RubySoho
Winston
Bibles, Brainwashing and Branding: Just Another Day In Science Class.
June 22nd 2008 12:31
This one from the ‘you can’t make this stuff up I swear’ basket, courtesy of The Columbus Dispatch:
Science teacher dissed evolution
He taught creationism, report says
"A Mount Vernon (Ohio), teacher undermined science instruction in the public school district by discrediting evolution in his classroom and focusing on creationism and intelligent design, an investigation has found.
Eighth-graders who were taught by John Freshwater frequently had to be re-taught in high school what they were supposed to have learned in Freshwater's class, according to outside investigators hired by the district.
For 11 years, other teachers in the school district and people in the community complained about Freshwater preaching his Christian beliefs in class and slamming scientific theories, a school administrator told investigators.
"There is a significant amount of evidence that Mr. Freshwater's teachings regarding subjects related to evolution were not consistent with the curriculum of the Mount Vernon City Schools and state standards," the consultants reported.
Freshwater was told to stop teaching intelligent design and creationism, but he continued, the report found
The debate about Freshwater's actions became public in April after he refused to remove a Bible from his desk, as the district had ordered.”
The battle between the teaching of evolution and the teaching of Intelligent Design (ID), continues to rage in America with the proponents of ID claiming it is a viable scientific alternative to the theory of Evolution. Briefly, ID, a theory that first propped up in the late 80s asserts that the complex features of the universe and all biological beings are best explained as the divine plan of a creator and not the Big Bang or natural selection. ID has been dismissed as a pseudo-science by the US National Science teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. That hasn’t stopped its advocates from attempting to introduce its teaching in American public schools. In 2005 a group of parents from Dover County in Pennysylvania filed a lawsuit against the school board after it required the schools in its district to present ID as a viable scientific alternative to evolution in its ninth grade classes. In Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, judge John E. Jones III ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, stating that ID was not a science and was in fact, creationism in disguise and thus violated the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which calls for the Separation of Church and State.
In light of this court ruling, it is clear that Freshwater was not only breaking the rules of the school curriculum, he was undermining the Constitution. One can only wonder as to why the school allowed him to do so, virtually unhindered, for eleven years. The school district is sending a conflicting message if it purports to have certain educational standards and requirements but turns a blind eye when one of its teachers repeatedly violates these standards.
But it doesn’t end there:
"HR on Call Inc., the consultants who investigated allegations against Freshwater, released their findings yesterday. Mount Vernon school board members will meet today to discuss the report and decide what, if any, action they will take.
The report confirmed that Freshwater burned crosses onto students' arms, using an electrostatic device, in December.
Freshwater told investigators the marks were X's, not crosses. But all of the students interviewed in the investigation reported being branded with crosses. The investigation report includes a photo of one student's arm with a long vertical line and a short horizontal line running through it.
The family of one student who was burned filed a federal lawsuit last week against Freshwater and the district, saying the student's civil rights were violated."
Is there a phrase for what happens to your mind beyond the stage where it boggles? If there is, that is the only way I can describe what I feel when I read those paragraphs. This science teacher branded the sign of the cross onto his students arms. And now the school district is deciding what action- if any to take. I cannot understand how this man has not being arrested.
Freshwater is being supported by his good friend Dave Daubenmire, a football coach who is no stranger to controversy himself, having been sued in 1999 by the American Civil Liberties Union for leading his players in prayer before games and at practice.
"With the exception of the cross-burning episode. … I believe John Freshwater is teaching the values of the parents in the Mount Vernon school district," he said.
Do you think there are other teachers in the public classroom that are trying to drive their opinions in the classroom?" Daubenmire asked. "I don't care who you are. You cannot separate your value system from your teaching."
With the exception of the cross-burning episode? Words fail me at how this violation of the minds and bodies of children can be so casually disregarded. That’s like saying “Sharon Tate-murdering incident aside, Charles Manson was a pretty decent guy.” One would think that burning crucifixes into children’s arms pretty much overshadows any other achievement that a teacher is capable of. But let’s put that aside and focus on the rest of the statement.
Yes, it is certainly true that an individual’s personal beliefs will undoubtedly influence how they interact with others and this is no less true in the classroom. However, there is a big difference between stating your opinion and deliberately deceiving. These students were not taught ID as an alternative to evolution (even though this would still have been a direct violation of the Constitution), they were categorically and unequivocally lied to when they were taught that evolution is a myth and Intelligent Design the absolute truth.
