Zack Koppelin is a college student in Texas who grew up in Louisiana. He is determined to expose the publicly-funded schools that teach creationism. As a high school student, he drew attention to voucher schools teaching religious dogma as science. Now in Texas, he finds creationism taught in the state’s biggest charter chain:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 16, 2014
Contact: Zack Kopplin
(225)-715-5946
Zsk1@Rice.edu
Texas’ Largest Charter District is Teaching Creationism
Houston, Texas — Is the Fossil Record “sketchy?” Is evolution “dogma?” Do leading scientists doubt the age of the Earth?
At Responsive Education Solutions’ charter schools, a public Texas Charter “Super-Network” with 17,000 students and over 65 schools, students are learning creationism and false history.
Responsive Ed is the largest charter network in the State of Texas and it receives $82 million in public money, annually.
Science activist Zack Kopplin, who investigated the program, said, “This creationist charter program represents an attack on science, an attack on the First Amendment, and is an insidious threat to the charter movement itself.”
Kopplin also said, “Responsive Ed’s creationist curriculum presents a moment of truth for the Charter movement; will charter proponents demand the closure of schools that teach this creationist rot? Responsive Ed has crossed a line and charter authorizers should immediately revoke Responsive Ed’s charters for academic malpractice.”
Read more about Responsive Ed’s creationist curriculum at Slate.com:
###
Diane Ravitch's blog 
It figures. This is what the future holds for our “students”. We know from past history that people’s minds are shaped by those from whom they “learn”. All or nearly all of the dictators hold power by promoting their agenda, not what scholarship by credible authorities find by extensive research.
It does not bode well for the future of a democratic society, or what is left of one, when myopic strictured views usurp the domain of true scholarship. This is why I follow Dr Ravitch so closely, and have for some time.
Without a STRONG push back the democratic principles in which WE were taught to believe will be inundated by the very thing identified in this blog.
This is nothing new of course but is just another example of people who wish to promote their limited visions and about which these blogs by Dr. Ravitch have noted.
So very, very true!!! I am so very worried about our country and our democratic society! This is the reason that I, too, follow Dr. Ravitch….and also because I see the great demise of our public education classrooms!
No Christian university in Texas teaches creationism in biology (the good theological schools don’t teach it in theology, either).
Why not give Texas high school kids the best Christian education, and cut out creationism?
Well, it stands to reason, since so-called education reform is a faith-based endeavor – a fundamentalist faith in the “magic” of the marketplace – to begin with.
God, Mammon: it’s all mixed together in the minds of these folks.
But what about….STEM! 🙂
The fusion of religious schools and charter schools is perplexing, I think, to the general public. We have a situation here where we had a religious school that people tell me has “converted” into a charter, but the sign and the website remain the same. No one knows what it is. Opinions differ.
In a way it doesn’t really matter, does it? Vouchers follow charters, in state after state after state, so at some point that division between publicly-funded religious private schools and publicly-funded charters will probably fall, too.
“Public” will mean whatever they say it means.
Chiara, for what it’s worth, my take has always been that charters have been intended to be a foot in the door for vouchers.
In other words, whatever busts the unions, turns teaching into temp labor and channels public dollars to private wallets is all good.
After all, it takes a pillage to educate our kids.
It’s inevitable, right? Once you redefine “public” to mean “publicly-funded” it’s consistent to then extend that to private schools.
It’s why I respect conservative ed reformers more than the liberals. They’re consistent. They were always opposed to “government schools” and they’re right out front with that.
What continues to amaze me, following this in Ohio for that 2 decades, is how reckless it is. What will it be like when there are no public schools? What happens when one conflates “public” and “private” so completely? What happens to existing public schools under these schemes?
With all the think tanks and big bucks and thousands of paid ed reformers, there’s just no long-term thought. It just rolls on like a tank, and my overall sense is there’s no consideration of what they’re throwing away. Were public schools really that valueless that we’ll just pitch them without second thought to how profound that is? Wow. That’s radical.
What happens when there are no more public schools?
