Federal Judge Rules UC can Deny Science Credit from Creationist Schools

Kernel Sanders · 08-13-08, 02:11 PM

Quote:

(08-12) 17:25 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge says the University of California can deny course credit to applicants from Christian high schools whose textbooks declare the Bible infallible and reject evolution.

Rejecting claims of religious discrimination and stifling of free expression, U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking.

Otero's ruling Friday, which focused on specific courses and texts, followed his decision in March that found no anti-religious bias in the university's system of reviewing high school classes. Now that the lawsuit has been dismissed, a group of Christian schools has appealed Otero's rulings to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. [...]

Christian schools in the suit accused the university of rejecting courses that include any religious viewpoint, "any instance of God's guidance of history, or any alternative ... to evolution."

But Otero said in March that the university has approved many courses containing religious material and viewpoints, including some that use such texts as "Chemistry for Christian Schools" and "Biology: God's Living Creation," or that include scientific discussions of creationism as well as evolution.

UC denies credit to courses that rely largely or entirely on material stressing supernatural over historic or scientific explanations, though it has approved such texts as supplemental reading, the judge said.

Source [ San Francisco Gate]

One more step forward for rational America

DarkWizard12 · 08-13-08, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

Source [ San Francisco Gate]

One more step forward for rational America

One more step toward barbaric christian suppression. Ah yes, the roman times.

This is absolutely insane. A student doesn't exactly have control over what high-school he or she goes to in the first place. 2nd, If a student graduates from a recognized high-school with all credits necessary, they should not be be rejected of their credit no matter how bad the textbooks are. If what the books taught were so important for achieving a credit, then why aren't all the other student credits in other courses denied? Take history for example: ever read the book "Lies my teacher told me?"

3rd of all(and ost important), what about Muslim schools? Jewish schools? Or Even buddhist schools? Will students who graduate their be denied their credits? This ruling violates the very principal of progressivism: Equality. This ruling is nothing but judicial activism aimed at Christian schools and none other.

shuamort · 08-13-08, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

One more step toward barbaric christian suppression. Ah yes, the roman times.

This is absolutely insane. A student doesn't exactly have control over what high-school he or she goes to in the first place. 2nd, If a student graduates from a recognized high-school with all credits necessary, they should not be be rejected of their credit no matter how bad the textbooks are. If what the books taught were so important for achieving a credit, then why aren't all the other student credits in other courses denied? Take history for example: ever read the book "Lies my teacher told me?"

3rd of all(and ost important), what about Muslim schools? Jewish schools? Or Even buddhist schools? Will students who graduate their be denied their credits? This ruling violates the very principal of progressivism: Equality. This ruling is nothing but judicial activism aimed at Christian schools and none other.

No, it only means that the student was provided an accredited amount of knowledge in the required field. If the student receives that credit, they can then go to the school that requires it. I'm sure that there are religious and irreligious schools who don't require those bits of curricula.

As for equality, the students aren't being discriminated because they hold their views, they're being asked that they learn the prevailing scientific views. You have to note that this is not against schools who teach creationism, but those that do not teach evolution.

Kernel Sanders · 08-13-08, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

One more step toward barbaric christian suppression. Ah yes, the roman times.

This is absolutely insane. A student doesn't exactly have control over what high-school he or she goes to in the first place. 2nd, If a student graduates from a recognized high-school with all credits necessary, they should not be be rejected of their credit no matter how bad the textbooks are. If what the books taught were so important for achieving a credit, then why aren't all the other student credits in other courses denied? Take history for example: ever read the book "Lies my teacher told me?"

Colleges give credit for classes based on whether or not the highschool class properly prepares a student and gives them the prerequisite knowledge to opt out of taking that class at university. Slapping a science sticker on Genesis does not make it a replacement for legitimate teaching of biology

Quote:

3rd of all(and ost important), what about Muslim schools? Jewish schools? Or Even buddhist schools? Will students who graduate their be denied their credits? This ruling violates the very principal of progressivism: Equality. This ruling is nothing but judicial activism aimed at Christian schools and none other.

I would have to see more specifics on the wording, but I am under the impression that the ruling isn't limited to christianity - it just concerns a case revolving around christianity in particular

Quote:

U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking

In my reading any school that offers "alternatives" to science that fails to live up to the standards would be rejected - be it Muslim, Catholic, or anything else

DarkWizard12 · 08-13-08, 03:34 PM

1st off, I think it should be clarified whether the judge means macro, or micro-evolution(or both). If the texts aren't teaching micro-evolution then...its not much a textbook. If you can put it under a microscope and see it, its real. However, macro-evolution shouldn't matter in a text book. As long as a chemistry/biology teaches students how to mix chemicals in a modern-day world, who cares about what they think about where humans came from?

