point is that Ruloff didn’t do his homework – and used the money he’s earned in technologies to promote an agenda via propaganda, misconception, lying, and shock and awe – all based a few bias confirming stories.

Moral of the story, anecdotal evidence isn’t enough. As a skeptic and critical/freethinking person, understanding this concept is very important – otherwise you might end up believing and acting on something that can ultimately harm you, like buying Airborne next time you get a cold.

Sunday, December 28, 2008

How well can you pay attension?

Go to this site

...focus very carefully, and count the number of times
the team in the white shirts pass the basketball.

It's tough to do, but if you focus you should be able to get the correct number.

---The point of this is that there is an interesting lesson involved in counting the number of passes that is sort of related to skepticism and science - very cool.


word,

David

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Hey! A New Post!

A few things...

1.) THE WAR ON CHRISTMAS


Although I'm sick to death of this phrase, I thought I'd throw it out there.

The concept is ridiculous, because it is assuming that Christmas is a purely religious holiday and that there is a massive, conspiring anti-religious movement attempting to destroy Christmas as an attack on Christianity. The movement of course is the 'Secularists' - the scare quotes meaning that the connotations associated with this word by the anti-'war' protesters.

Just ask Bill:

"See, I think it's all part of the secular progressive agenda to get Christianity and spirituality and Judaism out of the public square. Because if you look at what happened in Western Europe and Canada, if you can get religion out, then you can pass secular progressive programs like legalization of narcotics, euthanasia, abortion at will, gay marriage, because the objection to those things is religious- based, usually."

name that logical fallacy anyone?

It could not be any clearer that Christmas is not a purely Christian holiday, so I'm not going to get into too much, but consider for a moment the:

-Christmas tree
-Historical background
-Massive amounts of shopping
-Santa Clause

2.)STRANGE CREATURES FROM 2008



The super creepy gnome.

Towards the beginning of the year, a South American town was 'terrorized' by a gnome running around scaring people.

Since then more and more gnome videos have been popping up, indicating that this is an easy thing to pull off.

Do gnomes exist? Maybe, but these silly videos aren't enough to convince me.


The Montauk Monster


Midway through the year this monster was all over the media. The people who took the picture claimed that they had found it washed up on shore. Upon further investigation it was found to be a complete hoax, but more interestingly it was a viral marketing scheme that went amazingly well. I have to hand it them, it was a brilliant idea.


3.) 2009

For the next year, the OU Skeptic Society has a lot on its plate. We have advertising/recruiting, fund raising, and charity work to do - all of which is standard for any decent on campus group. But specific to us, we have:

1.) Darwin Day 2009
2.) Micheal Shermer @ OSU
3.) Skepticamp in Columbus
4.) ID panel in collaboration with Difficult Dialogues
5.) Weekly meetings and socials
6.) Drinking Skeptically meetings
7.) The Amazing Meeting 7 in Vegas
8.) and as always, lots of skepticism and debunking

to look forward too!



So all in all, I made this post to get back into it, and to say a.) the war on xmas is nonexistant, b.) some of the hoaxes of the last year were funny, and c.)the OU skeptic society has just began to get going.