Science Education across Cultures

[Spacewriter]

In the thread about astronomy coming under attack, Sam raised the point about my personal pages not being in any language except English. Of course since that's the language I speak, that's what I write in, and I consider that most of my readers do also speak it. Finding someone to translate those pages is a problem I have neither the time nor money to tackle (since I pay for my web space out of my own pocket and don't have an institution backing my informal outreach). More to the point, what languages would I choose? Which do I leave out? Will I be able to express the concepts I need to express in each language? Since I only speak English (and some French, and very little Spanish), it would be bordering on professional suicide for me to write everything in several languages and hope that I don't insult anybody in the process.

Over the years, I've run into the language issue in science education, particularly in informal outreach programs, such as the planetarium shows I do. There's no one solution that fits all -- if I translate into Spanish, for example, I have to use a broadcast Spanish (and I don't catch all the nuances of why it's different from say, regular Spanish as it is spoken in Mexico City, for example).

Yet, supposedly, broadcast Spanish is acceptable to most (if not all) of the Spanish speakers in the world. However, in practice, there are some who complain that it's too elitist sounding, and others who say it's a turnoff for them. We've been flat out told that unless we're native speakers of some language, we shouldn't bother to translate our materials -- we should let locals do it. All well and good, but Spanish, for example, has dozens of local dialects. Same with Arabic. The problem could get very complex very fast.

In my dealings with the Native community in New Mexico (which have been ongoing for a few years now), the issues go beyond language differences. Cultural differences are profound, with each side having misconceptions about the others in the process. For example, even though one of the people involved in the process is a native American student, he was also raised in the Anglo world. When I suggested that we translate some of the work we were doing into
Dine, he held up a hand and said that it wouldn't work because the language didn't include concepts we were trying to express. It would be an insult to try and make the language wrap around something that was already complex enough in English, and that indeed, may have been contrary to the Dine language.

As another example, some years ago we had a project at the university that came in for a lot of feedback from different language departments. The idea was to have a forum discussion (taped) between different speakers (who would be portrayed by actors) as if we were doing a radio show. One of the advisors suggested that we have different cultures represented by narrators with different accents -- so, a Spanish accent for the Latino crowd, a French accent, an Irishman, a German, etc. Then the Black Studies department chair asked the advisor, "Well, how would you suggest we portray a black student in a voiceover?"

If you think about it for even a little bit, you can imagine the kinds of negative fallout that would flow from trying to portray a black student on tape -- we'd have been accused of being racist, stereotyping, etc. Yet, it would have stemmed from an honest attempt to be inclusive. All it would have turned out to be was insulting.

We've faced this issue in the past with the materials I create, and each project has to seek its own solution. If you try to accommodate language needs you walk a very, very, very fine line, and it is entirely possible to go into something with all good will and still end up insulting somebody.

In the end, we do the best we can, trying to be sensitive to people's needs. You have to start somewhere. In science education, we'd like to think that the basic concepts of science and inquiry cross all languages and cultures. In practice, it's not so simple, but the National Ed. standards we were discussing in the other thread were a start at trying to make some basic proficiency standards that could be made to work by good teachers in a variety of situations. It was only possible to even come up with those standards through the efforts of a LOT of educators in every state, working together for the students. I have no doubt that a lesson on gravity will be taught by the science teachers -- but when and how they do it is left up to them. The standards are flexible enough to allow for differences in states and students, languages and cultures. But, the bottom line is still that there are certain levels of proficiency required -- how they're achieved is best left to the teachers who know and work with the students.

Cultural issues are important to understand -- there's no question about it.

[Celestial Mechanic]

[Snip!]In my dealings with the Native community in New Mexico (which have been ongoing for a few years now), the issues go beyond language differences. Cultural differences are profound, with each side having misconceptions about the others in the process. For example, even though one of the people involved in the process is a native American student, he was also raised in the Anglo world. When I suggested that we translate some of the work we were doing into Dine, he held up a hand and said that it wouldn't work because the language didn't include concepts we were trying to express. It would be an insult to try and make the language wrap around something that was already complex enough in English, and that indeed, may have been contrary to the Dine language.[Snip!]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be. The words need to be created from other existing words according to the way that Dine builds up other words as needed. It's a safe bet that Dine did not have a word for automobile before its invention (that would have been some trick!), but they probably have a word for it now, probably compounded out of pre-existing words, much like our term "horseless carriage".

I'm reminded of the story I read once about Alexander Graham Bell demonstrating the telephone for the German Kaiser. He was asked what the device was called. Now the name "telephone" already existed and being compounded out of Greek roots would have been understood by the educated in Europe, regardless of language. But knowing of the resurgent nationalist feeling in the newly unified German Empire, Bell coined a German word for it on the spot--"Fernsprecher", an exact literal translation into German, and you will see both words for if, Fernsprecher and Telefon in German to this day.