Quote:

Originally Posted by shuamort

No, it only means that the student was provided an accredited amount of knowledge in the required field. If the student receives that credit, they can then go to the school that requires it. I'm sure that there are religious and irreligious schools who don't require those bits of curricula.

But don't the respective high schools decide if that student recieved the credit?

Quote:

As for equality, the students aren't being discriminated because they hold their views, they're being asked that they learn the prevailing scientific views. You have to note that this is not against schools who teach creationism, but those that do not teach evolution.

So a school can teach evolution and not creationism, but it can't teach creationism and not evolution?

DarkWizard12 · 08-13-08, 03:38 PM

[quote=Kernel Sanders;1057695088]Colleges give credit for classes based on whether or not the highschool class properly prepares a student and gives them the prerequisite knowledge to opt out of taking that class at university. Slapping a science sticker on Genesis does not make it a replacement for legitimate teaching of biology
[quote]
Don't they call this the SAT or w/e? I wasn't awared they actually checked that beyond what was on the tests. If its true its...strange. Someone could have told me that.

Quote:

I would have to see more specifics on the wording, but I am under the impression that the ruling isn't limited to christianity - it just concerns a case revolving around christianity in particular

In my reading any school that offers "alternatives" to science that fails to live up to the standards would be rejected - be it Muslim, Catholic, or anything else

Fair enough. The ruling in its actual wording should be posted.

Kernel Sanders · 08-13-08, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

So a school can teach evolution and not creationism, but it can't teach creationism and not evolution?

They can teach the theory that Bob Sagget sneezed the universe out after an all night bender if they want, they just have no guarantee that universities will accept their classes as proper science credits if they do.

Kernel Sanders · 08-13-08, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

Don't they call this the SAT or w/e? I wasn't awared they actually checked that beyond what was on the tests. If its true its...strange. Someone could have told me that.

There are several ways in which colleges gauge student's academic backgounds. SAT's are one way (although the primary test is math/reading/writing only there are SAT II subject tests such as physics and chemistry), as are ACT's, AP/IB scores, and a student's transcript. While most of those are standardized tests where the subject matter is well known, transcripts are relatively subjective and schools often (but not always) examine the school behind the transcript in addition to looking at GPA/classes taken

shuamort · 08-13-08, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

1st off, I think it should be clarified whether the judge means macro, or micro-evolution(or both). If the texts aren't teaching micro-evolution then...its not much a textbook. If you can put it under a microscope and see it, its real. However, macro-evolution shouldn't matter in a text book. As long as a chemistry/biology teaches students how to mix chemicals in a modern-day world, who cares about what they think about where humans came from?

But don't the respective high schools decide if that student recieved the credit?

So a school can teach evolution and not creationism, but it can't teach creationism and not evolution?

So as not to confuse things, schools can teach whatever they want. Really. The problem is in the accreditation. Have you ever taken a day off work and watched day time TV? Ads for schools with easy to achieve diplomas advertise heavily during the day with degrees in accounting or CAD work. Compare those classes with what is taught at the state university and there can be a discrepency in the course work and the credits don't transfer and the classes that the student paid for have to be retaken at the state U.

The TV advertising University can teach what they want and some employers will respect a degree from the college whereas others will turn up their noses at it.

Here's the ruling.

Quote:

UC admits most California applicants based on achievement in high school courses and standardized tests. However, UC only considers courses that it has approved to ensure that admitted students took courses that provided those students with the knowledge and skills to succeed in their studies at UC.1

and

Quote:

This course proposed a primary text published by A Beka titled Biology: God's Living
Creation. (Pls.' Ex. 624, at 40.) UC Professor Barbara Sawrey reviewed this text and concluded that it was inappropriate for use as the primary text in college-preparatory science classes. (Sawrey Decl. ¶ 3.) Professor Sawrey found the text problematic because it characterized religious doctrine as scientific evidence, included scientific inaccuracies, failed to encourage critical thinking, and took an "overall un-scientific approach to the subject matter." (Sawrey Decl. ¶ 3.)14

Sawrey's "judgment was based not on the fact that the textbooks contained religious references and viewpoints, but on [her] conclusion that [the texts] would not adequately teach students the scientific principles, methods, and knowledge necessary for them to successfully study those subjects at UC." (Sawrey Decl. ¶ 3.)15 After forming her conclusions, Professor Sawrey shared her findings with other members of the course review committee, who supported her conclusions. (Sawrey Decl. ¶ 4.)

I skimmed the full ruling and noticed that the crux of this case isn't based solely on this but a number of other educational issues that didn't fall into the necessary prerequisites.

DeeJayH · 08-13-08, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

Source [ San Francisco Gate]

One more step forward for rational America

one more example of the pompous who think that ~90+% of the world is irrational for holding their long held beliefs
without proving the non-existence of god(s)
sad taht this is what you need to make yourself feel superior to the rest
are you lacking in other ways that requires such compensation?