Webcast quango: One-third of UK teachers are creationists
Teachers may be silly: Gov mediacrats, sillier
In a recent survey, barely half of a self-selecting sample of UK teachers who use the webcast service Teachers' TV disagreed with the idea that "creationism or intelligent design should be given the same status as evolution in the classroom". Some 87.9 per cent of respondents thought that it was appropriate to discuss religious matters in science classes if pupils brought them up.
Andrew Bethell, head of Teachers' TV, commented:
“The debate on whether there is a place for the teaching of creationism in the classroom is still fierce. Although over half (50.4 per cent) of teachers either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the idea that creationism should be given the same status as evolution, there is a significant minority who believe that it should be given equal weight.
“Perhaps most telling is the fact that, almost 9 out of 10 teachers take the pragmatic view that they should be allowed to discuss creationism or intelligent design in science, if pupils raise the question.”
The survey was carried out by emailing 10,600 people signed up to the Teachers' TV website, of whom 1,210 responded. The government-funded quango webcast channel (which also broadcasts on satellite and cable, and has a two-hour Freeview slot) believes that "95 per cent of [the respondents] are teachers and the remaining 5 per cent work in the wider education workforce".
Presumably this means that 1,149-and-a-half of the respondents identified themselves as teachers.
Anyway. UK government guidelines state that:
Creationism and intelligent design are not part of the science national curriculum programmes of study and should not be taught as science.
Fully 29 per cent of those responding to the email survey disagreed or strongly disagreed with this, says Teachers' TV.
It's worth noting that excluding theological discussion from science classes doesn't exclude it from school. Quite apart from science, schools are legally required to teach "religious education". Parents are permitted to withdraw their kids from RE, but few do. These periods might easily be seen as the appropriate venue for kids to discuss theological matters.
"The debate on whether there is a place for the teaching of creationism in the classroom," which Mr Bethell believes still to be firecely underway, was in fact settled long ago as a matter of law. There is such a place - just not in the science classroom. Nor the maths one, or the English one, or the gym, or wherever else some kid - or teacher - might want to bring up the subject of religion. They should wait for the religion class.
It would appear, however, that of the one in ten possible teachers on the Teachers' TV spam list who could be bothered to answer, around a third either don't know about RE, think that there isn't enough of it in the timetable, or are genuine science-denying lunatics.
The Teachers' TV release is headed "nearly a third of teachers agree that creationism or intelligent design should be given the same status as evolution in the classroom". All the webcasters actually know for sure, however, is that about 3 per cent of the people they spammed think that. Much though we enjoy a witchhunt against silly corduroys as much as the next man, this is thin stuff.
Teachers are sometimes untrustworthy, but media quangocrats are a lot worse.
In this thread
One group of people show their support for an attempt to force their opinions on another group.
The modern trend of hatred (and that is the correct word) of Christians is no different to the prevalent racist attitudes of times past.
Strange also how people are arguing for the case of being 'open minded' while simultaneously denying the right to be taught differing values in schools.
As I said, cowards.
"Jake - you won't get an answer mate, there is no way for these insane zealots to form any coherent argument that doesn't involve burning us both at the stake."
I know. See subject line.
There are so many problems with this topic...
...that i will invariable step on one toe too many and be consigned to the electronic dusty-bin. So why bother replying? why bother complaining about the stupidity that is rampant within the narrow minded bigotry of people who wish to see creationism spoon-fed to the innocent under the guise of being scientific? why not just let these arseholes destroy the few weak threads of proper educated thinking that still cling desperately to the school system? religions of all form are the complete absence of science, creationism is an unsubstantiated paranoid delusion based on one version of it. science requires proof. So I post, and await the proof. I may well be proven wrong.
Jake - you won't get an answer mate, there is no way for these insane zealots to form any coherent argument that doesn't involve burning us both at the stake.
Science requires proof and abhors faith, religion relies entirely on faith, and faith requires an absence of proof - "for without faith i am nothing"... QED.
God is great ... yeh, and the earth is flat... religion belongs in that retarded committee concept called RE where for 40 minutes a week each and every child the nation over can get some well earned shut-eye and still get a "B" in the final exam. Religions are like a string of pearls... no single one is perfect but the thread of truth runs through them all. Anyone wishing to discuss this truth might do well to read The Golden Bough, or, if that's a bit heavy going and controversial - go with The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy. There is more Universal Truth and Spiritual Enlightenment in the words of the late Douglas Adams than you will find in all of the pathetic leftovers of carefully selected gnostic texts that made it into the multiple rewrites of doctrine that were finally edited down into the 15th century manipulative debasement that is the modern bible. And anyone who believes that that sort of shite belongs in the science classroom really shouldn't be allowed to have access to anything sharp.