[Sam5]

[Snip!]In my dealings with the Native community in New Mexico (which have been ongoing for a few years now), the issues go beyond language differences. Cultural differences are profound, with each side having misconceptions about the others in the process. For example, even though one of the people involved in the process is a native American student, he was also raised in the Anglo world. When I suggested that we translate some of the work we were doing into Dine, he held up a hand and said that it wouldn't work because the language didn't include concepts we were trying to express. It would be an insult to try and make the language wrap around something that was already complex enough in English, and that indeed, may have been contrary to the Dine language.[Snip!]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

[papageno]

[Snip!]In my dealings with the Native community in New Mexico (which have been ongoing for a few years now), the issues go beyond language differences. Cultural differences are profound, with each side having misconceptions about the others in the process. For example, even though one of the people involved in the process is a native American student, he was also raised in the Anglo world. When I suggested that we translate some of the work we were doing into Dine, he held up a hand and said that it wouldn't work because the language didn't include concepts we were trying to express. It would be an insult to try and make the language wrap around something that was already complex enough in English, and that indeed, may have been contrary to the Dine language.[Snip!]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

I think that Celestial Mechanic's point is that a language is not set in stone.
People adapt their language to their needs.
If they need to express concepts or refer to objects that have no words in their language, they borrow words from other languages or invent new words.

[Disinfo Agent]

In the thread about astronomy coming under attack, Sam raised the point about my personal pages not being in any language except English. Of course since that's the language I speak, that's what I write in, and I consider that most of my readers do also speak it. Finding someone to translate those pages is a problem I have neither the time nor money to tackle (since I pay for my web space out of my own pocket and don't have an institution backing my informal outreach).

Stick to the languages that you know well.

Over the years, I've run into the language issue in science education, particularly in informal outreach programs, such as the planetarium shows I do. There's no one solution that fits all -- if I translate into Spanish, for example, I have to use a broadcast Spanish (and I don't catch all the nuances of why it's different from say, regular Spanish as it is spoken in Mexico City, for example).

Yet, supposedly, broadcast Spanish is acceptable to most (if not all) of the Spanish speakers in the world. However, in practice, there are some who complain that it's too elitist sounding, and others who say it's a turnoff for them.

:roll:
There are always whiners. Ignore them, I say.

(I bet they don't complain about the elitism of broadcast English.)

We've been flat out told that unless we're native speakers of some language, we shouldn't bother to translate our materials -- we should let locals do it.

Well, you definitely should get someone with formal education in the language in question to do the translation. But I disagree that it has to be a native speaker. Hire an American with higher education in Spanish, if you need to.

All well and good, but Spanish, for example, has dozens of local dialects.

Technical language, though, tends to be quite uniform throughout dialects.

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

Are you serious, or is that irony? :-?

[Celestial Mechanic]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

It's obvious that you read only what you want to read and ignore the rest. Immediately after your quote above I continued:

The words need to be created from other existing words according to the way that Dine builds up other words as needed. It's a safe bet that Dine did not have a word for automobile before its invention (that would have been some trick!), but they probably have a word for it now, probably compounded out of pre-existing words, much like our term "horseless carriage".

How is this an example of "cultural insensitivity"? If they don't have the words, coin them consistent with the practice of the Dine language and get on with it! Insisting that they must learn English in order to learn science is "cultural insensitivity" of the worst sort.

[Spacewriter]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

It's obvious that you read only what you want to read and ignore the rest. Immediately after your quote above I continued:

The words need to be created from other existing words according to the way that Dine builds up other words as needed. It's a safe bet that Dine did not have a word for automobile before its invention (that would have been some trick!), but they probably have a word for it now, probably compounded out of pre-existing words, much like our term "horseless carriage".

How is this an example of "cultural insensitivity"? If they don't have the words, coin them consistent with the practice of the Dine language and get on with it! Insisting that they must learn English in order to learn science is "cultural insensitivity" of the worst sort.

Oh, I agree with that last sentence wholeheartedly. I've had long conversations with the partners in this project I'm advising on and we have all struggled with ways to implement language so that it's culturally sensitive and scientifically accurate. I should say that the partners (all Native American) came to me (and others) for advice on the science aspects of their project, and that they were more than happy to share whatever they could about their respective cultures so that we (jointly as a project) wouldn't make any blunders. Given that most of the kids already know English, the partners pointed out that it was silly to try to make up native words to cover concepts that the kids probably had at school already. Where the cultural aspects came into play was in teaching about the native viewpoint and that was an area where we all learned from each other.

I don't blame Sam for being suspicious, however there's a point where you have to realize that not everybody is the enemy and not every rule or set of standards is a consequence of "White Man's Rule." The BIA didn't make up the laws of physics and understanding celestial mechanics, the force of gravity, and how life sciences work isn't restricted to one race or color of people.

I come about my cultural viewpoints from an intimate family circumstance. My dad was taken from the reservation when he was five (in the late 1920s) years old and forcibly "settled" into an Anglo family. It was an awful experience for him and the families involved as he was only allowed to visit with his birth family a few times after that. He wasn't told the full circumstances of his "adoption" until he was an adult.

As a consequence of this, we were raised with an awareness of things that could go wrong when unthinking people transgressed where they shouldn't. The importance of cultural sensitivity was part of our upbringing. But Daddy would be the first to say that some rules are made for a reason and they must be obeyed. And he never told us that we should distrust anyone based on their skin color, nor make assumptions about their motives based on the same.

