There is nothing intrinsically difficult about teaching kids what a scientific model, hypothesis or theory is
Hahahaha!
hence my earlier statement about the Islamic Golden Age etc.
Comparing the men on who's knowledge a good deal of modern mathematics and astronomy rests, and creationists is a terrible argument, and I think you know it. For some folks; what Gabriel spoke to Mohammed about and the science of the world around them are two things that they could easily hold in their heads simultaneously, that you cannot, neither invalidates their faith, nor their mathematics.
hence my earlier statement about the Islamic Golden Age etc. – you can’t believe in a book/version that is literal and immutable in all aspects and do useful science because you have to reject your observations which is where the creationists are.
Funny, there are more than a few scientists who manage it, without compromising their faith, and comparing modern creationism with Islamic scientists and mathematicians would have said scientists and mathematicians doing mass head-shaking and face-palming. They discovered things that Western science would ignore until they ‘re-discovered’ them a thousand years later.
Comparing the men on who’s knowledge a good deal of modern mathematics and astronomy rests, and creationists is a terrible argument, and I think you know it.
Well that's the argument, whether you think it's terrible or not.
For some folks; what Gabriel spoke to Mohammed about and the science of the world around them are two things that they could easily hold in their heads simultaneously, that you cannot, neither invalidates their faith, nor their mathematics.
I spent a decent part of my career working with muslim scientists... and very few of them profess to take any literal meaning to every word of the Koran. I worked in Libya for nearly 6yrs where at the time it was totally acceptable and normal for a geologist to believe in evolution
There is no evidence that ALL the great polymaths of the Golden Age actually believed in any god at all... or that if they believed in supernatural entities in any form that they then believe that every word by this fantastical messenger being is completely literal and plenty of evidence that given the general co-existence and tolerance in Bagdad at the time extending not only to various sects but to other Abrahamic religions that they were pretty relaxed on that score. Indeed the Golden age many of the contributors were not Muslim themselves but Jews or Christians that thrived in the open and tolerant society of the Caliphates and would have been persecuted in Christian society at the time for their thinking and beliefs.
Quite obviously they didn't have access to DNA and the modern trappings for evolution but there is really no reason to think their views on creation were less diverse than today's muslim scholars... or that in fact the 10C muslim scholars had not already laid the foundations that would take Darwin almost a millennia to get to.
A good perspective of this is Dajani, R. Why I teach evolution to Muslim students. Nature 520, 409 (2015).
https://www.nature.com/articles/520409a
The whole paper is worth reading as she is a very eloquent (Muslim) educator but specifically on this the following stands out. I had to search for the specific paper but this is nothing new that my muslim scioentist friends and colleagues haven't said before.
Muslim scholars such as Hussein al-Jisr and Ahmad Medhat in the 1880s supported evolution. Before Darwin, al-Jahiz and others proposed rudimentary evolutionary theories in the ninth century. I point out that the apparent controversy over evolution and Islam arose only in the twentieth century, when Darwin’s ideas became associated with colonialism, imperialism, the West, atheism, materialism and racism. Muslim religious scholars gradually took a stand against evolution, which the public adopted. The scholars used Christian creationist arguments to support their stance, transferring the Western war between science and religion to Islam.
or a welder .. but you’re missing the point there with regards to conspiracy theory fodder and not knowing what a scientific theory is…
I highly doubt that a welder needs to know about plasma any more than a taxi driver needs to understand fuel injection or a carpenter needs to know the chemical composition of chrome vanadium.
Well, I’d argue that...
What you're arguing is that we should be teaching is things like scientific analysis and critical thinking. And I'm right with you there.
I highly doubt that a welder needs to know about plasma
I'm pretty sure its part of WI certifications, it certainly used to be.
What you’re arguing is that we should be teaching is things like scientific analysis and critical thinking. And I’m right with you there.
You're only a couple of years younger than me I think ... but this is exactly what we were taught in science pre-GCSE (GCE) and I don't think (my brother did GCSE) it magically changed overnight... but in the WIDER context I agree wholeheartedly.
However what I'm saying is yes we do need to change the way we teach science ... and I'll add the point again of teaching what a scientific theory is (and isn't).. what a scientific model and a simplified model is (and isn't).
I'm going to make an assumption that you have a safe way to access the links without your inbox/YT/social media being flooded (you have been warned)
You don't even need to click on the Quora stuff.. I'm just trying to illustrate how prominent "Evolution is just a theory" is to the creationists.
What needs to change? (Wikipedia entry)
Edexcel (also known since 2013 as Pearson Edexcel[2]) is a British multinational education and examination body formed in 1996 and wholly owned by Pearson plc since 2005. It is the only privately owned examination board in the United Kingdom.[3] Its name is a portmanteau term combining the words education and excellence.
Edexcel regulates school examinations under the British Curriculum and offers qualifications for schools on the international and regional scale. It is the UK's largest awarding organisation offering academic and vocational qualifications in schools, colleges and work places in the UK and abroad. It is also recognised internationally.[4] In 2019, Edexcel was the focus of significant controversy following a leak of an A-level examination.
