There are more news stories today about both the Religious Liberties bills and the Instructional Materials bills that we here at Florida Citizens for Science are opposed to and tracking.
Naples Daily News:Â Senate committee pushes ‘religious expression’ bill forward
Brandon Haught, a high school biology teacher representing the organization Florida Citizens for Science, says the bill would have detrimental effects specifically in science education.
“Does this mean that a teacher or school personnel can then talk about stuff like the age of the Earth and evolution from a religious perspective, and if someone was to try to counsel them not to do that, would that be discrimination against the teacher?â€
Haught also raised concerns about students being able to refute what is being taught based on their own religious beliefs.
“This has a chilling effect on science teachers across the state who would prefer to short-change evolution instruction rather than deal with potential conflicts with students, parents and the community,†Haught said.
Tampa Bay Times:Â ‘Religious liberties’ measures diverge, but advance
The bills were once identical, but the House Pre-K-12 Quality Subcommittee amended its bill to make it more narrow than the Senate’s …
At this point that seems to be our best hope. The House and Senate versions are different and if they are both approved by their respective chambers, they will need to be reconciled before moving to the governor’s desk. We’ve seen bills fall apart at that stage before and we’re hoping it happens again now.
Meanwhile, the Instructional Materials bills get some media attention too.
Naples Daily News:Â Leon educators say ‘instructional materials’ bill not needed
Flaugh said he and others in the Alliance define “objectionable material†within the textbooks to be that which is “strongly biased on major issues.†However, critics of the bill say it could be a Trojan horse to undermine instruction of climate change and evolution.
Flaugh characterizes the bill as straightforward, simply a way to control quality when it comes to what a community’s children are reading and discussing.
[…]
Wood, however, thinks the legislation was proposed to benefit special interests with hidden agendas.
“This bill seems like a well-disguised way for single-issue interest groups who don’t have students in public schools to work their agendas,†she said.
Keith Flaugh and his Florida Citizens’ Alliance are trying to tap dance around specifics when called out on them. But they’ve been passing around copies of their “Objectionable Materials” list [pdf document] that shows on page 8:
World History – Ancient Civilization: Author” Holt McDougal, Publisher: Houghton, Mifflin, Harcourt
6th grade History: These two pages teach the children that we descended from apes. This is stated as a fact not a theory. http://goo.gl/MNqVBm
That link in their document takes you to a page of their website that states this:
Collier County 6th grade History: These two pages teach the children that we descended from apes. This is stated as a fact not a theory. Nowhere in the material is a balanced discussion of the biblical explanation.
Trojan horse, indeed. Fortunately, both the Senate and House versions of this bill are still stalled with no committee hearings scheduled.
I don’t know much about the ins and outs of Tallahassee procedural details, but I get a rush of optimism from the last four words in this post.
I talked to a Senator who sponsored the religious freedom bill this week(Perry from Gainesville) and told him my real life story of having a middle school student answer a test question with “God did it”. i asked him how i could be sure if the student actually understood the concept and how we could teach high quality science in Florida if the vague wording on the bill prevented us from challenging that answer. In real life we did challenge the answer by telling him that he had every right to his belief but still needed to show his teacher that he understood the concept whether he believed it or not. Anyone want to tackle some better wording for this bill? I think I have an opportunity here to offer alternative wording that would help rectify this particular problem. The bill looks like it is very likely to pass if the Senate president decides to put it on the floor.