Well, there are two answers to that question: the official one and the real one.
The official answer is that we’ll all magically be living in a free market utopia.
Or, to use the so-called reformers’ paraphrase of Martin Luther King: “Free (markets) at last! Free (markets) at last! Thank God almighty we have free markets at last”
You see, so-called reform IS the civil rights movement of our time, because the only real freedom guaranteed under the constitution is the freedom to make money off other people’s children.
Then there’s the real answer which is captured in an acronym made infamous in the aftermath of the financial crisis: IBGYBG.
“I’ll be gone, you’ll be gone.” In other words, after cannibalizing the public schools, the privateers will retreat to their gated communities, yachts, space pods, or wherever else they delude themselves into thinking they can escape from the misery and chaos they’ve created.
The social studies “content” in here is just as appalling. Taken together, I think any informed person can see that this is a continuation of the curriculum wars. Since it has been difficult to control the country’s textbooks they are simply going to run their own kind of schools.
For all of the common core’s lip service to “critical thinking”, it is useless in challenging the habits of the mind this kind of school is trying to inculcate. I fear we are in the process of producing a generation of students who are taught to evaluate the veracity of facts or truth claims on the basis of who uttered them. “Are they with us or against us?” This promotes conspiracist, rather than scientific, reasoning. College may be the last place in their lives where these habits of the mind are challenged but only if the student is exposed to a broad and deep liberal arts curriculum. If college becomes nothing more than career-prep as well, what will become of us? What can be done when people can’t even agree on what the facts are much less what to do about them?
Emmy you are right, and if you look up the new Social Studies standards (can be found with a quick google search), you will see that this is exactly the type on deconstructive thinking that will be taught in lieu of history and social science.
Quote: “Historical inquiry is based on materials left from the past that can be studied and analyzed. Such materials, referred to as historical sources or primary sources, include written documents, but also objects, artistic works, oral accounts, landscapes that humans have modified, or even materials contained within the human body, such as DNA. These sources become evidence once they are selected to answer a historical question, a process that involves taking into account features of the source itself, such as its maker or date. The selection process also requires paying attention to the wider historical context in order to choose sources that are relevant and credible. Examining sources often leads to further questions as well as answers in a spiraling process of inquiry.” C3 Framework pg 48.
“No historical event or development occurs in a vacuum; each one has prior conditions and causes, and each one has consequences. Historical thinking involves using evidence and reasoning to draw conclusions about probable causes and effects, recognizing that these are multiple and complex. It requires understanding that the outcome of any historical event may not be what those who engaged in it intended or predicted, so that chains of cause and effect in the past are unexpected and contingent, not pre-determined. Along with claims about causes and effects, historical arguments can also address issues of change over time, the relevance of sources, the perspectives of those involved, and many other topics, but must be based on evidence that is used in a critical, coherent, and logical manner.” C3 Framework pg. 49
D2.His.13.9-12. Critique the appropriateness of the historical sources used in a secondary interpretation.
“. . . you will see that this is exactly the type on deconstructive thinking. . . ”
I am not quite sure how your two examples are “exactly the type of deconstructive thinking” that it appears you are decrying.
What you have quoted seem to be quite logical statements about historical investigations in general. A good read to understand “problems” with studying history is “The Pursuit of History” by John Tosh.
I believe I know what “deconstruction” as a philosophical position is. What is your definition of “deconstructive thinking”?
These are the examples given in the article:
-Implying that “social Darwinism” is (or ever was) a facet of Darwin’s theory. (aka guilt by association)
– Stating authoritatively “In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth” in a science text book.
– Stating “we do not know for sure whether vaccines increase a child’s chance of getting autism” when we actually do. (Unless one wants to quibble over what “for sure” means. Should we talk confidence intervals or epistemology here with the fourth grade class?)
-“[T]he abandoning of religious standards of conduct and the breakdown in respect for governmental authority [after WW 1] would lead to one of two options: either anarchy or dictatorship would prevail in the absence of a monarch.” This is a causal connection that has no consensus amongst historians.