Whether Freshwater or any other teacher likes it or not, schools have a set curriculum and whilst teachers are free to employ different methods of teaching the coursework, they are not free to disregard the coursework and just teach what they themselves emphatically believe to be true. If Freshwater was so opposed to the set coursework then he could have stopped teaching, period.
But he didn’t, so for eleven years the parents of the students of Mount Vernon entrusted their children’s education to this science teacher and he betrayed this trust, as did the school board through their inaction. These kids had to be retaught everything they held to be true and factual. Imagine what it must feel like to discover that everything you had been taught was a lie.
Incidents such as these are perhaps indicative of the deep divide that continues to cut through America. In a country where 30% of the population identify themselves as Evangelicals, where a “Creation Museum” has been built in an attempt to ‘prove’ that man and dinosaurs co-existed, where women’s re-productive rights are threatened by the largely Christian pro-life lobby, where the words “in God we trust” are emblazoned on the currency, where public schools are derided as “liberal indoctrination centres” by political commentators such as Anne Coulter and where federal elections are run and won on “moral values”, there is a deep distrust and anger on either side of the chasm.
The fact is there are many aspects of a secular society that are in direct opposition to some of the basic tenets of Christianity, at least as it is interpreted in America. Abortion, homosexuality and same-sex marriage, evolution, these are big issues that are not going to go away, nor will they be resolved any time soon. The question is, whose rights should come first- the secularist who wishes to keep God out of the public sphere, or the devout Christian who claims that there is no separation of Church and State, that America is “one nation under God”, that freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion?
-Ruby
Science teacher dissed evolution
He taught creationism, report says
"A Mount Vernon (Ohio), teacher undermined science instruction in the public school district by discrediting evolution in his classroom and focusing on creationism and intelligent design, an investigation has found.
Eighth-graders who were taught by John Freshwater frequently had to be re-taught in high school what they were supposed to have learned in Freshwater's class, according to outside investigators hired by the district.
For 11 years, other teachers in the school district and people in the community complained about Freshwater preaching his Christian beliefs in class and slamming scientific theories, a school administrator told investigators.
"There is a significant amount of evidence that Mr. Freshwater's teachings regarding subjects related to evolution were not consistent with the curriculum of the Mount Vernon City Schools and state standards," the consultants reported.
Freshwater was told to stop teaching intelligent design and creationism, but he continued, the report found
The debate about Freshwater's actions became public in April after he refused to remove a Bible from his desk, as the district had ordered.”
The battle between the teaching of evolution and the teaching of Intelligent Design (ID), continues to rage in America with the proponents of ID claiming it is a viable scientific alternative to the theory of Evolution. Briefly, ID, a theory that first propped up in the late 80s asserts that the complex features of the universe and all biological beings are best explained as the divine plan of a creator and not the Big Bang or natural selection. ID has been dismissed as a pseudo-science by the US National Science teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. That hasn’t stopped its advocates from attempting to introduce its teaching in American public schools. In 2005 a group of parents from Dover County in Pennysylvania filed a lawsuit against the school board after it required the schools in its district to present ID as a viable scientific alternative to evolution in its ninth grade classes. In Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, judge John E. Jones III ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, stating that ID was not a science and was in fact, creationism in disguise and thus violated the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which calls for the Separation of Church and State.
In light of this court ruling, it is clear that Freshwater was not only breaking the rules of the school curriculum, he was undermining the Constitution. One can only wonder as to why the school allowed him to do so, virtually unhindered, for eleven years. The school district is sending a conflicting message if it purports to have certain educational standards and requirements but turns a blind eye when one of its teachers repeatedly violates these standards.
But it doesn’t end there:
"HR on Call Inc., the consultants who investigated allegations against Freshwater, released their findings yesterday. Mount Vernon school board members will meet today to discuss the report and decide what, if any, action they will take.
The report confirmed that Freshwater burned crosses onto students' arms, using an electrostatic device, in December.
Freshwater told investigators the marks were X's, not crosses. But all of the students interviewed in the investigation reported being branded with crosses. The investigation report includes a photo of one student's arm with a long vertical line and a short horizontal line running through it.
The family of one student who was burned filed a federal lawsuit last week against Freshwater and the district, saying the student's civil rights were violated."
what do you say to something like this?
