Back in 2002, the school system in Cobb County, Georgia mandated that a sticker be placed inside the cover of all biology textbooks. The stickers say, “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.”
Last Thursday a federal judge told the school district to remove those stickers. The judge ruled that it was yet another attempt by the state to denigrate the scientifically proven theory of evolution and to promote alternative religious theories of creation.
While the stickers do not specifically mention alternative “theories” to evolution, the judge correctly determined that it clearly was meant to isolate the theory of evolution as somehow undeserving of the same respect mustered by other scientific theories.
He said, “While evolution is subject to criticism, particularly with respect to the mechanism by which it occurred, the sticker misleads students regarding the significance and value of evolution in the scientific community.”
If you disagree with that statement, just think about this. Why did the school district not order similar disclaimers for all other scientific theories? The sticker says that evolution should be “…approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.” But isn’t that good advice for pretty much everything?
Should chemistry students not carefully study and critically consider the atomic theory? Should physics students approach the quantum theory with any less care and critical consideration?
No, evolution was singled out as the only theory that should be approached with caution. And the reason is obvious: Evolution theory tramples on the dogma of fundamentalist Christians. And Georgia is full of them.
So is Alabama, which mandates a similar sticker. That state has no plans to remove its dubious disclaimers, despite this latest ruling against the back-door encroachment of fundamentalism in the public schools.
Now, I’ve written on this topic enough to know that if someone believes in a literal six-day creation of everything in the universe by God, then nothing I say is going to change his mind. That’s not my intent.
I realize that most fundamentalists wouldn’t recognize the real theory of evolution if it crept out of the primal muck and bit them on their collective asses. Let's just say they know just enough about it to be dangerous.
My point is that even if I, myself, believed in creationism or intelligent design, I would still oppose placing such stickers in textbooks or teaching creation in schools as an alternative “theory.”
That’s because I know creationism is not a scientific theory. Evolution is. And even if there remains some controversy over its exact mechanisms, it still is a full-fledged, bona fide scientific theory that has withstood the test of time and scientific scrutiny.
Since students are supposed to learn about science from science textbooks and in science class, then it seems excruciatingly obvious that evolution must be a part of that curriculum, whether it tramples one’s personal religious beliefs or not.
The judge is simply reaffirming this notion, as have many other judges before him.
Of course, there are those who insist that evolution itself is nothing more than a belief. But this notion is truly absurd. Science, by definition, has to be neutral and impartial.
Certainly, some scientists have pet hypotheses that they like to see confirmed by observation or experiment. But if, in the end, the hypothesis doesn’t pass scientific scrutiny, then it has to be either modified or abandoned.
One of Charles Darwin’s contemporary’s, Thomas Huxley, once stated, “The great tragedy of science is the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.” It’s the nature of science.
The theory of evolution has withstood the tests of 150 years, and it is far stronger now than it was when Darwin proposed it. It certainly deserves its spot in biology textbooks, undiluted by spurious disclaimers.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Answering Machines
Most people own one, but most people hate it when other people use theirs. What is it? The dreaded answering machine.
It’s the device that created the modern phenomenon of “phone tag,” when you call someone and leave a message on their machine but then, when they call you back, you’re not home, so they leave a message on yours. It sometimes goes on like that for days.
And, although they are not as ubiquitous as they once were, those “amusing” messages people leave can be a little annoying. A few years ago, a big seller on TV commercials was the cassette tape that came with several humorous voice characterizations. But really, when all you want to do is leave a message, you really don’t feel like being entertained by lame impressions.
But answering machines do serve a very useful function, which is why most people have one of the contraptions. Americans truly do have a love-hate relationship with their telephone answering machine.
It wasn’t always like that, of course. Back in the 1970s, almost nobody had an answering machine. Even most businesses didn’t have one, except the movie theaters.
I was probably one of the first individuals to own one. And when I bought my first one, it was against the telephone company’s rules to install one, making them virtually useless unless you broke the rules.
Of course, I had no qualms about breaking telephone company rules back then and I slept perfectly well after having broken them. I wired my new high-tech gadget directly into the phone line in my apartment and it worked wonderfully. (The telephone installer actually showed me how to wire it – unofficially.)
I tried going the “legal” route. I called the phone company to find out about installing one on my phone line. They actually sent a couple of representatives out to my house to discuss the ins and outs of telephone answering machines and to show me a line of products. But the monthly charge for their use was in the hundreds of dollars.
So I elected to buy my own, for a one-time cost of about $150 at L. S. Ayres. It was their cheapest model and consisted of a miniature reel-to-reel tape recorder. Radio Shack had a cheaper model, but it was junk.
