Josh Rosenau

Josh Rosenau just spoke, and boy was he brilliant! I felt like I was racing, but I'm told that I didn't trip over myself the way Casey did. I've got tape of the whole thing, so we'll see shortly.

Here's what I said:

Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, thank you for the chance to speak with you about the draft science TEKS.

The science TEKS on the books now were given _an F_ in a 2005 survey of state science standards by the politically conservative Thomas Fordham Institute, noting that "they produce breadth of assertion instead of depth of understanding."

The TEKS presented by your expert writing committees addressed many of those problems. For instance, they replaced inaccurate and misleading references to "strengths and weaknesses" with a more accurate description of the scientific process.

On behalf of the students, parents, teachers, and scientists represented by the National Center for Science Education, thank you for voting to uphold that decision. You showed the respect this body has for the expertise of Texan scientists and educators.

I am not alone in praising that decision. I am proud to present you with these letters and statements signed by over 60 scientific and educational societies, all thanking you for listening to the experts on your writing committees about leaving "weaknesses" out of the standards. I know of no such society opposing that decision.

I am confident you will show the same respect for these scientists' and teachers' concerns over some amendments which you passed in January.

Fifty-four societies, from the American Institute for Biological Sciences and the National Science Teachers Association to the Biotechnology Institute and the Society of Sedimentary Geology signed a statement drafted by NCSE urging you to remove and reject amendments which single out evolution for scrutiny beyond that applied to other scientific theories, or which inaccurately and misleadingly describing these ideas as scientifically controversial. We're especially concerned by references to "sudden appearance," which may sound confusingly similar to creationist rhetoric about "abrupt appearance" to the untrained ears of a student, just as references elsewhere to "arguments against universal common descent" may be taken as a call for creationist claims that go beyond the standards' clear statement about the limits of science.

I'd be happy to go into further details of my concerns about these amendments if you have any questions.

The National Center for Science Education and these many scientific societies urge the Board to delay or reject outright any further amendments which have not been reviewed by your writing committees and the community of Texas scientists and educators. Do not be distracted by discredited creationist claims such as that microbes are irreducibly complex or that the Cambrian Explosion is inexplicable. Do not single out evolution or related concepts in geoscience for scrutiny beyond that given to every other scientific topic.

Texas students _deserve_ a world-class education, and this revision process could move them toward that goal, … or hold them back. Please, listen to the voices of scientists and educators, listen to the writing committees you chose, and restore and protect honest science in the TEKS.

To learn more about the societies signing that statement, check out NCSE's website.

I got some good questions from Tincey Miller, Lawrence Allen, and Ken Mercer.

More like this

Over 50 scientific societies representing hundreds of thousands of American scientists today publicly urged the Texas Board of Education to support accurate science education.... From the National Center for Science Education Over 50 scientific societies representing hundreds of thousands of…
Berlanga and Nuñez voted against the final TEKS, the other 13 voted to approve them. Texas has new science standards. Those standards are better than the old ones, but those old standards really did suck. As the Fordham Institute put it, giving the standards an F in 2005, "Thematic unities, so…
John West is gloating about the new Texas science standards, and in doing so, he's lost track of the truth: Evolutionists typically cast themselves as the champions of secular reason against superstition, but in Texas they tried to inject religion into the debate at every turn. Indeed, this past…
It's the Discovery Institute's Rob Crowther, of course! I'm in Texas right now, gearing up for the second round of science standards hearings. I'll be testifying 2nd tomorrow, right after what looks to be a very impressive news conference. Anyway, Crowther, Disco. DJ, is upset that people…

Awesome! Thank you! I'm sooo glad we had you waiting in the wings and didn't expend all of NCSE's testimony in the first hearing.

Excellent, Josh! Let's hope a bit of sense prevails....

Thanks Josh!
I was listening online, but didn't get to hear your testimony. Though I heard many others including Dr. Scott's. Though I had a bad feeling about the progression of the entire thing. I guess it didn't turn out as bad as it could have, though we could have done without the impromptu changes to the TEKS as "strengths and weaknesses" was voted down.