-“Catholics, Moslems (Muslims), and pagans in various stages of civilization.” Developmental stage theory is an outdated concept in the eyes of historians and social scientists in large part because it can support racism (or other -isms) without any empirical proof that civilizations or peoples go through similar “stages” at all.
-the book conflates technical advancement with cultural advancement in discussing native peoples.
-feminism “created an entirely new class of females who lacked male financial support and who had to turn to the state as a surrogate husband.” (This one is new to me. I’ll have to revisit my Weber for his discussion on ‘welfare queens’ as as class.) 🙂
Emmy: wow! The great American critic and poet Randall Jarrell wrote that we live in a time when parody has become difficult because there’s so much that parodies itself. That curriculum reads like something from an Onion article!
A common core set of standards could be an antidote to this idiocy. But, as you have discussed so often, it has to tie together the skill of close reading to some actual knowledge about a subject. This is so horrifying to me that I don’t even know what to say.
This is off-topic, but I’ve been looking for politicians who support public schools, and Carter in GA seems to be one.
Is that true?
http://clatl.com/freshloaf/archives/2014/01/15/deal-carter-clash-over-proposed-547-million-increase-in-education-funding
Color this Georgian cautiously optimistic.
He does have education front and center on his web site.
http://www.carterforgovernor.com
Making his grandfather proud.
According to a recent report from the outstanding Pew Research Center, 33% of Americans and 57% of those who identify as Republicans believe that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.” In other words, they reject evolution.
No word yet from Pew regarding those who believe that the sky is a rotating crystal dome with stars stuck into it.
The results from the ongoing Pew Religion in America project are fascinating.
Many Americans have thrown over specific traditional beliefs (only 43% believe in hell as “a place of suffering and punishment where people go after they die”).
Most do not attend church regularly (only 38 percent attend weekly), they go to various churches, and they change denominational affiliation about as often as they change cell phones.
65% believe in some New Age or Eastern religious tenet (reincarnation, panentheism, astrology), and 39% meditate weekly.
In 2009, 48% reported having had a mystical experience, up from 22% in 1962.
70% said that “many religions can lead to immortal life.”
96% express belief in a God or Supreme Being.
So, the American religious landscape is changing. A cynical person, lacking in generosity about all this, might say that, by-and-large, most Americans practice a religion that one might call Vaguism. A less cynical person might say that Americans retain their desire for religious or spiritual belief and experience in their lives but have much more diverse, much less rigid, much more fluid notions about religion. Unsurprisingly, these tendencies are strongest among the young.
33% reject evolution. And the universe is how old? How about the heavens and the earth?
How many think the earth is flat?
This explains a lot.
And a woman can only get pregnant if she wants to – therefore rape cannot result in new life unless she asks for it, in which case, it’s not rape. Just think lovely thoughts.
Texas also has 43 Gulen Movement schools…based on Sharia law…though
fostering math. Religion has no part in public education unless taught
as comparative religion, not an inculcating of young minds. Those parents
who want their children to be indoctrinated with religion, should send
them to parochial schools with no funding by the rest of the public
Why are you shocked?
Take a look at what they teach in the public schools in Texas.
Many people in this country believe all sorts of counterintuitive ideas. When I looked at subject area books to possibly purchase for the school library, I would specifically look up some of those hot topics to see what these nonfiction books said (sometimes it read more like fiction). Being “politically correct” can lead to omitting information, vague statements, or outright lies.
Welcome to the world of education.
And many people home school or send their children to special private schools specifically to teach them these so-called facts, such as creationism. Children grow up thinking that dinosaurs and cavemen co existed. Plus they can spell. (No offense meant for people who home school for other reasons).
If our congressmen are spouting nonsense, think of what their constituents also believe.
Rahm Emanuel relinquishes public schools to private operators and foundations:
http://michaelklonsky.blogspot.com/2014/01/despite-next-weeks-sham-hearings-new.html
So, two questions.
One, is there some substantive difference between “relinquishing” public schools and “abandoning” public schools, besides clever marketing and this sort of fake-zen language?
