Liveblogging Texas, day 2, part 6

Dunbar proposes that old TEKS be revise to say:

Analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, experimental and observational reasoning and problem solving by examining scientific evidence supportive and not supportive of those explanations.

This adds the word "critique," and the bit at the end. She says the last bit just quotes Wetherington, but he's withdrawn that idea.

Hardy: Vote against because Wetherington opposes.

Leo: Cites his testimony.

But he withdrew that.

Knight: This language opens up too many problems. Oppose.

Nuñez is back.

Craig: Don't amend the draft. Leave it alone.

Mercer: That's all hearsay!

Knight: Is this a court of law?

Cargill: This is clearer. Better for teachers. "It's OK if it doesn't support evolution."

Dunbar: Doesn't know what happened outside, knows that he said in testimony. Quotes Wetherington saying: "I think adding that would be superfluous," and other stuff too. She takes this as supportive. Voting against would take away academic freedom. Wants to call the vote.

Hardy: "I believe my integrity has been impugned." She spoke with him and others about some sort of compromise language. He didn't like the idea. "I do not appreciate that anyone would question" my speaking to the reviewer I appointed.

Vote: 7-8, amendment fails.

Cargill wants to amend Earth and Space Science.

More like this

Dunbar offers a new amendment to the fraught 3A, formerly the "strengths and weaknesses" language. It would now read: analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations in all fields of science by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning and experimental and observational testing, by…
You can listen along with me at: As before, board comments are in blue. Rose Banzhas, speaking for herself but also an environmental educator: Environmental education matters. As an outdoor educator, I know this matters. McLeroy keeps asking people if they're…
Dunbar jumped in line, and is trying to reinsert a new 7(B), slightly varied from the one just stricken. "analyze and evaluate the sufficiency of scientific explanations concerning any data of sudden appearance, stasis, and the sequential nature of groups in the fossil record." Allen likes it…
Peter Johnston, parent, fmr. SBOE candidate, lawyer: Teach S&W. History of science shows that we aren't all objective. "Powers that be in science … resist change." Difficult to see outside the box. Maundering on Kuhn. Dunbar: "Mrs. Scott." It's "Dr.," dammit. What's the deal with…