For today’s (Jan 14) update on the Louisiana Board’s consideration this week of policy for implementing the state’s new “science education” law, see this post by the Sensuous Curmudgeon. You can click here to download a pdf of the report posted prior to the meeting. (Note: I extracted these pages from the humongous file on the BESE website, which included reports for many other items on the agenda. I also did text recognition on those pages, which were only page-images in the BESE file.)
These developments reinforce my view that we are preoccupied more than we should be with the Establishment Clause as the reason for not teaching the “alternatives.” The Establishment Clause should be used as the basis for judicial disposition; but the main reason for not teaching the alternatives in science class should be that they are alternatives to science, not scientific alternatives. That’s what needs to be made clear to everybody, IMHO.
Tony's curricublog 
One Comment
What a great resource. I just found this after writing my own premature posting on the LA proposal to block the teaching of intelligent design under the “unless otherwise prohibited” part of the law. What does it take for the BESE to prohibit something these days?
One Trackback/Pingback
[…] in the public schools of some states — including, for example, legislation introduced in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Mississippi, and Texas — I was particularly interested in the bills introduced in […]