New Ohio law allows students to be scientifically wrong.

[Shad]

You were right. It's much ado about nothing until a one of these hypothetical situations occur. But, right now, today, doesn't this discourage people from becoming science teachers in Ohio? That's not good, right?

The Bill is not targeted at science nor does it change academic standards. At worst a teacher reads a bit of religious babble, rolls eyes, and moves on.

 

[dybmh]

No. His religious comments should simply be ignored. He should be graded on the remainder of the reply. If he chooses to waste valuable test time writing out his religious beliefs only to have them disregarded, he may find himself running out of time to answer all of the questions. He will be graded down for that as well as inadequate or incorrect answers

Please forgive me for butting in...

But I keep thinking of this extreme hypothetical example, ( and I know I'm exposing my bias by saying this )...

What if a student gives the correct scientific answer to a question on a test followed by a smug disclaimer:

"** Except that all this is not true because it's not in the Bible. **"

In this ( admittedly ridiculous scenario ) do you think the religious commentary should be ignored?

 

[dybmh]

The Bill is not targeted at science nor does it change academic standards. At worst a teacher reads a bit of religious babble, rolls eyes, and moves on.

I keep going back to the STEM school qualifier in the bill. But maybe it's not significant.

Either way, if I was in process to become a science teacher... doesn't it make sense to avoid Ohio? Isn't passage of this bill 60/30 a sign that the State Legislature is currently unfriendly towards science teachers? it communicates a lack of common ground and common aspirations.

 

[Jose Fly]

A Christian can use the world, but not to the full. Meaning, everything in the world is not bad, including science, but one need to be able to remove the dross, or leave it where it is.
If one understands what is of God, they will know what is of the world. Only then, can they apply the words...
Do not love either the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him; because everything in the world - the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life - does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world. Furthermore, the world is passing away and so is its desire, but the one who does the will of God remains forever. (1 John 2:15-17)

I understand that's what you believe.

Yes. Interested in making a comment. I do that from time to time. One comment is okay on RF, unless pressed by a poster to say more.

Fair 'nuff.

Free world. Choose your train, and jump aboard. Enjoy your ride.
As far as I know, there are scientists who work in the field of evolutionary biology, who do not believe in the Darwinian concept, and who do not believe in the idea of LUCA.
I believe once something can be demonstrated to be true, then it is reasonable to accept it.
There are good scientists in all fields of scientific study, and we appreciate their work. A lot of their knowledge has been used in areas that have been useful.

Do you believe those Christian scientists who do see the idea of LUCA as accurate are "true Christians" (for lack of a better term)? Do you believe they're risking their salvation in doing so?

 

[Shad]

I keep going back to the STEM school qualifier in the bill. But maybe it's not significant.

Either way, if I was in process to become a science teacher... doesn't it make sense to avoid Ohio? Isn't passage of this bill 60/30 a sign that the State Legislature is currently unfriendly towards science teachers? it communicates a lack of common ground and common aspirations.

No as the curriculum wasn't changed. All this Bill does is let student express their religious views without reward nor punishment in class. It also protects their right to form clubs of a religious nature at school. The Bill is about religious freedoms

 

[Jose Fly]

Can you please say what the student's argument would be?

Pretty simple...."You gave me an F on my answers that were expressions of my religious beliefs. That's penalizing me for the religious content of my work, which is illegal."

Can you also explain in what way the teacher who gave the F was awarding a grade based on religious content and not on academic standards?

Because the answer is entirely religious content, which means that's what the grade was based on.

It seems to me that there is no argument there because the teacher gave the F based on appropriate academic standards as opposed to based on religious content. So I'm at a loss to understand what argument a student could make here.

That's the main problem with the law...it's self-contradictory.

 

[Jose Fly]

I answered the question. It just wasn't the answer you wanted. Read the Bill son and try again.

Thanks for evidence you are talking from your *** as you didn't read the Bill. Section 3320.02. The same section that states grading follows academic standards.

More dodging. As lawyers like to say, the questions a person dodges tell you more than the ones they answer.

 

[Shad]

More dodging.

Wrong. My answer was directly based on the Bill. Try again. Maybe try reading the Bill son.

As lawyers like to say, the questions a person dodges tell you more than the ones they answer.

Babble. Try again.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Please forgive me for butting in...

But I keep thinking of this extreme hypothetical example, ( and I know I'm exposing my bias by saying this )...

What if a student gives the correct scientific answer to a question on a test followed by a smug disclaimer:

"** Except that all this is not true because it's not in the Bible. **"

In this ( admittedly ridiculous scenario ) do you think the religious commentary should be ignored?

Under the Ohio law the comment should not affect the grade provided they can provide the curriculum reply, do whatever calculations are necessary.

Should this be the case? Students in public schools can get away with all kinds of snark. Its part of the problem with public schools. Why would religious snark be the only exception.

 

[Jose Fly]

Wrong. My answer was directly based on the Bill. Try again. Maybe try reading the Bill son.

