hooligans
Posts: 114
Joined: Jan. 2007
|
Why are they quoting the Science Framework for California Schools from 1990 in EE? I couldn't find anything on the framework from 1990. However I did find this gem on page ix of the 2004 framework : | Quote | | Discussions of any scientific fact, hy pothesis, or theory related to the origins of the universe, the earth, and life (the how) are appropriate to the science curriculum. Discussions of divine creation, ultimate purposes, or ultimate causes (the why) are appropriate to the history–social science and English–language arts curricula. |
and
| Quote | | As a matter of principle, science teachers are professionally bound to limit their teaching to science and should resist pressure to do otherwise. Administrators should support teachers in this regard. Philosophical and religious beliefs are based, at least in part, on faith and are not subject to scientific test and refutation. |
I'm wondering how the 2004 frameworks mesh with what EE is trying to convey. Too me it looks like the California standards are well written and clear. I'm also wondering how the DI can support secret research labs in light of what I read in the 2004 Science Framework for California Schools on page 20: | Quote | | Science does not take place in a secret place isolated from the rest of society. |
|