And, two, why do we need Rahm Emanuel if private interests are running his city?
Let’s cut out the middleman politician and deal directly with the powerful people 🙂
No, they don’t want that, just send them the money. The powerful need the politician to appease the masses and act as the scapegoat. The 1 % can’t be exposed or some sliver of “accountability” might intrude on their peace and damage their image. They need the delusion that our elected clowns are at fault.
You can not tell Charter Schools what to teach because they are only paid public tax dollars to their owners as part of a contract agreement with a Private school. Private schools can teach whatever they wish. Sorry, but the courts have already made this distinction.
I wish this website would stay away from sensitive issues like one’s religion and other areas that are every-so-often brought up that have nothing to do with being pro-public schools. It invariably leads to bashing, judging and even name-calling. I also wish that people would refrain from demeaning those who do not feel the same way they do. Isn’t that the height of “intolerance”? (According to whom are one’s beliefs “counter-intuitive?)
Labeling and assuming are judgemental and divisive.
I am not sure this line of thought and the discussion here is critical of anyone for believing and feeling what they do. What people think and believe, and where they learn their ideas from is an appropriate topic for discussion. When we are talking about public money, however, peoples personal beliefs and feelings about religion should not be taught in public schools. Public money should certainly not support the teaching of a one particular religion over another.
Betsy – I am a non-denominational Christian and sent my two boys to Catholic school specifically so that they could be educated with the God component embedded. When I read comments like the one that I pasted below, my interpretation is that this person is self-righteously scoffing people like me. I am also an inner-city public school kindergarten teacher and feel passionate about the responsibility of this country to provide excellent public education for all. Somewhere else in this post, someone referred to “creationist rot.” What I am saying is that this kind of judgementalism does nothing to unify and further the critial cause of anti-school reform. I agree that one religion cannot be taught with public money.
many people home school or send their children to special private schools specifically to teach them these so-called facts, such as creationism. Children grow up thinking that dinosaurs and cavemen co existed. Plus they can spell. (No offense meant for people who home school for other reasons).
Dear kindergarten interlude,
I stand by my comments, and whether you agree or not, many parents choose home schooling or private schools specifically to keep their children from hearing other points of view, so they can teach them concepts such as creationism. I base this not on conjecture, but on discussions I have had with numerous parents over the years. They are doing their children a dis service by not even allowing them to hear dissenting points of view (or interact with children of different faiths). No matter what your personal beliefs, the theory of evolution has many scientific facts in its support. There are also cultures who preach that the holocaust was a hoax and that man never landed on the moon. However, just because they say it’s so, doesn’t make it so.
This is very different from parents such as yourself who want their children to have an education where the concepts and teachings of God and Christ are a focal point. And if you want your children to learn that God created the heaven and the earth in seven days, that’s fine, as long as you also mention evolution as well. There are many scientists who are able to coexist with both the concepts of creation and evolution. Actually, the study of creation theories from various cultures, all with a similar theme, is fascinating. I, too, am a Christian, although I believe most of the stories in the bible are allegories and not fast truths. That’s my belief, however, and not that of many others, even in my own church. Yet we are able to coexist lovingly.
I guess my point is that I don’t want you to think I was disparaging a parochial education. It’s just when scientific viewpoints are ignored because of an interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation of certain selected books in the bible (other books of the bible were rejected which didn’t fit in with the chosen “message”), I get concerned.
Plus, the discussion also involved public money or public vouchers being used to pay for these alternative religious points of view. Or any religious doctrines.
I try to understand your viewpoint, please understand mine. This blog is looking at appropriate educational models. A Catholic Education is fine, fringe extremist views, especially using public money, is not.
An aside: my granddaughter attended St Leo the Great (which is sadly being closed at the end of the year) for PreK and I thought learning the Bible Stories and scriptures were charming. My grandson goes to day care at the local Methodist Church. I am in favor of a good Sunday School program. So it’s not the religion, it’s using the religion to screen children from the truth (Dinosaurs and cavemen did not coexist and the earth is older than a half million years).