Houston-area school board votes to remove 13 chapters from state-approved science textbooks, citing controversial topics

[essentialsaltes]

Cy-Fair ISD trustees vote to omit textbook chapters about topics such as climate change and vaccines​

State Rep. Jon Rosenthal worked as a mechanical engineer before entering politics, and his father was a mathematics professor at the University of Texas. So studying science, and teaching it, are endeavors that are important to him.

Trustees for the third-largest school district in Texas, which is served in part by Rosenthal, voted to omit a series of science textbook chapters that address subjects such as climate change, vaccinations, cultural diversity, depopulation and humans' impact on the Earth and its ecosystems.

Those topics were referred to as "controversial" by multiple Cy-Fair ISD board members, whereas Rosenthal said there is a "strong consensus around all of those topics" within the global scientific community. The five textbooks in question also have been approved, in their entirety, by the State Board of Education.

Julie Hinaman was the lone Cy-Fair ISD trustee to vote against omitting the materials, saying she did not understand "why one board member chose to override the recommendation of our highly trained educators who selected these materials for next school year."

 

[rambot]

I love it when people take noncontroversial things, label them as controversial. And then when it's pointed out that it's not controversial, claim other people are "making it political".

I would like to put forward a motion that nobody could serve as a trustee unless they can pass an exam written for people they are overseeing.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Cy-Fair ISD trustees vote to omit textbook chapters about topics such as climate change and vaccines​

State Rep. Jon Rosenthal worked as a mechanical engineer before entering politics, and his father was a mathematics professor at the University of Texas. So studying science, and teaching it, are endeavors that are important to him.

Trustees for the third-largest school district in Texas, which is served in part by Rosenthal, voted to omit a series of science textbook chapters that address subjects such as climate change, vaccinations, cultural diversity, depopulation and humans' impact on the Earth and its ecosystems.

Those topics were referred to as "controversial" by multiple Cy-Fair ISD board members, whereas Rosenthal said there is a "strong consensus around all of those topics" within the global scientific community. The five textbooks in question also have been approved, in their entirety, by the State Board of Education.

Julie Hinaman was the lone Cy-Fair ISD trustee to vote against omitting the materials, saying she did not understand "why one board member chose to override the recommendation of our highly trained educators who selected these materials for next school year."

It all depends on how those topics were presented in the text.

I could be for or against their inclusion based on that.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It all depends on how those topics were presented in the text.

I could be for or against their inclusion based on that.

With the exception of "cultural diversity" where I'd need to see what they were presenting to be sure, nothing else is controversial scientifically.

 

[Zaha Torte]

With the exception of "cultural diversity" where I'd need to see what they were presenting to be sure, nothing else is controversial scientifically.

It's not the science that I would take issue with - but how the information is presented - as I said.

 

[rambot]

It's not the science that I would take issue with - but how the information is presented - as I said.

And you have sat in classes?

What would look like a disconcerting science lesson on one of those topics?

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's not the science that I would take issue with - but how the information is presented - as I said.

A concern expressed without any evidence of the form of the presentation. There is nothing inherently bad about any of those topics, so you are going to need actual criticism of actual, specific content. (On the other hand if they were proposing a "creationism" chapter be added to HS biology, that wouldn't need any details to reject as not science, because it isn't.)

 

[Zaha Torte]

And you have sat in classes?

What would look like a disconcerting science lesson on one of those topics?

Trying to convince a classroom of students that climate change is an imminent threat caused by their parents and that they should give up their rights and freedoms to the Federal Government in order to combat it.

 

[Zaha Torte]

A concern expressed without any evidence of the form of the presentation. There is nothing inherently bad about any of those topics, so you are going to need actual criticism of actual, specific content. (On the other hand if they were proposing a "creationism" chapter be added to HS biology, that wouldn't need any details to reject as not science, because it isn't.)

Considering that the Creation cannot be observed or repeated - you are right.

Again - I would need to see how the information is presented before I could claim any objection.

Why are you looking for reasons to get offended?

 

[SimplyMe]

It's not the science that I would take issue with - but how the information is presented - as I said.

Trying to convince a classroom of students that climate change is an imminent threat caused by their parents and that they should give up their rights and freedoms to the Federal Government in in order to combat it.