Is there a phrase for what happens to your mind beyond the stage where it boggles? If there is, that is the only way I can describe what I feel when I read those paragraphs. This science teacher branded the sign of the cross onto his students arms. And now the school district is deciding what action- if any to take. I cannot understand how this man has not being arrested.
Freshwater is being supported by his good friend Dave Daubenmire, a football coach who is no stranger to controversy himself, having been sued in 1999 by the American Civil Liberties Union for leading his players in prayer before games and at practice.
"With the exception of the cross-burning episode. … I believe John Freshwater is teaching the values of the parents in the Mount Vernon school district," he said.
Do you think there are other teachers in the public classroom that are trying to drive their opinions in the classroom?" Daubenmire asked. "I don't care who you are. You cannot separate your value system from your teaching."
With the exception of the cross-burning episode? Words fail me at how this violation of the minds and bodies of children can be so casually disregarded. That’s like saying “Sharon Tate-murdering incident aside, Charles Manson was a pretty decent guy.” One would think that burning crucifixes into children’s arms pretty much overshadows any other achievement that a teacher is capable of. But let’s put that aside and focus on the rest of the statement.
Yes, it is certainly true that an individual’s personal beliefs will undoubtedly influence how they interact with others and this is no less true in the classroom. However, there is a big difference between stating your opinion and deliberately deceiving. These students were not taught ID as an alternative to evolution (even though this would still have been a direct violation of the Constitution), they were categorically and unequivocally lied to when they were taught that evolution is a myth and Intelligent Design the absolute truth.
Whether Freshwater or any other teacher likes it or not, schools have a set curriculum and whilst teachers are free to employ different methods of teaching the coursework, they are not free to disregard the coursework and just teach what they themselves emphatically believe to be true. If Freshwater was so opposed to the set coursework then he could have stopped teaching, period.
But he didn’t, so for eleven years the parents of the students of Mount Vernon entrusted their children’s education to this science teacher and he betrayed this trust, as did the school board through their inaction. These kids had to be retaught everything they held to be true and factual. Imagine what it must feel like to discover that everything you had been taught was a lie.
Incidents such as these are perhaps indicative of the deep divide that continues to cut through America. In a country where 30% of the population identify themselves as Evangelicals, where a “Creation Museum” has been built in an attempt to ‘prove’ that man and dinosaurs co-existed, where women’s re-productive rights are threatened by the largely Christian pro-life lobby, where the words “in God we trust” are emblazoned on the currency, where public schools are derided as “liberal indoctrination centres” by political commentators such as Anne Coulter and where federal elections are run and won on “moral values”, there is a deep distrust and anger on either side of the chasm.
The fact is there are many aspects of a secular society that are in direct opposition to some of the basic tenets of Christianity, at least as it is interpreted in America. Abortion, homosexuality and same-sex marriage, evolution, these are big issues that are not going to go away, nor will they be resolved any time soon. The question is, whose rights should come first- the secularist who wishes to keep God out of the public sphere, or the devout Christian who claims that there is no separation of Church and State, that America is “one nation under God”, that freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion?
-Ruby
| 147 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
"With the exception of the cross-burning episode." hmmm the word episode suggests Dave is trivialising a teacher abusing a student . . . nice to know theres always a friend around to excuse you for sadistic crap
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
he also had a guest speaker at a christian athletes meeting (which met in school hours), who was sick and he tried to "heal" him saying "Satan be gone from this man".
and his friend Dave says Freshwater is just the victim of a character assassination. He burned crosses into students arms, I mean if that's not indictable what is?
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Cheryl J
Rhythmatism
Zentertainment
Budget Centsability
Any good tort lawyer would have the grounds for a class action suit against not only the teacher but the school which allowed him to do this.
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
Having said that, however, it also behooves Man to use his head; something Freshwater and his kind seem to be leave at the church door upon entering.
He had no business tatooing crosses on kids arms. Burning them or using indelible ink, they're still tatoos.
And if he taught at a public school, he has to use full discretion and recognizes who pays him and what its policies are. If the school allows him to offer a brief discretionary disclaimer at the beginning of the semester, then fine, he's free to use it. But he's gotta toe the line.
And yes, though Jesus reminded Pilate where all authority stemmed from, later in the Bible, Christ spoke through St. Paul admonishing the faithful to be good citizens.
