It is a bit hard, in my experience, to teach about ID stuff in biology. Admittedly, I'm not living in a country where it is considered remotely necessary - most controversies are about religious-affiliated schools not teaching about evolution (and sex) enough.
The problem is that the ID/creationist stuff I've seen is so stupid/faulty/muddled a good 17-year old student picks holes in it without much aid. And if I as a biology teacher spend time letting them do that it feels slightly like I'm actually ridiculing on or encouraging picking on religion, which really isn't my job. I mean, of course I teach evolution from a historical standpoint as well as current issues and encourage debate, but it is hard to mix science and faith in class without risking students laughing at "those stupid American fundamentalists".
I wonder if the ID proponents consider those risks.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-03 04:12 am (UTC)The problem is that the ID/creationist stuff I've seen is so stupid/faulty/muddled a good 17-year old student picks holes in it without much aid. And if I as a biology teacher spend time letting them do that it feels slightly like I'm actually ridiculing on or encouraging picking on religion, which really isn't my job. I mean, of course I teach evolution from a historical standpoint as well as current issues and encourage debate, but it is hard to mix science and faith in class without risking students laughing at "those stupid American fundamentalists".
I wonder if the ID proponents consider those risks.