Eventually, the phone company standardized their jacks and plugs and started allowing people to connect their own equipment to the phone lines. Answering machines became more readily available. More and more people started buying them. You can buy one today for about $25 or less with far more features than my old reel-to-reel model. Most don’t even use tape anymore, but record your voice electronically.
The modern counterpart of the answering machine is voice mail. It’s really the same thing, except you don’t have to buy the equipment. Just pay a small monthly fee and the telephone company keeps track of your messages for you.
I tried voice mail, but decided that having an answering machine met my needs more economically. But there are no cute messages on mine, just the standard greeting. I don’t even bother telling people to wait for the beep anymore, because answering machines are so common, there’s no one out there who doesn’t know what to do when they get one on the other end of the line.
“Hello. This is me. Please leave a message.” Beep!
It’s the device that created the modern phenomenon of “phone tag,” when you call someone and leave a message on their machine but then, when they call you back, you’re not home, so they leave a message on yours. It sometimes goes on like that for days.
And, although they are not as ubiquitous as they once were, those “amusing” messages people leave can be a little annoying. A few years ago, a big seller on TV commercials was the cassette tape that came with several humorous voice characterizations. But really, when all you want to do is leave a message, you really don’t feel like being entertained by lame impressions.
But answering machines do serve a very useful function, which is why most people have one of the contraptions. Americans truly do have a love-hate relationship with their telephone answering machine.
It wasn’t always like that, of course. Back in the 1970s, almost nobody had an answering machine. Even most businesses didn’t have one, except the movie theaters.
I was probably one of the first individuals to own one. And when I bought my first one, it was against the telephone company’s rules to install one, making them virtually useless unless you broke the rules.
Of course, I had no qualms about breaking telephone company rules back then and I slept perfectly well after having broken them. I wired my new high-tech gadget directly into the phone line in my apartment and it worked wonderfully. (The telephone installer actually showed me how to wire it – unofficially.)
I tried going the “legal” route. I called the phone company to find out about installing one on my phone line. They actually sent a couple of representatives out to my house to discuss the ins and outs of telephone answering machines and to show me a line of products. But the monthly charge for their use was in the hundreds of dollars.
So I elected to buy my own, for a one-time cost of about $150 at L. S. Ayres. It was their cheapest model and consisted of a miniature reel-to-reel tape recorder. Radio Shack had a cheaper model, but it was junk.
Eventually, the phone company standardized their jacks and plugs and started allowing people to connect their own equipment to the phone lines. Answering machines became more readily available. More and more people started buying them. You can buy one today for about $25 or less with far more features than my old reel-to-reel model. Most don’t even use tape anymore, but record your voice electronically.
The modern counterpart of the answering machine is voice mail. It’s really the same thing, except you don’t have to buy the equipment. Just pay a small monthly fee and the telephone company keeps track of your messages for you.
I tried voice mail, but decided that having an answering machine met my needs more economically. But there are no cute messages on mine, just the standard greeting. I don’t even bother telling people to wait for the beep anymore, because answering machines are so common, there’s no one out there who doesn’t know what to do when they get one on the other end of the line.
“Hello. This is me. Please leave a message.” Beep!
Friday, January 07, 2005
Technology in Schools
It’s become almost a cliché, businessmen and women darting around all over the country carrying there tiny notebook computers, cell phones, and personal digital assistants. Then there are the kids. It’s long been known that young people tend to assimilate technology into their lives better than their parents.
Most businesses incorporate computers and technology into nearly every aspect of their daily workings, and today’s employees know they must adapt or seek employment in what few low-tech fields remain.
Unfortunately, there is one American business that remains far behind the average in making use of computers and technology. It’s the business of education.
A government report says that schools lag far behind much of society in incorporating technology. Education secretary Rod Paige said that training and understanding about how computers can be used to help students is still lacking.
In the National Education Technology Plan, Paige said, “Education is the only business still debating the usefulness of technology. Schools remain unchanged for the most part despite numerous reforms and increased investments in computers.”
Nearly all American schools are connected to the Internet. But many teachers still lack the skills necessary to incorporate it into their daily lesson plans, or in using it to communicate with parents.
Colleges are ahead of elementary and secondary schools in the assimilation of technology into the daily flow of information. For example, Franklin College is well wired. It uses the Internet, or its own intranet, to facilitate nearly every aspect of campus business.
Professors still teach students face to face in the classroom, of course. But the Internet is used to make assignments, give and grade tests, distribute grades, and communicate with students when they’re not in class. Students, in turn, use campus computers or their own computers connected to the campus network to research their assignments, write their reports, and submit them to their instructors.