Babble. Try again.

Ok, let's try again.

Is giving a student an F on an assignment penalizing the student?

Where does the bill "prevent grading of religious views" as you claimed?

 

[dybmh]

Under the Ohio law the comment should not affect the grade provided they can provide the curriculum reply, do whatever calculations are necessary.

Should this be the case? Students in public schools can get away with all kinds of snark. Its part of the problem with public schools. Why would religious snark be the only exception.

Thank you for this.

You convinced me... In this hypothetical scenario... I'm assuming the teacher is immature... like me.... HAH!

 

[Shad]

Ok, let's try again.

Is giving a student an F on an assignment penalizing the student?

Why did they get the F?

Where does the bill "prevent grading of religious views" as you claimed?

You have reading comprehension issues.

Section 3320.03

"Assignment grades and scores shall be calculated using ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, including any legitimate pedagogical concerns and shall not penalize nor reward a student based on the religious context of a student's work."

 

[dybmh]

No as the curriculum wasn't changed. All this Bill does is let student express their religious views without reward nor punishment in class. It also protects their right to form clubs of a religious nature at school. The Bill is about religious freedoms

Thank you.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Thank you for this.

You convinced me... In this hypothetical scenario... I'm assuming the teacher is immature... like me.... HAH!

On the other hand I am opposed to students expressing Satanic opinions in class. That is just not cool. Satanist students just need to shut up in class about their religion, not say anything Satanic to the teacher. Seriously if I were a teacher and a Satanic student told me I was going to hell for believing in dinosaurs I would be inclined to send them to the principal's office. I just don't get those kids.

 

[Shad]

Thank you.

Other parts of the Bill cover unions and CBA of teachers which can be a good or bad thing depending on union and CBA. I say good or bad as a general point not an assessment of any Ohio union or CBA

 

[Shad]

On the other hand I am opposed to students expressing Satanic opinions in class. That is just not cool. Satanist students just need to shut up in class about their religion, not say anything Satanic to the teacher. Seriously if I were a teacher and a Satanic student told me I was going to hell for believing in dinosaurs I would be inclined to send them to the principal's office. I just don't get those kids.

This is the double-edged sword. Now if non-Christians are shot down by Ohio government and/or school boards it demonstrates a clear bias in application of the Bill. Application being the lower tier bureaucrats applying the law in action. These type of Bills create an all or none situations. All religions and/or religious views can be expressed not merely mainstream views.

 

[Jose Fly]

Why did they get the F

Still dodging. It's a concept question....is giving a student an F (for any reason) penalizing the student?

You have reading comprehension issues.

Is there a specific reason you have to engage in personal insults so frequently?

Section 3320.03

"Assignment grades and scores shall be calculated using ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance, including any legitimate pedagogical concerns and shall not penalize nor reward a student based on the religious context of a student's work."

The law clearly contemplates a student providing religious answers in their work, be it a test question or homework assignment and even states that no school shall "prohibit a student from engaging in religious expression in the completion of homework, artwork, or other written or oral assignments".

So a student gives a religious answer to a question. If they can neither be penalized nor rewarded for that answer, what in your view is a teacher to do?

 

[Jose Fly]

Wrong. You didn't say why they got an F so I asked. One can get an F due to absence.

Isn't that penalizing the student for being absent?

One can get an F due to the wrong answers

Is that penalizing the student for giving the wrong answer?

You refusing to respond shows your question had a hidden premise which you do not want to expose as it would demonstrate you are a hack

As you are a hack which is very easy to expose. When exposed you attack me for having exposed you. Try again son.

Answers my question or bugger off.

Read my quote and try again.

What was the question?

Your post has been reported for personal insults. That you cannot engage me without such insults speaks volumes.

 

[Shad]

Isn't that penalizing the student for being absent?

No its a fail for no completion of work.

Is that penalizing the student for giving the wrong answer?

Yes. That how grades work son. If someone says 1+1=3 that answer is wrong.

Your post has been reported for personal insults.

That's nice. Only problem is my points are true so not insults but conclusions which are insulting. No different if a student gets an F. It makes them look bad but reflects upon themselves so they whine. Try again son.

That you cannot engage me without such insults speaks volumes.

You refused to answer my question then babbled about me dodging. I called BS on that. If someone gets an F it is normal to ask why they got the F. You refused to answer. That is because your hidden premise is a religious answer. So if I say "No" you will reveal your hidden premise as a gotcha. If I say "Yes" same thing. You are transparent. Try again son. Look up loaded questions and hidden premises. Yawn.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Isn't that penalizing the student for being absent?

Not if they are absent for religious reasons, such as a surprise Satanic conclave. These are very important for Satanists, some of whom must read heavy metal magazines during school hours and smoke in the woods. I've seen the messes they leave.

The questions can get complicated. I think whoever started the OP made at one good point that the law is vague. Its going to generate work for lawyers and judges and cost Ohioans money.