If I was less aware I doubt I'd care about the language and cultural issues in the work I do. But, I can't do a good job and NOT be aware of how language is perceived. It's my job. And, we do eventually find ways to work around those issues. The aforementioned Spanish objections to "broadcast" being "elitist" were not the reaction of the majority of Spanish speakers who reviewed and used the work we'd done. The majority was amazed that somebody actually cared enough to translate a science work into Spanish that a lot of people could understand. That happened some years ago -- in the time since then, translations have become more the norm and it's not such an issue, except one of cost, perhaps.

I don't have room here to detail the lengthy discussions I've had with the native partners on the project I advise on, but suffice to say, we've jointly explored a lot of interesting ground, culturally, scientifically, and on a personal level. We all came to the table with the idea that we'd learn from each other, not that we were there to impose one set of ideas on the rest. I was asked to present such things as the science education standards and written language as well as concepts of science that should be covered in the project. Others brought to the table the concepts that imbue the native American viewpoint (at least those groups who were represented -- nobody claimed to speak for all NAs). There were a lot of "aha's" during various conversations when somebody would grasp a concept and say something like, "Okay, but in Dine (or in classical astronomy or in geology, etc... ) we talk about that THIS way... " and then we'd all go on to think of ways to help make the bridge between the science and the culture.

I actually had a similar experience with an exchange student from Zimbabwe several years ago. She was extremely interested in becoming an astronaut, and learned the sky by incorporating all her clan's constellations into the larger mix of constellations we know of today that come from a variety of sources around the world. We had a long series of conversations about what each constellation meant and how they fit with the others. The issue wasn't so much about language as it was about bridging between cultures, realizing that there were important commonalities and differences between hers and ours.

When you come down to it, astronomy is an excellent science to bridge between cultures. We all know the skies and we all have our cultural backgrounds about the skies, and comparing them provides a great deal of chance for mutual understanding.

[Sam5]

I think that Celestial Mechanic's point is that a language is not set in stone.
People adapt their language to their needs.
If they need to express concepts or refer to objects that have no words in their language, they borrow words from other languages or invent new words.

My point is that a couple of million people out here do not want Easterners or federal agents coming out here an telling them, “People adapt their language to their needs.” They don’t like being told what their “needs” are. They’ve been getting this from the feds since the Army came out here in the 1860s and chased them all over the place and put them on reservations and told them what their “needs” were and what they “must” learn, under direct orders of The Great White Father back East in DC. Also, Hispanics who usually have a strong Catholic tradition, who founded this state, who were here in this state before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock, don’t much like the idea of Easterners (English, Anglos) coming out here and telling them what to think. Likewise the Anglos of a long Western and Southern heritage out here don’t like Northeasterners coming out here and calling their Judeo-Christian origin story a “myth” and that they can no longer pray in school or pledge allegiance to the flag, just because some hot-shot Northeasterners don’t want them to do it.

[Sam5]

The words do not exist because there was no need to discuss these concepts. But now that the concepts exist, words must be found, created if need be.

Oh, man, that attitude is not culturally sensitive. You sound just like an Eastern federal BIA guy lecturing the Native Americans back when they were first put on the reservations out here in the late 1860s, about how they were going to learn White Man’s Ways and White Man's Language. That attitude is not welcome out here.

Are you serious, or is that irony? :-?

I am serious. I never would have believed this attitude still prevails out here had I not lived out here for the past 10 years and heard it myself from a lot of local people. The Indians aren’t the only ones who resent the feds from the East. Some of the Mormons do and some of the Anglo Protestants and Catholics do. Keep in mind that the Indians AND the Hispanic Catholics were here first, long before there was a federal government organized in Washington DC. Some of the Indians, such as those at Acoma, Zuni, and other pueblos, are still living in adobe and stone houses that their own ancestors lived in a thousand years ago. It is a little peculiar to see new satellite dishes fastened to the sides of thousand year old adobe homes, but that’s the way it is in some places out here.

[papageno]

I think that Celestial Mechanic's point is that a language is not set in stone.
People adapt their language to their needs.
If they need to express concepts or refer to objects that have no words in their language, they borrow words from other languages or invent new words.

My point is that a couple of million people out here do not want Easterners or federal agents coming out here an telling them, “People adapt their language to their needs.”

[snip!]

I think you are misunderstanding what I said.
Changes in a language do not occur purely because pressure from the outside.
The changes in a language occur because people use it.

An example: what is known as Italian has not changed radically since the 14th century (I can read the Divine Comedy without translation).
That's because it was not commonly spoken.

As I said, a language is not set in stone and people adapt to their needs.

[Sam5]

It's obvious that you read only what you want to read and ignore the rest. Immediately after your quote above I continued:

The words need to be created from other existing words according to the way that Dine builds up other words as needed. It's a safe bet that Dine did not have a word for automobile before its invention (that would have been some trick!), but they probably have a word for it now, probably compounded out of pre-existing words, much like our term "horseless carriage".