Read yer good book teacher. It'll keep ya outta trouble.
Comment by Steven Barrett's OpEd Blog
What you see below --
Having said that, however, it also behooves Man to use his head; something Freshwater and his kind seem to be leave at the church door upon entering.
-- should have been written like this:
to leave at the church
My apologies for doing any disservice to God for BOTCHING His gift to mankind, humankind, and/or personkynd: the ability to read and write.
By the way, I didn't need any crosses tatooed on my arms to remind me of this gift. Sharp-eyed parents and many trips to the blackboard did wonders, until I got too smart for rmy own good. Then I needed editors. And they (rightfully) made the nuns look VERY sweet.
KA--BOOOOM ! ! !
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
Comment by Summer Minor
Comment by Louie
Climate Red
randomthoughts
Phil's Wellness Tips
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Hi Steven, um okay, I'm an atheist so I will give you my opinion as you have given me yours- God is part of the problem. I think Freshwater is a prime example of the way religion messes with people's heads and causes them to act in way that we would consider irrational and unbalanced.
He told his students that evolution is a myth, that homosexuality is a sin and he branded them with a sign of the cross. The fact that he he is escaping without arrest is testament to society's lopsided attitude to religion. Namely, we allow religious people to get away with behaviour we would consider unconscionable in anyone else.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Summer and Louie, I'm with you here. On one hand this story amazes me, on the other it's kind of typical isn't it?
Comment by Cibbuano
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
I can't believe there's still a debate?
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
This story makes me mad too but I think its important to follow such stories as they are the essence of why secularists want to keep religion out of schools- children been fed misinformation, taught to put 'faith' above reason and science and not been given access to alternative points of view. Other teachers have been complaining about Freshwater for years, stating that they had to reteach ninth graders everything they were supposed to have learnt from freshwater's eigth grade class. Not to mention been treated with defiance and anger by some students to refused to even consider the merits of evolutionary theory due to Freshwater's lessons.
The only conclusion I can draw is that the school was complicit through inaction. By not reprimanding him, they gave him their tacit approval. A science teacher calling evolution a myth. How on earth....?
Comment by Smooth Political
Comment by Summer Minor
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
Comment by Johnny Come Lately
Jack's Back
If this school has allowed this to happen the entire school board needs sacking.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
natural selection is the likely theory about the mechanism of evolution
creationism perhaps has a place in social studies or wherever you would learn about the Greek and Roman myths and legends or the Aboriginal dreamtime tales . . . it is useful in explaining how cultures developed but not biology
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Since when is science about values? Science exists outside of any human-centric notions of good or evil, and is simply a means of describing the physical world as accurately as possible. It helps to predict what IS true, not what SHOULD be true.
The values of the parents. Sheesh.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
This is from the report the school filed on his investigation:
“The lesson of the day had been on the creation of the universe. John talked about how the textbook could be wrong. He said, ‘Let me give you an example of how science can be wrong.’ He then went on to say that an article in Time magazine a few years back stated that scientists had found a genetic link to homosexuality. ‘In that case science is wrong because the Bible states that homosexuality is a sin’ and so anyone who is gay chooses to be gay and therefore is a sinner. My reaction was one of disbelief that he was saying these things to eighth graders. I thought of how those two or three students in that classroom who might be struggling with their sexual identities would be feeling, hearing that they were sinners from a teacher. ... I was surprised at how comfortable John was talking about the Bible stating that homosexuality is a sin, and that anyone who is gay makes a conscious choice to be so. ... He had no problem declaring that not only can science be wrong by the example he gave, but heavily implied that the students’ textbook was wrong as well on how the universe was created.”
Comment by Smooth Political
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Winston or Morgan, I'll leave it to you. I can't be bothered explaining it yet again.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
evolution is a FACT
natural selection is the likely theory about the mechanism of evolution
Comment by Summer Minor
In science a theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation. For the scientist, "theory" is not in any way an antonym of "fact". For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behavior are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and the general theory of relativity.
In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, a speculation, or a hypothesis. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statements. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.
Creationism a theory in that it is an opinion, an idea, a might be. Evolution is a SCIENTIFIC THEORY in that it can be tested and verified through observation.
See the difference?
