Hi all,
Here are the questions for Dewey and Strike as well as the article.
Article link:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/26/hamilton.pledge/index.html?iref=allsearch
Questions for Dewey:
Education in Relation to Form
1. On page 275, Dewey says one school of thought is that "the mind is so illogical in its processes that logical form must be impressed upon it from without." Do you think schools impose their views to the point of stifling the intellecutal growth of students by not allowing them to form their own opinions?
2. The second school of thought is total self-discovery and direction with little or no structured learning. Because we will be teaching the early childhood years, by using this method, what impact would it have on our students?
Science, Belief and the Public
1. Because the curriculum taught is chosen by a few, Is science (or any other subject) already predisposed to bias?
2. Does religion have a place in science?
Questions for Stike?
1. If evolution is taught in school, should creation be taught also in order to gain balance? Why or Why not?
2. Dr. Jones wants the Iroquois to see themselves as Americans and not focus on their past. Does that mean they have to forget their past in order to be American?
3. Because we are a multicultural nation, there will be differences in our values, beliefs, and cultural history than some students who will enter our classroom. How would you address tolerance should this become an issue in your classroom?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Does religion have a place in science curriculum? I say no. While I have a personal faith that is extremely important to me, as a former middle school educator and as a future early childhood educator, I firmly believe in the separation of church and state. We know the Founding Fathers came to the US in search of religious freedom and they knew the potential consequences of religious intrusion into government-related affairs.
I think there is certainly a place to discuss world religions (within the social sciences, for example) to help cultivate more inclusive perspectives among our students. As Julie and I discussed in our presentation, within the social studies curriculum, for example, religious ideas associated with anti-colonialism, slavery, and imperialism might be topics for discussion for older students.
What worries me, though, is the current debate in Texas. Texas is such a large state and because of this, they control a lot of the textbook selections nationally. A textbook that does not address real science is extremely disconcerting to me. I’ve grown up with father who is a zoology/ecology professor, so I certainly have been exposed to the merits of science and research and evolution. I think as educators we are there to help students learn and grow and matters of religious beliefs should be left for families and other caregivers. I’ve worked in a private secular and a private Episcopal day school and though I never taught science, only history, literature, and writing, I’m not sure I would be at ease teaching in a way that is contrary to my core beliefs of scientific inquiry.
http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/03/the-texas-textbook-debate
And finally, taxpayers fund public education. These many folks may or may not practice a certain religious tradition and therefore I believe a particular religion should not infiltrate into the public school system. We must respect all views, but at the same time, we need to respect the merits of core subjects and hard facts within those subjects, particularly in the sciences.
I believe Dewey would think that schools do stifle students views and intellectual growth. The school is the place that should be providing students with social and individual growth. Much of what was discussed in this section of Dewey, was the idea "education consists in the formation of wide-awake, careful, thorough habits of thinking."
The problem with these views on logic and knowledge is that they don't take into account the individuality of the student. Every child is different and no students should be treated exactly alike, under Dewey's understanding. Each child's experiences are uniquely their own.
Through this reading and what I have gathered, Dewey was influenced by the theory of evolution, the mind as well as the body has evolved over time. People adapt to their environment and form new experiences based on the environment around them. Thinking and knowledge is involved in a process by which humans adjust.
I hope our class discussion will shed more light for this matter. I do believe that because the curriculum is developed by a particular board, that it is predisposed to bias' based on where in the country you live. State standards all over the United States are different and what is acceptible to be taught in the north, might not be as acceptable in the south.
My favorite historian, Howard Zinn who recently just passed away is most well-known for his book "A People's History of the United States," I was lucky enough to have this book a part of my curriculum in high school, but only because I attended a private high school, otherwise his books were not allowed in public school.
I know we have discussed how certain schools and districts have banned particular books for language or content but I do believe that based on where you live in the United States does have a predisposed bias on what is taught.
Religion and science are two very different subject (obviously) but they do cross over, when much can't be explained by science we look to a greater force, something above ourselves and that is where religion plays a role. No matter what your religion, or your beliefs for some major circumstances there is no scientific explanation for, God or a greater being is the only explanation.
I went to a private Baptist school from K5-12th grade. We had a required Bible class and that class as well as all of my other classes including PE began with prayer. In my science classes we were never formally taught evolution, but if it was brought up by a student, we did have discussion on it. It was never a shunned topic, but of course there was always biased. I don't think that evolution should be taught without teaching creationism and vice versa. It's not fair for learning and to the students with differing beliefs. I'm looking forward to hear your views on science and belief in the classroom
I agree with Amy that Dewey beleives the teaching in school can be stifling for learning. The way each child learns is different, therefore requiring different teaching methods based on relavent and building new experiences.
Dewey says that "tendencies toward a reflective and truly logical activity are native to the mind, and that they show themselves at an early period". I think that often schools are quick to try and impose ideas on students, especially today since teachers may feel pressured to teach standards to students in a limited amount of time. Students may not have the opportunity to learn about something they are simply interested in and may begin to dislike schooling if they feel learning is in fact a mechanical and impersonal process. The opposite school of thought Dewey speaks of with little or no structured learning could be useful for many young students, however you must be careful to maintain some sort of order with your students. Ideally with younger students you could give them opportunities to learn through types of structured play.
The Strike discussion about the Iroquois and incorporating material that is relevant and respectful especially stood out to me. I think that the best thing for Marie, the head of the social studies department, to do is to focus not on the Iroquois contribution to the United States but to emphasize the uniquely Iroquois form of government. Some Iroquois may not identify with being American, and it seems ethnocentric to not recognize them as part of a unique group. As with everything, it is vital to find a good balance here. You do have to be sensitive to the fact that students will come into your classroom with different beliefs and from diverse cultures. You should not try to treat everyone as if they are exactly the same, however it is also important not to treat someone differently as a result of their background. Most importantly as a teacher you should make students feel that your classroom is a place where everyone is respected and can express themselves without feeling they must hide or change any aspect of who they are.
Nice posts from everyone here. I'm looking forward to tonight's discussion.
As far as the creationism-evolution debate goes, I also agree that evolution should not be taught in isolation. While our students will not learn this type of material, I think that it's vital for teenagers and young adults to learn about various points of view. One thing that I appreciate most about my college education is that it allowed me to explore points of view that I did not learn when I was younger (in school or at home) and helped me form my personal worldview. Not only did it broaden my perspective, it also taught me how others saw my perspective and how to support/defend my viewpoint. If we only teach students creationism or evolution, as Amy said, we stifle their intellectual growth and limit their perspective.
As far as the article goes, I honestly believe that the merits of Mr. Newdow's case are in some ways valid, but I wish that the article discussed in more detail the perspectives of the child in question and of her custodial parent. While Mr. Newdow is not the child's custodial parent, he could have joint legal custody and the right to file this suit on his child's behalf. But I honestly have some reservations about a non-custodial parent without joint legal custody being able to file lawsuits on the behalf of a child.
All of that aside, I can't help but sympathize with the argument, even though I question the standing of the petitioner. Although I personally have no problem with the phrase "under God", I do know many people who do. If this were a case where different perspectives could be given and one could choose their own preference it wouldn't be as big of a deal. But the fact is, this is a uniform pledge in which a specific phrase is used. And while my personal preference would be to leave it alone, legally I would have to agree that it promotes a religious viewpoint.
Post a Comment