I think what you fail to realize is that these books, which had to be approved and were largely made for the wishes of the Texas Education Board, which is extremely right leaning to the point that no "liberal" presentation of the information in the books would be allowed. You also, even if the Texas School Board wasn't so far right politically, is the home of many of our oil and gas producing companies which will fight any attempts to blame them for climate change in the schools (and Houston is one of the areas where oil companies have the most presence, being the headquarters for 44 of the top oil and gas companies and having major operations centers for most of the other top companies).

 

[Hans Blaster]

Considering that the Creation cannot be observed repeated - you are right.

Again - I would need to see how the information is presented before I could claim any objection.

Why are you looking for reasons to get offended?

You claim to object to the presentation, yet, have made no claim to know how it is being presented.

 

[Zaha Torte]

I think what you fail to realize is that these books, which had to be approved and were largely made for the wishes of the Texas Education Board, which is extremely right leaning to the point that no "liberal" presentation of the information in the books would be allowed. You also, even if the Texas School Board wasn't so far right politically, is the home of many of our oil and gas producing companies which will fight any attempts to blame them for climate change in the schools (and Houston is one of the areas where oil companies have the most presence, being the headquarters for 44 of the top oil and gas companies and having major operations centers for most of the other top companies).

I will say it again - it depends on how the information is presented.

I don't know how these books presented the information and I never claimed to know.

 

[Zaha Torte]

You claim to object to the presentation, yet, have made no claim to know how it is being presented.

Another strawman.

I never claimed to object to any presentation.

I said that I would need to know how the information was presented before I could object to it being included in the book.

I said that I would not initially object to topics - like climate change - being presented in the book.

I would just need to see how the topic was being presented first.

Are you okay today? Do you drink coffee? Do you need more? Or Less? Or a nap?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Are you okay today? Do you drink coffee? Do you need more? Or Less? Or a nap?

My impression of you is declining rapidly. You should knock this off.

 

[rambot]

Trying to convince a classroom of students that climate change is an imminent threat caused by their parents and that they should give up their rights and freedoms to the Federal Government in order to combat it.

Have you looked in a science textbook in the last 10 years?

Climate change IS an imminent threat that has been caused by the choices of humans over the last 150 years.

And folks who complain about rights and freedoms getting taken away tend to be the same people who are unwilling to fulfill their responsibilities.

Regardless, as a teacher of Science, you can rest comfortably in knowing that I don't insist people give of their rights and freedoms. Though I do prepare them for the idea that their lifestyle may be affected. Of course, that is neither a right or a freedom.

 

[Zaha Torte]

My impression of you is declining rapidly. You should knock this off.

I am not forcing you to respond to my posts or to employ various logical fallacies.

I would rather talk about other things with you. Things that don't seem to cause this agitation.

I think you are level-headed and keep your cool - but something was just off today.

Did something happen? Something that upset you? You can DM me if you want to open up.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Have you looked in a science textbook in the last 10 years?

Climate change IS an imminent threat that has been caused by the choices of humans over the last 150 years.

And folks who complain about rights and freedoms getting taken away tend to be the same people who are unwilling to fulfill their responsibilities.

Regardless, as a teacher of Science, you can rest comfortably in knowing that I don't insist people give of their rights and freedoms. Though I do prepare them for the idea that their lifestyle may be affected. Of course, that is neither a right or a freedom.

Based on what you said - no - I wouldn't want you to teach this subject in your classroom.

 

[SimplyMe]

I will say it again - it depends on how the information is presented.

I don't know how these books presented the information and I never claimed to know.

But that is just it, I provided you a link showing that it is a right wing board that rejected most "presentations" of climate change; they specifically were looking for "presentations" that didn't criticize our use of oil and gasoline for climate change -- that basically minimized mans effect on climate change. It seems like the book already presented climate change in a non-threatening, we don't know if man is causing the change way. It seems, rather than pull chapters out of books, they should be setting the standards for how they want the information presented and not removing it completely.

 

[rambot]

Based on what you said - no - I wouldn't want you to teach this subject in your classroom.

Why not? Everything I said was totally factual.

Just because you don't like facts, doesn't mean there is not an obligation to teach them.

 

[Pommer]

Trying to convince a classroom of students that climate change is an imminent threat caused by their parents and that they should give up their rights and freedoms to the Federal Government in order to combat it.

Human beings have affected the climate.
If human beings would like to remain on this planet, they may have to take mitigating action because the climate might change in such a way that human beings are disadvantaged for survival.
”Rights and freedoms” won’t count for much then.