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
biological evolution (the fact) can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming
when scientists say "fact" they mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." (as opposed to "absolute certainty")
when scientists say "theory" they mean "a hypothetical structure of ideas that explains and interprets the facts" (as opposed to "random guess")
quotes from Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981
(and yes Ruby if that looks familiar its because i posted on another one of your religious debate articles)
Comment by Smooth Political
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Smooth Political - At the risk of offending you (which I am not intending to), I will say that while you are correct and everyone is absolutely entitled to their opinion, that has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not those opinions are actually valid. If I told you that it was my opinion that lightning was just static electricity formed from God touching the earth after he shuffled his cosmic socks on the rug, would you agree that it should be mentioned alongside the well-established scientific causes for lightning? That's about the level of absurdity involved with equating creationism to evolutionary theory. It is not my intention to offend you, but honestly, I would be lying if I presented even a vestige a respect for that idea. I respect your right to have it, wholeheartedly, but the idea itself? There's just no way, and no reason, for me to give it any credence.
If you feel like reading it, here's a post I did that deals with this subject. I don't expect you to agree with me, just presenting it as something else for you to look at if you'd like.
Comment by Smooth Political
In response to this post, I believe the teacher was wrong to not present an objective education to the students. Yes, I brought up the post because the right fighters have made this a creation diss instead of commenting directly on what the post was about
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth".
Can't get much simpler than that. In the words of Ricky Gervais the Bible "doesn't go into detail".
Smooth, I'm really astounded at the way people just refuse to accept scientific evidence. Why is that?
Comment by Smooth Political
Really Long Link
All scientific "theories" in favor of creation.
Like I said in the beginning. All theories should be presented. I am equally astounded that people are so afraid to present both.
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Smooth Political
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Comment by Smooth Political
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Seriously Smooth, I am happy to have discussions with people who have valid points of view. But I will not give credence to the Creationist Museum. It is not science. It is not valid. It is idiocy at its most destructive.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
And Ruby.....you are right, the main quack behind that "museum" is from Australia...is that what you do with your idiots? Send them over here to make "museums?" I can just picture a new inscription on the Statue of Liberty..."keep your poor and downtrodden, give us your idiots, your stupid masses longing to feel smart."
Comment by alt_ed
Alted Opinion
ArtCombat
The Inner Saintdom
If god created us, howcome he designed us to fix ourselves? i mean surely, he could just make us all invincible rather than giving us the power to think and figure things out for ourselves... Whats the point to life, if all there is too it is ID?
I.D. Ignorant Dickheads?
Comment by RubySoho
Music Zone
Thought Zone
Sure, believe in God and creation if you must, but don't try to claim that you are being scientific because you absolutely are not. Creationism belongs in classes on religion and in Church. Not in a science classroom. And just adding the word "museum" does not make a giant, three-dimensional bible an institution that promotes knowledge and understanding.
Comment by alt_ed
Alted Opinion
ArtCombat
The Inner Saintdom
EVOLUTION CAN WITHSTAND ANY INVESTIGATION - CREATIONISM IS FORCED TO DEPEND ON INFANT BRAINWASHING
Comment by Morgan Bell
Science News
Deep Pencil
Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
it was a FACT back in 1981 and it is still a FACT today . . . this is because FACTS dont undo themselves
a FACT is an observation or a piece of data
FACTS can include objective measurements which can be either pieces of verifiable evidence, or the results of an experiment which can be repeated over and over again by different people
example:
Fruit flies changing generation to generation is an observation of generational organism change.
Organisms changing generation to generation is called evolution.
Evolution is a FACT.
here is a great summary on wiki which was last updated 29 June 2008
Really Long Link
EVOLUTION IS AN ACCEPTED FACT IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY
you would have to be incredibly ignorant to continue denying this
hi Winston,
yes i did miss you!
Comment by Johnny Come Lately
Jack's Back
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
And if I can just say.......the Creation Museum? Seriously? I figured you'd at least pull out someone like William Dembski or something, but Ken Ham? You might as well have pointed to Ray Comfort and his magical banana argument. Ken Ham is in the same league.
One last point, although it's already been made: creationism and ID are not scientific theories. Science does not deal with the supernatural. Period. If your opening premise for a "theory" is "god did it" then, even if everything else is defined in scientific terms, you have stepped outside of science's purview. That's just the way it is, and there's no way around that fact. In order to include creationism theory or ID into a science class, the entire definition of what science is would need to be changed.