I was planning on ranting today about my frustration with the way the 8th grade course of study has us start the year, but there is a follow-up to my post from yesterday (I am sure that I will be frustrated with the COS long enough to post another day).
Following the link from Dispatchs from the Culture Wars, I find this report of an interview with Brian Rohrbough, the father of one of the Columbine victims. It would seem that not only does Mr. Rohrbough have an explanation for the recent school shootings, but apparently it is my fault. He claimed that, among other things, "... the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum, expelling God from the school and from the government, replacing him with evolution, where the strong kill the weak, without moral consequences and life has no inherent value."
Evolution is in our state-based course of study and I teach it without apology. I am fortunate enough to not have very many students challenge me (I was expecting a fight last year from my openly-creationist student, but I never heard a single complaint), but when it does come up, I tell the student (or parent) that I teach science in my science classroom. As long as evolution is a part of my curriculum, I will teach it.
According to Mr. Rohrough, this means that I teach without morals and my students are learning that "life has no inherent value." I wish that I could invite Mr. Rohrbough into my classroom. I wish that he could have been in my classroom this morning listening to my students discussing why it is important that they worry about pollution and water conservation. I wonder if Mr. Rohrough would have seen the same morality in my students that I saw as they objected with outrage to my claim (playing the devil's advocate, of course), that it is not unreasonable for some people to put their own finances above protecting the environment. I wonder how Mr. Rohrough would have reacted to see my student last year, a product of public schools in a course that teaches evolution, worked up nearly to the point of tears because of how frustrated she was by the inability of our country to help the parts of the world fighting malaria (during our disease transmission unit).
I see morality in my classroom and in my students everyday. I wish, for his sake, Mr. Rohrough could see what I do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 other thoughts:
The morality implicit in teaching evolution is that it is up to us, as conscious beings, to solve the problems of the world by choosing to fight for justice. That this is a moral choice as well as a practical one is predicated on our evolutionary psychology, and the more we realize we must take responsibility, the better off the world will be.
Well said, Brad.
Good post :) My mother (also math and science in a Southern middle school) has already had a bit of a challenge from one of her sixth graders when they discussed continental drift...
It would also be wise to remind students that there has never been a law or Supreme Court decision that has prevented prayer or the discussion of religious issues in schools. Indeed, the old joke that as long as there is algebra, there will always be prayer in school is based in fact and law.
Students may pray in any way and at any time that their praying is not disruptive. The same is true of reading the Bible. They may not, in the middle of English class, roll out the prayer rug, face east and began to loudly pray, nor may they suddenly leap up, unfurl the Good Book, and call down the wrath of the Almighty on an evil social studies teacher. And teachers may indeed discuss religion in appropriate ways and contexts. What they may never do is prosletyze or otherwise attempt to impose their own or any religious beliefs and/or practices on their students, and this is as it should be.
Creationism, intelligent design, or whatever it's being called today is excluded from school not because it is expressly religious, but because it is simply not scientific and is not the best practice in the field of biology. It may well be properly and safely discussed in a comparative religion class, as part of a history class, and in many other contexts. But that's not the point of those who want it, is it?
Post a Comment