Condemnation for TEA Over Forced Resignation

The decision by the Texas Education Agency to force out its science curriculum director, Chris Comer, for sending an email suggesting that her colleagues attend a talk critical of intelligent design is still reverberating around the state and beyond.

Barbara Forrest, the author of the talk mentioned in Ms. Comer's email, has responded in a lengthy rebuttal condemning the TEA for its actions.

In forcing Chris Comer to resign as Texas Director of Science, the Texas Education Agency has confirmed in a most public, unfortunate way the central point of my Austin presentation, “Inside Creationism’s Trojan Horse,” the mere announcement of which TEA used as an excuse to terminate her: the intelligent design (ID) creationist movement is about politics, religion, and power. If anyone had any doubts about how mean-spirited ID politics is, this episode should erase them......

Ms. Martinez continued, “Thus, sending this e-mail compromises the agency’s role in the TEKS revision process by creating the perception that TEA has a biased position on a subject directly related to the science education TEKS.” But why would the TEA be concerned about being biased in favor of teaching children the truth about science? The TEA’s proper role is to ensure the quality and integrity of what is taught in Texas science classes. My Austin presentation was most certainly not a threat to that role, but in fact highly supportive of it. I presented the truth about ID as established by years of scholarly research. Has the process of administering the public education system in Texas become so politicized that even the truth is a threat to people’s jobs? One can only conclude that it has.

The full text of Dr. Forrest's letter is published here.

Meanwhile, Bud Kennedy at the Fort Worth Star Telegram [link not found] notes the irony of the rationale given by the TEA in forcing Comer's resignation.

Those who believe in teaching creation as science often argue that both sides of a debate should be heard.

Yet when Christine Castillo Comer, a former science teacher, forwarded an e-mail announcing a public speech by creationism critic Barbara Forrest, suddenly that side no longer needed to be heard......

Kevin Fisher, the science coordinator for Lewisville schools, is a past president of Texas Science teachers.

"The most astonishing part of this is that the Texas Education Agency would want science classes to remain neutral between evolution, which is science, and creationism, which is religion," Fisher said. "I think everybody in Texas wants a 21st-century education for our children. Bringing creationism into the classroom is 15th-century education.

TEA Science Curriculum Director Fired Over ID

In the latest skirmish over the teaching of intelligent design, the Texas Education Agency is making national news for forcing its science curriculum director, Chris Comer, to resign or be fired. Her crime? Sending an email suggesting that members might be interested in hearing a speaker who testified against intelligent design in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover School Board trial.

I thought that you might like to know that Barbara Forrest will be speaking on “Inside Creationism’s Trojan Horse” in Austin on November 2, 2007. Her talk, sponsored by the Center for Inquiry Austin, begins at 7:00 p.m. in the Monarch Event Center, Suite 3100, 6406 North IH-35 in Austin. The cost is $6; free to friends of the Center.

In her talk, Forrest will provide a detailed report on her expert testimony in the Kitzmiller v. Dover School Board trial as well as an overview of the history of the “intelligent design” movement. Forrest is a Professor of Philosophy in the Department of History and Political Science at Southeastern Louisiana University; she is also a member of NCSE’s board of directors.

God forbid anyone responsible for the design of the state science curriculum should actually be exposed to both sides of the debate over intelligent design. Actually, as far as science goes, there is no debate, which was really the whole point of the Dover trial.

PBS' Nova covered the trial in a recent documentary. In the Dover trial, Republican Judge John Jones, a Bush appointee, ruled that teaching intelligent design equated to teaching creationism. And the Supreme Court had previously ruled out teaching creationism in public schools because it was religion, not science.

So who was responsible for this latest act of politicization of Texas education?

The call to fire Comer came from Lizzette Reynolds, who previously worked in the U.S. Department of Education. She also served as deputy legislative director for Gov. George W. Bush. She joined the Texas Education Agency as the senior adviser on statewide initiatives in January.

Looks like the TEA is doing a little housecleaning in anticipation of the battle over the science curriculum coming up next year.

Comer's resignation comes just months before the State Board of Education is to begin reviewing the science portion of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, the statewide curriculum that will be used to determine what should be taught in Texas classrooms and what textbooks are bought.

East Lemming Liberal News has a nice summary of the coverage being given this issue.

See also previous post "Will the Texas State Board of Education Oppose Teaching ID?"

Will the Texas State Board of Education Oppose Teaching ID?

Lightseeker at Texas Kaos takes heart in a Houston Chronicle article assessing the views of the Texas State Board of Education members on the teaching of evolution versus intelligent design in the schools. The board is scheduled to revise the science curriculum in the 2007-2008 calendar, and many expect proponents of intelligent design to launch an aggressive campaign to include the teaching of ID in the classroom.

First the good news:

In Interviews with The Dallas Morning News, 10 of the board's 15 members said they wouldn't support requiring the teaching of intelligent design. One board member said she was open to the idea. Four board members didn't respond to the newspaper's phone calls.....

Other board members who said they believe the curriculum should continue to include evolution and not be changed to accommodate intelligent design were: Geraldine "Tincy" Miller, R-Dallas; Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands; Gail Lowe, R-Lampasas; Bob Craig, R-Lubbock; Mavis Knight, D-Dallas; Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio; Lawrence Allen, D-Houston; and Mary Helen Berlanga, D-Corpus Christi.

Note that Gail Lowe, who calls herself a creationist, represents District 14, including Denton County.

And then there is this reassuring quote.

"Creationism and intelligent design don't belong in our science classes," said Board of Education Chairman Don McLeroy, who described himself as a creationist. "Anything taught in science has to have consensus in the science community and intelligent design does not."

It's reassuring, because McElroy's appointment last month by Governor Rick Perry kicked up a firestorm of protest over concerns that he was an anti-science, religious ideologue. We should take McElroy's quote to mean that evolution will be taught in our public schools according to scientific consensus, right?

Maybe not. Here's another quote from the Houston Chron article by McLeroy.

McLeroy, R-College Station, said he doesn't want to change the existing requirement that evolution be taught in high school biology classes. But he joined several of his colleagues in arguing that biology textbooks should cover the weaknesses of the theory of evolution [emphasis added].

The Texas Freedom Network highlighted a speech McLeroy delivered to the Grace Bible Church in 2005.

McLeroy recounted the controversy over teaching evolution during the State Board of Education’s adoption of new biology textbooks in 2003. McLeroy was one of only four members on the 15-member panel who voted to reject the textbooks. Those four members argued that the textbooks failed to discuss what they called the “weaknesses” of evolutionary theory. They were backed by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based organization that opposes evolution and promotes “intelligent design” as an alternative. McLeroy said:

“It was only the four really conservative, orthodox Christians on the board [who] were willing to stand up to the textbooks and say they don’t present the weaknesses of evolution. Amazing."

So don't think for one minute that Perry appointed McLeroy to be chairman of the board with the concession that he not advocate his views on creationism. The "weaknesses" argument is code for ID, which in turn is creationism wrapped up in enough jargon to make a claim that it passes scientific muster. It doesn't, but that's for another post.

TFN leaves us with this warning.

In the 2006 elections, religious conservatives increased their numbers on the state board to eight – a majority. The board is currently overhauling all public school curriculum standards. The board is scheduled to take up revisions to science standards – including standards dealing with evolution – in 2007-08.

Even Lightseeker warns us to "pay attention, even while celebrating this , apparent, step forward."