Ohio lawmakers lack science education, want to be sure everyone else does too

Once again, nonscientists are dictating how to do science. They are mistaken. And they have an agenda.

Ohio lawmakers want to limit the teaching of the scientific process.

The bill, currently under consideration by the Ohio Assembly, is intended to revoke a previous approval of the Common Core educational standards, which target math and literacy. However, the bill’s language also includes sections devoted to science and social studies. And the science one is a real winner:

The standards in science shall be based in core existing disciplines of biology, chemistry, and physics; incorporate grade-level mathematics and be referenced to the mathematics standards; focus on academic and scientific knowledge rather than scientific processes; and prohibit political or religious interpretation of scientific facts in favor of another.

The problem is, we don’t need to know scientific knowledge. That’s always advancing and we have records of that. What we desperately need is citizens who are aware and appreciate how good science works. This is exactly what this bill tramples – learning how to think and appreciate science. It’s a disaster. Then you have the sponsors, real winners too:

One of the bill’s two sponsors, Rep. Andy Thompson (R-Lima) told The Columbus Dispatch that the bill would open the door to instruction on intelligent design: “I think it would be good for them to consider the perspectives of people of faith. That’s legitimate.”

Now this week, he apparently told another newspaper that it’s all about the political interpretation of science. He is very very confused. So he really should not talk about stuff he obviously knows nothing about. I think he was shortchanged on his education on how science processes work.

Appreciating Science: A New Approach to Science in our World – CSI.

Tip: Society for Science Based Medicine

  7 comments for “Ohio lawmakers lack science education, want to be sure everyone else does too

  1. MK
    August 28, 2014 at 10:19 PM

    I wonder if there is any education system anywhere that puts enough focus on to the methods and processes of science as opposed to wrote facts. I wonder because I’d like to move there.

  2. terrence lee
    August 29, 2014 at 8:28 AM

    In addition to being confused, Thompson is an obvious hypocrite. The bill is supposed to “prohibit political or religious interpretation of scientific facts in favor of another”, but we know that there is no balance when it comes to intelligent design. What 8 year old has the courage to disagree with teacher when (s)/he says “God did it”?

  3. Kurt
    August 29, 2014 at 11:36 AM

    See, Ohio doesn’t understand the biggest problem with all of this garbage: they lose everyone who might be qualified to make Ohio better. I left Ohio because I am a scientist and a writer, both of which Ohio has no real jobs for outside of the medical industry. By promoting these anti-science pieces of trash, they look like a joke to education people like me and, thus, lose any chance of positive growth in the industries of the future where science is key. The saddest part is I grew up near Cleveland, an area that was really much more East Coast than most of Ohio… arts, sciences, industry on the rebound, cultural things. But the southern and western areas full of fundamentalists and the uniformed are dragging down the entire state. Sad really. Guess I can buy a house in California now…

  4. chemical
    August 29, 2014 at 11:40 AM

    I thought if one were to “prohibit political or religious interpretation of scientific facts in favor of another” that would ban intelligent design from ever being taught in a classroom, because it’s a religious interpretation of scientific facts, and it’s favoring a specific religion.

    Don’t get me wrong: This bill is a disaster because it de-emphasizes the scientific process. I’d actually support a bill that simply prohibited religious or political interpretation of scientific facts, because science is supposed to be removed from religious and political bias anyways.

  5. spookyparadigm
    August 29, 2014 at 12:50 PM

    You’ll note that the article I sent on this earlier also pointed out that an early draft of the bill (not sure it has been corrected) also mandated that at least 80% of the literature material had to be from Anglo or American sources from before 1970. Which they were then embarrassed about because that ruled out the Classical works, important European works not in English etc.

    The obvious conclusion drawn by the article was that they were trying to avoid anything written recently by postcolonial or other non-white authors (no Rigoberta Menchu, Naipul, etc.). Like I said, I don’t know if that is still in the bill since its supporters weren’t happy with the consequences.

  6. Kiljoy616
    August 30, 2014 at 12:28 AM

    So who put him there? If your mad that is whom you need to feel anger for. Oh yeah the voters who want to be sheep. I know its easier to hate a lawmaker than all those useless voters who keep putting them in power.

  7. Chris Howard
    August 31, 2014 at 7:58 PM

    I always wondered if Red States that promote and adhere to an anti-science agenda see a brain drain to more evidence-based states?

Comments are closed.