How is this an example of "cultural insensitivity"? If they don't have the words, coin them consistent with the practice of the Dine language and get on with it! Insisting that they must learn English in order to learn science is "cultural insensitivity" of the worst sort.

You, who are not Diné, have no right to tell the Diné what words to use, what words to make up, or how to think. If they want to make up a word, they’ll do it, but you don’t come out here and tell them that they will start calling rockets “sticks that fly” or whatever. They don’t like Easterners coming in here and telling them what they will learn and think based on Eastern Anglo standards. They are fed up with that because it has been happening to them since the 1860s. It’s sort of like with the Southerners who have been bossed around by the Northeasterners since the 1860s. They are fed up with it too. Am I not making myself clear on this issue? Are you just not aware that millions of people in the US, of many different ethnic groups and religions, do not want Northeasterners trying to force their beliefs on the free and independent people in the independent states and regions? This is their right under the 1st, 9th, and 10th Amendments. This was their “privilege” and “right” and freedom in this country from 1776 until the 1960s and ‘70s. Now locals all over the country are rebelling against the usurpation and suppression of their legal rights by the Northeasterners during the past 30-40 years.

[ToSeek]

It's obvious that you read only what you want to read and ignore the rest. Immediately after your quote above I continued:

The words need to be created from other existing words according to the way that Dine builds up other words as needed. It's a safe bet that Dine did not have a word for automobile before its invention (that would have been some trick!), but they probably have a word for it now, probably compounded out of pre-existing words, much like our term "horseless carriage".

How is this an example of "cultural insensitivity"? If they don't have the words, coin them consistent with the practice of the Dine language and get on with it! Insisting that they must learn English in order to learn science is "cultural insensitivity" of the worst sort.

You, who are not Diné, have no right to tell the Diné what words to use, what words to make up, or how to think. If they want to make up a word, they’ll do it, but you don’t come out here and tell them that they will start calling rockets “sticks that fly” or whatever.

What are the options, though? If the Diné want to talk about astronautics, either they need to use "rocket" or they need to come up with the equivalent in their own language. Or is there some alternative I haven't considered?

[Disinfo Agent]

Are you serious, or is that irony? :-?

I am serious. I never would have believed this attitude still prevails out here had I not lived out here for the past 10 years and heard it myself from a lot of local people. The Indians aren’t the only ones who resent the feds from the East. Some of the Mormons do and some of the Anglo Protestants and Catholics do. Keep in mind that the Indians AND the Hispanic Catholics were here first, long before there was a federal government organized in Washington DC. Some of the Indians, such as those at Acoma, Zuni, and other pueblos, are still living in adobe and stone houses that their own ancestors lived in a thousand years ago. It is a little peculiar to see new satellite dishes fastened to the sides of thousand year old adobe homes, but that’s the way it is in some places out here.

With the latest posts in this thread, I understand better where you're coming from. However, I think you may indeed have misunderstood Celestial Mechanic's point.

[TriangleMan]

Sometimes languages cannot adapt to new vocabulary very quickly in which case lengthy explanations of a term are needed instead rather than the creation of a new word. As an example the Inuit are very concerned about climate change affecting the arctic but Inuktitut doesn't have a lot of science vocabulary. So researchers have created a glossory of science terms translated into Inuktitut. The glossary appears to be lengthy definitions rather than creating new words but it is also possible that they are phonetically translating the english word as well.

[Celestial Mechanic]

You, who are not Diné, have no right to tell the Diné what words to use, what words to make up, or how to think. If they want to make up a word, they’ll do it, but you don’t come out here and tell them that they will start calling rockets “sticks that fly” or whatever. They don’t like Easterners coming in here and telling them what they will learn and think based on Eastern Anglo standards.

And you, who are also probably not Diné either, have a right to tell me what they think and what they do and do not like?

They are fed up with that because it has been happening to them since the 1860s. It’s sort of like with the Southerners who have been bossed around by the Northeasterners since the 1860s.

And I guess slavery is just hunky-dory with you? OK. :roll:

They are fed up with it too. Am I not making myself clear on this issue? Are you just not aware that millions of people in the US, of many different ethnic groups and religions, do not want Northeasterners trying to force their beliefs on the free and independent people in the independent states and regions?

I'm not a "Northeasterner", I'm from Wisconsin (the cheesiest state in the Union! ). But you know something? I don't like publishers having to dumb down their textbooks so that they will satisfy the Gablers and be sold in Texas. I don't like "disclaimers" being put into biology textbooks. Is this not "trying to force ... beliefs on the free and independent people in the independent states and regions"?

This is their right under the 1st, 9th, and 10th Amendments. This was their “privilege” and “right” and freedom in this country from 1776 until the 1960s and ‘70s. Now locals all over the country are rebelling against the usurpation and suppression of their legal rights by the Northeasterners during the past 30-40 years.

Well, good for you. If the people of New Mexico desire it, they can stop teaching science, fall behind even farther economically and turn the state into a large trailer park for all I care. Just don't whine to me.

[Sam5]

With the latest posts in this thread, I understand better where you're coming from. However, I think you may indeed have misunderstood Celestial Mechanic's point.

When I first came out here 10 years ago, even I had the same old Northeastern attitude, even though I came here from the South. My attitude was, “We need to educate these people in the ways of the modern world.”

Well, I gradually learned that such a thing is not so simple, and is often not of interest to their parents or the kids.

Over the years I’ve come to see their side of the issue, but I’ve also seen other unexpected things, ways, that could be used to educate them without offending them or bossing them around.

For example, I think the schools push them too hard and fast to learn a lot of complicated stuff that they have no interest in learning. And it seems to me that the local schools are trying to force some “national” standards on them, because the “national” educators seem to be trying to keep up with and get out ahead of countries like Japan, China, and Germany, regarding the pace of educational learning and technology.

The resistance to and unsuccessfulness of the fast pace of the “national standards” also includes most of the local Hispanics and the Anglos (that’s what they call “white” people out here). Out in this slow-paced world, from West Texas all the way to Southeastern California, and North up to Montana and Idaho, the place of life out here is rather slow. So the kids grow up thinking sort of slowly, then all of a sudden BAM! they are thrown into the fast paced schools and they start falling behind immediately.

But I’ve noticed that a lot of the kids out here have computer games, and most of the games have various levels of complexity, such as Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, etc. Well, the slow kids start off on Level 1, and within a couple of years they are experts at Level 1 and so they go up to Level 2, 3, 4, etc.

But the school classes are all as if they start out each year on Level 5, and the kids just can’t keep up with it. For example, I know a kid who was taught some algebra in the 5th grade. He had no idea what that was all about. I wasn’t taught algebra in the 1950s until the 10th grade. It seems to me that the schools are pushing difficult and tough stuff on kids that are too young and slow to learn it, while, in my opinion, the schools should use a technique more like the computer games, that is, make learning a game, and let the kids stay on Level 1 as long as they need to stay there. Within a few years most of them will naturally go up to Level 5. But to teach algebra in the 5th grade in a slow-moving and slow-thinking state, is, I think, a really a stupid idea. And many of the other classes, such as history, biology, etc. are just the same.

They are trying to teach these kids high-school and university-level stuff in the 4th, 5th, and 6th grade, and most of them can’t keep up with it. I had trouble with algebra in the 10th grade, and I know that most of these local kids (of all the local races, Hispanic, Anglo, and Indian) have no idea what it is and what the need for it is. Only the really bright kids can keep up with it, such as the ones who will eventually become doctors, lawyers, scientists, and CEOs. But the average kids, as much as 80% of them or more in some school systems, just can’t keep up with it. Some of the homework the neighbor kid brings home, takes three of us adults to work on it, his two parents and me working on my computer trying to look up the answers to his homework questions. Sometimes I get the answers off the internet, I type them up and give them to his parents, they have him re-write the answers in his own handwriting, and he turns that in so he won’t get a bad grade in school. In the meantime, while we’re doing his homework, he’s in on his Nintendo and Play Station 2 games, playing up at levels we old-timers don’t understand.

Instead of trying to teach him algebra in the 5th grade, because Japanese kids can learn algebra in the 5th grade, they should have been teaching him basic arithmetic over and over again for the first 4-5 grades. He never could do the algebra and he still can’t do the basic arithmetic. But the “national standards” people have the “push, push, push” philosophy, and the idea of teaching basic arithmetic to school kids for 4 or 5 years in a row is abhorrent to them. Consequently, many of the kids out here never learn the algebra and the also never learn the basic arithmetic.

Several times we have gone to stores and looked on the internet to find some “educational” games the kid can play on his Nintendo and Play Station, but there aren’t any. There are games of car races, football, wrestling, monster killing, etc., but no math or spelling games, no history or biology or science games.

Do you know what kind of skills these games are teaching the kids of America? How to operate airplanes, tanks, machineguns, etc. I.E. they are teaching them how to be soldiers and how to go to war and operate modern military computer equipment, while the schools are teaching them almost nothing that will be useful in life when they graduate.

[Taibak]

Taking what Celestial Mechanic said further, one of the most important forces driving curricula right now is the publishing industry. Rather than publish 50 different textbooks, one for each state's educational standards, publishers tend to write for the largest markets out there: Texas and California. It's still up to local school boards to choose which textbooks they're going to use, but publishers can make much more money pandering to Texas school boards than Massachusetts school boards and, as such, are much more likely to respond to input from Texans than us Massachusetts Yankees. Now, I agree that cities have the rights to control their own school systems, but what happens if a school system in Massachusetts wants to use those 'Eastern Anglo standards,' but is hindered because they can't find a publisher that caters to the Northeastern market?

[Sam5]

And you, who are also probably not Diné either, have a right to tell me what they think and what they do and do not like?

I don’t issue my opinions to you as Federal Edicts that must be obeyed. I merely express my opinions. I don’t send feds to your house or your town to insist that all of you there must adopt my opinions. But the federal “national standards” people have the attitude that they are “always right”, they “must be obeyed”, and their ideas must be enforced by federal law. I’ve actually seen federal school issues handled by means of a President sending federal troops into small towns, armed with live ammunition and fixed bayonets, and declaring military martial law. I’ve seen this. I lived through it 40 years ago. Today the feds use less obvious and more subtle means to enforce their royal edicts. For example, there are such things as federal court orders that must be obeyed, the violation of which involve $10,000 a day fines and federal imprisonment of the school superintendents, school board members, principles, teachers, and even parents. Back in the ‘70s there were parents who were threatened with imprisonment and $10,000 a day fines if they tried to get their kids out of schools where federal busing was mandated.


Today, states that fail to follow some of the “federal standards” can have their annual federal grants withheld, their school superintendents sent to jail and fined. One of the “arm twisting” techniques the feds use is to tax locals and then turn around and give some of that tax money back to the local schools in the form of “grants” which the schools used to pay teachers, construct buildings, and buy books. But if the schools don’t follow the federal edicts, the grants can be withheld and the schools can lose millions of dollars, which was stolen by the feds from the local residents to start with.

[Sam5]

Taking what Celestial Mechanic said further, one of the most important forces driving curricula right now is the publishing industry. Rather than publish 50 different textbooks, one for each state's educational standards, publishers tend to write for the largest markets out there: Texas and California. It's still up to local school boards to choose which textbooks they're going to use, but publishers can make much more money pandering to Texas school boards than Massachusetts school boards and, as such, are much more likely to respond to input from Texans than us Massachusetts Yankees. Now, I agree that cities have the rights to control their own school systems, but what happens if a school system in Massachusetts wants to use those 'Eastern Anglo standards,' but is hindered because they can't find a publisher that caters to the Northeastern market?

I hardly think there is a dearth of textbooks written from the Northeastern perspective. Surely you Northeasterners have resources other than textbooks published in Dallas and Houston.

For example, I have a textbook here titled “Anthropology, A Global Perspective”. Published by Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1992.

On page 23 we have the headline: “Western Origin Myths”, and we have the text:

“The most important cosmological tradition af-
fecting Western views of Creation stems from the
Book of Genesis in the Bible. This Judaic tradition
describes how God created the cosmos. IT begins
with "In the beginning God created heaven and
the earth," emphasizing that the Creation took 6
days during which light, heaven, earth, vegeta-
tion, sun, moon, stars, birds, fish, animals, and
humans originated. In Genesis the creator is given
a name, Yahweh, and is responsible for creating
man, Adam, from "dust" and placing him in the
Garden of Eden. Adam names the animals and
birds. Woman, Eve, is created from Adam's rib.
Later, as Christianity spread throughout Europe,
this biblical cosmology became the dominant ori-
gin myth in the Western world.”

Now, you tell me how many Protestant and Catholic parents all across the US, the millions of them in Texas, the entire Southeast, Kansas, the Southwest, the Midwest, and other states want their children’s public schools to teach their kids that the Bible contains a “myth” of a creation story?

Textbooks didn’t contain this atheist propaganda when I was in school back in the 1950s, and millions of parents across the country today don’t think it is appropriate for this type of propaganda to be published in public school textbooks today.

This type of prejudiced, intolerant, myopic, anti-multi-cultural, and even racist anti-religion material has no place in a public school textbook on “anthropology”. The kids already know what their ethnic group’s “origin story” is. They don’t need a Prentice Hall textbook published in New Jersey to tell them that that story is a “myth”. These are the types of atheist messages contained in Northeastern textbooks in the 1970s, ‘80s, and ‘90s that brought about the backlash all across American and the demand and need for better textbooks to be published outside of the Northeastern propaganda zone. Northeastern publishers are reaping what they sowed in past decades.

[Ilya]

Sam5, whatever cultural insensitivity bee has bitten you, it is not present on this forum. No one here is telling you to "adapt English words" NOR to "invent Dineh words" for rockets. All anyone says is that if Dineh want to discuss rocketry (and it is entirely within they right NOT to do so), they will have to come up with SOME word for "rocket". Hebrew language once did not have a word for rocket either, or for an isosceles triangle for that matter. Nowdays it does, because at least some Israelies are interested in these subjects, and do not want to switch to English -- or to Russian, -- when discussing them. How exactly is this notion insulting to you?

[Spacewriter]

Sam,


After reading all your messages, I have to ask what it is you have against atheists? We seem to come in for blame about everything you think is wrong in society. I've learned a great deal by reading your msgs, and one of the most important lessons is that cultural insensitivity isn't a one-way street.

I also think that we've pushed this discussion up against the hard boundaries against political and religious discussions in this forum. We've all bent over backwards to accommodate your view, and I don't think any of us has said anything that warrants such harsh responses from you.

Nor do I think that you speak for those millions of parents you mentioned in the previous msg who you claim don't want their kids being taught some creation "myth" in the Bible. We're not a homogenous culture here in the U.S. Not every Protestant/Catholic/Jewish/Dine/Muslim-American/etc. parent is using the Bible/Koran/cultural beliefs to frame their child's education to the exclusion of science, art, literature, and so on. For you to sort all the rest of us into exclusive bins of your own making is just as culturally insensitive as you seem to think we've all been against your people and the people of your state. Nobody's been that here.

FWIW, I've traveled, lived in, and worked with many people in New Mexico, of many different backgrounds, and I never met one who didn't want the best for their children and their people, even if it meant exposing themselves and their children to some ideas that weren't in the mainstream of their culture. That's part of education and growth as a person, no matter what your culture, religion, political persuasion, etc.

It's clear to me that you and/or the people you live with had some bad experiences, but it's terribly unfair of you to treat all of us HERE as if we had something to do with that experience. We're supposed to be here to communicate and share information and I plan to continue doing that.

And now, once again, I'll bow out because I'm not interested in a political-religious argument.

Best wishes to you and I hope that good things flow for you and your people.

[Celestial Mechanic]

[Snip!]On page 23 we have the headline: “Western Origin Myths”, and we have the text:

“The most important cosmological tradition af-
fecting Western views of Creation ... [Snip!]

Now, you tell me how many Protestant and Catholic parents all across the US, the millions of them in Texas, the entire Southeast, Kansas, the Southwest, the Midwest, and other states want their children’s public schools to teach their kids that the Bible contains a “myth” of a creation story?

Well, somebody has to tell them sooner or later it is a myth. You don't actually believe the universe was created literally the way the book of Genesis says, do you?

One important fact about ancient history: all ancient history starts in myth and eventually, gradually, leads to verifiable facts. The difficult part is judging at what point the transition from myth to history takes place. I read a history of Rome once and all through the sixth to the fourth centuries BCE there were constant qualifications about the chronicles saying such and such but we are not sure how trustworthy the report is. You don't believe in Romulus and Remus, I hope.

Textbooks didn’t contain this atheist propaganda when I was in school back in the 1950s, and millions of parents across the country today don’t think it is appropriate for this type of propaganda to be published in public school textbooks today.

Millions of parents don't think that theist propaganda and disclaimers should be in the textbooks either.

This type of prejudiced, intolerant, myopic, anti-multi-cultural, and even racist anti-religion material has no place in a public school textbook on “anthropology”. The kids already know what their ethnic group’s “origin story” is. They don’t need a Prentice Hall textbook published in New Jersey to tell them that that story is a “myth”. These are the types of atheist messages contained in Northeastern textbooks in the 1970s, ‘80s, and ‘90s that brought about the backlash all across American and the demand and need for better textbooks to be published outside of the Northeastern propaganda zone. Northeastern publishers are reaping what they sowed in past decades.

It is not "prejudiced, intolerant, myopic, anti-multi-cultural, and even racist anti-religion" to note that not every jot and tittle of the predominant scriptures is factually and literally true. This does not detract from the literary value of the myths and the important lessons in ethics that these scriptures can teach.

[Klausnh]

Sam5, your anger towards us "Northeasterners" is misplaced. There are plenty of us "Northeasterners" who think that the federal government is overstepping it's authority, not just on education issues.

A few thinks to think about:
The man who came up with No Child Left Behind is not from the Northeast and has strong support from the people of the Midwest and South.
IIRC, Madalyn Murray O'Hair was from Texas.
Because this is venturing into politics, I'm not going to respond here. Any further discussion can be in the FWIS forum or via PM.

[Gillianren]

my Catholic mother, like the Pope, believes in evolution. are they atheists?

and you know, I'd suspect that kid didn't learn basic arithmetic because instead of doing his own homework, he plays video games while adults do it for him.

[Van Rijn]

As a note, I never lived in the Northeast, I was born in California, I have lived in the mid-West, went to school in Albuquerque and live in California again. I don't recall any "Atheist" teaching in any of the public schools I attended, ever.

Likewise the Anglos of a long Western and Southern heritage out here don’t like Northeasterners coming out here and calling their Judeo-Christian origin story a “myth” and that they can no longer pray in school or pledge allegiance to the flag, just because some hot-shot Northeasterners don’t want them to do it.

This is getting very political, so I'll just note that it is quite legal to pray in school. The issue is led, organized prayer in a public school. Even then, there are exceptions (study clubs). As a Westerner, I do believe that government organizations should not show favortism towards personal philosophical beliefs, or castigate those with differing beliefs.

[Sam5]

Well, somebody has to tell them sooner or later it is a myth. You don't actually believe the universe was created literally the way the book of Genesis says, do you?

Study ancient literature. Learn what “metaphors” and “similes” are.

[Celestial Mechanic]

Well, somebody has to tell them sooner or later it is a myth. You don't actually believe the universe was created literally the way the book of Genesis says, do you?

Study ancient literature. Learn what “metaphors” and “similes” are.

I already know what metaphors and similes are. However I doubt that the people who want to ram Genesis down our throats as a science text understand the difference -- and even if they did, that they would settle for Genesis being described as a collection of metaphors and similes of how the world was created.

Do you think Genesis is a collection of metaphors and similes of how the universe was created? "Let there be light" is not a bad poetic description of the big bang. But it is only that. The rest of what follows in the creation myth (either one, there are two of them in them in the book of Genesis, take your pick) is in the wrong order and amounts to uninformed guess-work. Still has some literary value, though.

[Sam5]

I already know what metaphors and similes are. However I doubt that the people who want to ram Genesis down our throats as a science text understand the difference -- and even if they did, that they would settle for Genesis being described as a collection of metaphors and similes of how the world was created.

I’ve explained to you several times already. There was none of this 6000-year stuff in the 1940s, ‘50s, and early ‘60s when I went to school, and there was no push to “atheize” the national textbooks then either.

Then in the 1970s, ‘80s, and ‘90s, this type of stuff started being published in textbooks published in the Northeast:

“Anthropology, A Global Perspective”. Published by Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1992.

On page 23 we have the headline: “Western Origin Myths”, and we have the text:

“The most important cosmological tradition af-
fecting Western views of Creation stems from the
Book of Genesis in the Bible. This Judaic tradition
describes how God created the cosmos. IT begins
with "In the beginning God created heaven and
the earth," emphasizing that the Creation took 6
days during which light, heaven, earth, vegeta-
tion, sun, moon, stars, birds, fish, animals, and
humans originated. In Genesis the creator is given
a name, Yahweh, and is responsible for creating
man, Adam, from "dust" and placing him in the
Garden of Eden. Adam names the animals and
birds. Woman, Eve, is created from Adam's rib.
Later, as Christianity spread throughout Europe,
this biblical cosmology became the dominant ori-
gin myth in the Western world.”

And so the people outside the Northeast (and the West Coast) began to react to this type of propaganda in school textbooks. This is what has brought on this problem, along with nonsense “scientific papers” like this:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/0008/0008040.pdf

We didn’t have these problems in schools until these two things started happening. We didn’t start this. We were minding our own business back in the '40s, ‘50s and ‘60s, then the feds and the Northeasterners stepped in and started dictating what our schools would teach.

Now, you tell me how many Protestant and Catholic parents, how many Native Americans and the Hispanics, Asians and the Arabs, and the others who have various cultural “origin” stories taught to them by their older family members, all across the US, the millions of them in Texas, the entire Southeast, Kansas, the Southwest, the Midwest, New Mexico, Arizona, and many other states, want their children’s public schools and textbooks to teach their kids that the Bible or other “origin” books and traditional stories contains a “myths”? That’s nobody in New Jersey’s business to try to push that atheistic baloney on the rest of the US state school systems. They can teach that in New Jersey if they want to, but don’t try to push it out here.

Let’s do it this way.... you lobby the school boards in Wisconsin for what you want taught, and I’ll lobby the New Mexico school boards for what I want taught. I’ll not try to lobby the school boards in Wisconsin. Ok?

[Gillianren]

technically, they are myths. this is me speaking as an English major, here, and I'm going to try to leave my religion out of it.

a myth is a story created by a culture to explain how things happened. note, nothing in that says they aren't true, exactly, just that they were created by a culture. and since the Bible was written by humans, whether you believe it was Moses or the scribes of David or whatever, that means it was created by a culture. were they inspired by God? not the point. certainly errors in transcription can happen over a few thousand years.

if you want your child to learn about your religion, that's your decision. your personal decision. however, you do not have the right to impose that decision on others. by definition, all cultures' creation stories are myths, because they had no way of testing them. the difference between, say, the Big Bang theory and the Babylonian creation myth, say (http://campus.northpark.edu/history/...nCreation.html), is that there is evidence of one, whereas we've never, say, found Marduk's war weapons.

there are atheists in the South, you know. and Hindus, and Buddhists, and even Pagans. I'm sure even quite a lot of the Christians are aware that their religion is faith, not science.

[Celestial Mechanic]

[Snip!]Now, you tell me how many Protestant and Catholic parents, how many Native Americans and the Hispanics, Asians and the Arabs, and the others who have various cultural “origin” stories taught to them by their older family members, all across the US, the millions of them in Texas, the entire Southeast, Kansas, the Southwest, the Midwest, New Mexico, Arizona, and many other states, want their children’s public schools and textbooks to teach their kids that the Bible or other “origin” books and traditional stories contains a “myths”?

It's the twenty-first century, Sam5. Somebody has got to tell them. If the validity of a scripture rests not on its message, but on every single jot and tittle being infallibly unerrant, then that scripture is invalid, because in countless ways portions of our favorite scriptures are wrong. This still does not detract from the literary and ethical value of said scriptures. They just should not be used as science texts.

That’s nobody in New Jersey’s business to try to push that atheistic baloney on the rest of the US state school systems. They can teach that in New Jersey if they want to, but don’t try to push it out here.

It is also nobody in Texas or New Mexico's business to try to push that theistic baloney on the rest of the US state school systems, such as the dumbed-down texts being published to appease the Gablers.

Let’s do it this way.... you lobby the school boards in Wisconsin for what you want taught, and I’ll lobby the New Mexico school boards for what I want taught. I’ll not try to lobby the school boards in Wisconsin. Ok?

As long as the Gablers have a disproportionate degree of influence on the textbooks of this country, it will be difficult for me to lobby for the textbooks I would like to see in my state's schools.