Edexcel was formed in 1996 by the merger of two bodies, the BTEC (Business & Technology Education Council) and ULEAC (University of London Examinations and Assessment Council).[1] In 2003, the Edexcel Foundation (the charity that managed the board) formed a partnership with Pearson plc to set up a new company called London Qualifications Ltd, which was 75% owned by Pearson and 25% by the Edexcel Foundation.[1] London Qualifications Limited changed its name to Edexcel Limited in November 2004 and is now known colloquially as Edexcel and formally as Edexcel Pearson - London Examinations.
In 2005, Edexcel became the only large examination board to be held in private hands, when Pearson plc took complete control.[1] Edexcel subsequently received investment from their new parent company.
On the first level this then did away with the following public/non-profits
On 3 April 2013, Pearson rebranded Edexcel and all of its exams 'Pearson Edexcel', in line with a name change that added the prefix 'Pearson' to all of its brands.[2]
Incorporated Examination Boards
Business Education Council (BEC)
Business and Technology Education Council (BTEC)
East Anglian Examinations Board (EAEB) – partial
Joint Committee for Business Studies and Public Administration (JCBSPA)
London East Anglia Group (LEAG)
London Regional Examining Board (LREB) – created in 1979
Metropolitan and Middlesex Regional Examining Boards (M&MREB) – created in 1979
Metropolitan Regional Examination Board (MREB)
Middlesex Regional Examination Board (MREB)
Technician Education Council (TEC)
University Entrance and Schools Examinations Council (UESEC)
University of London Examinations and Assessment Council (ULEAC)
University of London Schools Examination Board (ULSEB)
Safe Guardian link
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/jul/16/pearson-multinational-influence-education-poliy
There is nothing intrinsically difficult about teaching kids what a scientific model, hypothesis or theory is
There was a Jehovah's Witness girl in my class at school who had somehow managed to get some kind of exemption from biology lessons when evolution was on the agenda and from all of Religious Studies lessons. Closed mind right from the start due to parental indoctrination.
I'm aware of less blatant cases too - a guy in the same class was from a devout Christian family and while he was a nice enough person and he did go to all the lessons and do his homework, he absolutely refused to believe any aspect of evolution.
I’m pretty sure its part of WI certifications, it certainly used to be.
I have no idea and, honestly, I don't particularly care so I'll defer to any superior knowledge you may have here. It didn't seem overly relevant knowledge to this layman, was all.
You’re only a couple of years younger than me I think … but this is exactly what we were taught in science pre-GCSE (GCE) and I don’t think (my brother did GCSE) it magically changed overnight…
Our year was the first to sit GCSEs instead of GCE/CSEs. How much the actual curriculum changed between the two or how much it has changed since, I do not know. If I were to guess I'd expect "not much" and "a lot" respectively. In any case it's probably a mistake to judge today's schooling by experiences in the 1980s.
I’m just trying to illustrate how prominent “Evolution is just a theory” is to the creationists.
I think at this point now we're vociferously agreeing with each other.
@crazy-legs - confirmation bias? How many people were moderate Christians and did believe in evolution? You'd never know, would you?
To be fair, he's talking about two people. I've known plenty of religious people and I'd put creationists in the same sack as flat Earthers, they're extremist idiots rather than representative of Xtians as a whole. Most major strains of religion are compatible with the theory of evolution unless they really just want to be extra special.
Like, refusing medical treatment because it's not 'god's will,' did your god not create doctors?🤷♂️ You might not believe in evolution but you may get to see natural selection in action.
(My Dad was a welder)
You are the same year as my brother then.
What changed that year (based on what I remember my brother doing) was a lot of more advanced/detailed stuff was moved from O level to A level not the fundamentals. i.e. The scientific method, theory etc. all stayed the same but some detail got moved
Obviously you and my brother had 5 years of education before that switch-over... so it's possible those going into 1st year (yr 7 now) THAT YEAR got taught something completely different but I don't believe that was the case.
You probably took a different path after that, both myself and my brother did all science/math A levels and I went into science and he went into Engineering. I mention that simply because you have (self evidently) retained the critical thinking but haven't had the interest or felt the need to keep up with physics or why those fundamentals are actually important. (That's not saying you don't remember fundamentals but the reason for them has slipped through lack of use)
I think at this point now we’re vociferously agreeing with each other.
Mostly ... that is I'm not surprised you don't think sticking a private publishing company in charge of the curriculum is a great idea.
Where we differ is I strongly believe the material (i.e. take the whole raft of stuff Pearson/EdExcel do from books to approved test questions to the exams) should never be false with an excuse (sic) "some kids are too thick"
If you looked at the Pearson/EdExcel stuff its a factory... churning out stuff, much of which is of low quality to shave a few pennies off the costs and maximise profit. [I guess what do you expect when the director is an accountant?]
It's really not difficult to adjust the actual poorly written and false questions in a perfectly understandable way to anyone who's mind has not been closed against critical thinking. (Crazy-legs illustrates that difficulty as does the writings of Rana Dajani I linked)
Its' going to be read by millions, it seems they could be arsed to write it correctly and consistently.
It's not like every bit of material is so poorly written, if you look you'll find the same question better written so its not that the kids can't understand there might be more states of matter and they are learning a simple kinetic model for the 3 they encounter daily.
