Redefining The Letter A

Although I did not attend high school in Texas, I’m familiar with high school science content. My high school experience included biology, two chemistry classes, physics, even earth science – which was our Midwestern excuse to hike for a month over the summer in 8 different national parks. One thing you can be sure of: high school science teaches the basics. We have these things called cells. They have smaller parts inside of them that help them function. There are three phases of matter: solid, liquid, and gas. Bunsen burners are fun to light with a striker. You can tap out the song “Low Rider” on the side of any glass beaker. . . High school science IS NOT rocket science. So in what universe would anyone in charge of setting curriculum imagine that beginning students have the capacity to “analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations?” Isn’t this the time period when you’re first introduced to the scientific process? It’s the equivalent of asking first graders just learning to read to apply those virgin skills to editing Hemingway. . . in Latin.
“In a 2005 report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, Texas was one of the 15 states to earn an ‘F’ for its science standards; it received a ‘1’ (out of a possible 3) for its evolution education.” How does the State Board of Education seek to improve science education here in the Lone Star state? If you guessed attempting to inject faux science into classrooms, you’d be correct! I propose we skip the religious and conservative undertones of their reasoning, and simply make up a whole new grading system. I’ve thought long and hard about what could be worse than failure. What about – not even showing up to try? If the letter grade A stood for Absent Any Awareness, students could study about the earth being only 10,000 years old and receive high marks concurrently. If the letter grade A stood for Ambivalent And Adamant, we could plant the seed of Anti-Darwinism early and make it impervious to any logic. If A stood for Aberration, students could earn 4.0 GPAs while remaining unmarred by scientific fact.
As someone who lives and breathes science, I find it quite impossible to wrap my mind around this sort of ignorance. These sorts of debates don’t happen at the level of higher education. What would drive a person to intentionally limit what truths young minds are exposed to? After losing his “battle to introduce anti-evolution language in the Texas science standards,” dentist and school board member Don McLeroy said, “Science loses. Texas loses, and the kids lose because of this.”
The only conclusion I can come to is religion. Religion drives this dentist to impose his beliefs upon ALL OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE and EVERY TEENAGE TEXAN.
Here are several articles directly related to this story:

http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=6782

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/opinion/editorials/science_wins__barely__in_texas_03-27-2009.html

http://pleion.blogspot.com/2009/03/science-wins-in-texas.html

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-evolution_28tex.ART.State.Edition1.4a87415.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27572

In parting, a quote from prolific French poet and human rights activist Victor Hugo:
"There is in every village a torch - the teacher:
and an extinguisher - the clergyman."