For at least the last 10 years, it has been technologically possible to almost eliminate paper from the classroom. But in that period of time, the use of paper has actually increased. E-mail is used more and more to facilitate communication between teachers and administrators. But, teachers find it hard to let go of paper documents. The first thing many of them do when they receive an e-mail is to print it out on paper.
Indianapolis Public Schools introduced its IPS Online system this year. It is an integrated online system that allows teachers to keep track of daily attendance, grades, and reports. It can be used to communicate with parents and to post assignments.
Yet the only thing it is typically used for is to keep track of attendance. Few teachers and administrators use the more powerful features of the system.
Ideally, computer technology could be used to replace bulky textbooks and student notebooks. Teachers could issue all classroom assignments via the school’s network. Students and parents could access these assignments at home, where the students could complete them and submit them to be graded, all without paper.
Schools often say they lack the money for technology and training, but the government report essentially rejects that idea. Money for technology can come from reallocating existing budgets and basing all spending decisions on whether they support learning.
It seems logical that the institutions charged with providing the best education possible to America’s youth would be ahead of the curve in matters of technology. Ironically, they are behind the students they teach in many cases.
A few schools are meeting the challenge. A handful of schools are now replacing printed textbooks with laptop computers containing the digital counterparts. Some schools are even issuing laptop computers to all students in the system.
Eventually, it will be commonplace for students to be issued laptops instead of textbooks. Teachers will no longer use blackboards or overhead projectors; they will use electronic drawing pads, capable of sending information directly to the student’s computer. And all assignments will be made and graded online. Communication among faculty, parents, and administrators will be done online.
Unfortunately, all that should be commonplace by now. Technologically, most schools are about 10 years behind where they ought to be.
Most businesses incorporate computers and technology into nearly every aspect of their daily workings, and today’s employees know they must adapt or seek employment in what few low-tech fields remain.
Unfortunately, there is one American business that remains far behind the average in making use of computers and technology. It’s the business of education.
A government report says that schools lag far behind much of society in incorporating technology. Education secretary Rod Paige said that training and understanding about how computers can be used to help students is still lacking.
In the National Education Technology Plan, Paige said, “Education is the only business still debating the usefulness of technology. Schools remain unchanged for the most part despite numerous reforms and increased investments in computers.”
Nearly all American schools are connected to the Internet. But many teachers still lack the skills necessary to incorporate it into their daily lesson plans, or in using it to communicate with parents.
Colleges are ahead of elementary and secondary schools in the assimilation of technology into the daily flow of information. For example, Franklin College is well wired. It uses the Internet, or its own intranet, to facilitate nearly every aspect of campus business.
Professors still teach students face to face in the classroom, of course. But the Internet is used to make assignments, give and grade tests, distribute grades, and communicate with students when they’re not in class. Students, in turn, use campus computers or their own computers connected to the campus network to research their assignments, write their reports, and submit them to their instructors.
For at least the last 10 years, it has been technologically possible to almost eliminate paper from the classroom. But in that period of time, the use of paper has actually increased. E-mail is used more and more to facilitate communication between teachers and administrators. But, teachers find it hard to let go of paper documents. The first thing many of them do when they receive an e-mail is to print it out on paper.
Indianapolis Public Schools introduced its IPS Online system this year. It is an integrated online system that allows teachers to keep track of daily attendance, grades, and reports. It can be used to communicate with parents and to post assignments.
Yet the only thing it is typically used for is to keep track of attendance. Few teachers and administrators use the more powerful features of the system.
Ideally, computer technology could be used to replace bulky textbooks and student notebooks. Teachers could issue all classroom assignments via the school’s network. Students and parents could access these assignments at home, where the students could complete them and submit them to be graded, all without paper.
Schools often say they lack the money for technology and training, but the government report essentially rejects that idea. Money for technology can come from reallocating existing budgets and basing all spending decisions on whether they support learning.
It seems logical that the institutions charged with providing the best education possible to America’s youth would be ahead of the curve in matters of technology. Ironically, they are behind the students they teach in many cases.
A few schools are meeting the challenge. A handful of schools are now replacing printed textbooks with laptop computers containing the digital counterparts. Some schools are even issuing laptop computers to all students in the system.
Eventually, it will be commonplace for students to be issued laptops instead of textbooks. Teachers will no longer use blackboards or overhead projectors; they will use electronic drawing pads, capable of sending information directly to the student’s computer. And all assignments will be made and graded online. Communication among faculty, parents, and administrators will be done online.
Unfortunately, all that should be commonplace by now. Technologically, most schools are about 10 years behind where they ought to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)