• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Biology teachers don't support evolution...

Bishadi said:
kind of like, there is no class on integrity, honesty and/or the 'evolution of knowledge'. These concepts can invoke a comprehensible fact; the next generations will be better equiped and capable of greater understanding than the previous generations (invoking a humility to each of us, equally, if honest)
Click to expand...
Any degree has classes that are mandatory and classes that are elective.
Which type do evolutionary studies go?

Java Man said:
I still don't understand those who say "it's against their religion". Evolution is not against creationism. It is only against it in the particular application of how we got here.
Click to expand...
Does evolution imply that Adam came from clay?
 
GrandMasterFox said:
Any degree has classes that are mandatory and classes that are elective.
Which type do evolutionary studies go?
Click to expand...

biology and evolution should be a part of each other but there is no mathematics from physics to support an evolution.

Does evolution imply that Adam came from clay?
Click to expand...

personally, i see the beginning as atoms and energy within time (the beginning), versus adam and eve but the metaphors of man coming from dust/mud/dirt (elements) i can agree with. ie... mankind is from the belly of god (mother nature). (he is actually a she.. giggle giggle)
 
Java Man said:
I understand that is delegated to the hand of God.
Click to expand...
which hand?

But I'm not a believer in that so don't take my word for it.
Click to expand...
that sentence is cute. Kind of like, "i dont believe in what i dont believe"

It's a nice metaphor though for "from dust to dust"
Click to expand...

in a real sense, from base elements to base elements (dust to dust). Be certain, that is where you were and will end up, physically.

most any biology teacher can sustain the same thing
 
themusicteacher said:
Expecting someone to just "get it" is slipshod from an educational standpoint.
Click to expand...
It's not optimal but this is an emotionally-charged issue. Students will accept facts from which the ToE is a drop-dead obvious synthesis. My opinion is that, given comprehensive training in biological fact, any student that fails to make the nearly-unavoidable step to the ToE just doesn't get it and probably never will.

Your nic implies you're a music teacher. Do you expect your students to appreciate great music or do you teach them the basics and then expect them to be able to differentiate a masterpiece from bubble-gum? Don't you expect them to take that step themselves? Do you have to actively expel students who don't appreciate Bach or do they weed themselves out of advanced studies? (Guessing the latter.)


There is no other way to explain certain things in biology other than using "evolve" and "evolution."
Click to expand...
Sure there are. I just told you that I was never taught evolution per se. I have a fairly good grasp of it, though. If you show students how malleable DNA is to adaptation and how prevalent analogous and homolgous structures are in nature, wouldn't the intelligent ones wonder exactly what would stop DNA from changing enough to separate a population into a new species? If they don't, they're obviously not going to be successful biologists.
 
FYI, I did a detailed blog post on this just a few days ago...

http://skepticalteacher.wordpress.c...ogy-teachers-dont-teach-evolution-adequately/
... So it seems that part of the problem is that many biology teachers themselves are not adequately prepared to teach about evolution. However, this is a problem which can (and should) be corrected by making adjustments to the university curriculum & training for prospective biology teachers, giving them (well, the 87% who are NOT creationist) the appropriate skills & training in the subject matter. Unfortunately, there seems to be a deeper problem: that of intimidation, either explicit or implicit, of biology teachers who actually want to teach evolution…
Click to expand...
 
Jeff Corey said:
I recall S. J. Gould making the point about the influence of Texas on HS textbooks and that evolution was tucked into the last chapter of most texts and a lot of classes never got that far.
Another point is that HS biology teachers usually take a lot more education courses than biology courses.
Click to expand...
Though I am not teaching Bio in my HS (prefer and am doing Chem), I will have to teach a short version of it in my integrated science (it really isn't but they use the name). I explained to the unenlightened among my IS students for both cosmology and Bio that (whatever the problems here) FL requires the evolution and the Big Bang thingies.:D
 
MattusMaximus said:
I don't know about physics specifically, but there certainly is a LOT of mathematical support for evolution.
Click to expand...



here is a pdf on the original 2004 version of the work

http://www.cs.unm.edu/~moret/poincare_survey.pdf

so anyone can read but we all can find, you dont read much of what you post M&M!

(and that guy is supposed to be a (math) teacher............ :jaw-dropp)


that math is not on the physics of mass/energy.... it is of gene algorithms (guestimations) of what they believe is occuring to develop an evolutionary frame. It has nothing to do with the energy of the mass; the life of the specimen.


m&m you are definitely not the most credible math teacher

ie..... why not post the threorem of an evolution?

you are supposed to be a teacher, then teach!


but you cant and you know that! (too much pride to be any assistance on this subject)

Go lay by your dish!
 
Last edited:
Bishadi said:
post it!

the math teach cant and had to google away for a book title, but never even opened the book...............

how about you?
Click to expand...

The book MattusMaximus linked to is 442 pages.

The pdf you linked to is 32 pages.

Do you think they're identical?

BTW , MM is not a "math teach".
 
Emet said:
The book MattusMaximus linked to is 442 pages.

The pdf you linked to is 32 pages.


Do you think they're identical?
Click to expand...

the math is............

ie... e=mc2 didnt take 442 pages (the theorem)

BTW , MM is not a "math teach".
Click to expand...

or much of any kind of 'teacher' unless to show how to avoid being honest with reality.

i love teachers more than most but any instructor that is incapable of being honest on such comments as "there is no math to support an evolution' is an pure claim. ie... if there was, then there would not be a thread on 'biology teachers dont support evolution' because the math of how mass/energy work would be supporting the biology to the molecular level; the natural progression would be understood by even k-12 children, prior to any having the capacity to impose the creation or uncertain claim.

the rules of how nature works would be mathematical versus speculative.
 
Jeff Corey said:
Another point is that HS biology teachers usually take a lot more education courses than biology courses.
Click to expand...

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. We can't expect rank and file high school biology teachers to do the superb job required to address the teaching of evolution when they are poorly educated in the subject themselves.

Issues to address:

*A significant proportion of the U.S. population specifically eschews logic and evidence because they believe the bible to be the inerrant word of god. End of story - you will not reach these people. (Although it is fun to catch them eating cheesburgers and endless shrimp platters, and not plucking their eyes out when they see Beyonce dancing on TV.)

*In the Bible Belt (and elsewhere in this country), a lot of the people teaching biology in our high schools are the people above.

*Of the well-meaning biology teachers who do want to tackle this issue head-on, how many have actually taken a course in evolution? For those who rely on their one "Intro Bio" course for their evolutionary knowledge (usually first semester, freshman year), how much time was spent on evolution, and how well was it presented? For example, there are an awful lot of "Christian" liberal arts colleges out there, pumping out a lot of high school teachers. Even if those teachers are not overtly religious themselves, what do we really know about how evolution was presented to them in their college biology class?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom