Freshwater: Dec 3 & 4, 2009, sessions

| 72 Comments

The administrative hearing on the termination of John Freshwater as a middle school science teacher in Mt. Vernon, Ohio, resumed on December 3, with truncated sessions both the 3rd and 4th. The sole witness heard on the 3rd was Ellen Button, a middle school science teacher, and the sole witness on the 4th was William White, the middle school principal. I’ll put it all below the fold.

December 3

The session on the 3rd was shortened by a two-hour wait in the morning for subpoenaed (by Freshwater’s attorney) text books to be gathered and transported from the middle school to the hearing room.

Elle Button Direct Examination

The sole witness was Elle Button, an 8th grade science teacher in the Mt. Vernon middle school, whose daughter Kate, a former student in Freshwater’s class, testified earlier in the hearing. Recall that Kate complained to her mother about several aspects of Freshwater’s teaching of evolution, and provided her mother with several handouts of questionable content. One handout, for example, implied that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time (perhaps this one or this one or adaptations of one or the other. The second includes reference to dragons, which was in one of the handouts).

To some extent I’ll summarize salient parts of Button’s testimony rather than provide a Q&A-style account, since Hamilton’s questions tend to skip around. Some things I flat missed – Button was occasionally very soft spoken and was inaudible to the gallery. Pam Schehl has a very good 500-word summary (with a truly awful headline!) in the Mt. Vernon News to which I commend your attention.

In part of her testimony, Hamilton questioned Button about various aspects of science, paying attention to controversial topics students raise in class. Button testified that students had questions about fossils and evolution, about the age of the universe and Big Bang theory. Asked how many scientific theories of the formation of the universe there are besides Big Bang theory, Button thought there were more but couldn’t name any. Asked if Big Bang theory was controversial, she replied it was not controversial in science.

Asked if both evolution and Big Bang were theories, she affirmed it. Asked for a definition of theory, my impression is that she summarized it pretty well, though I didn’t get it transcribed because my pen was running dry and I was borrowing a replacement from one of the attorneys. Asked if a scientific theory was absolute truth, she responded that it was not, but was used until being replaced by a better one. Button agreed that kids raise all kinds of questions, and that they don’t necessarily agree with what’s being taught.

Asked about the scientific method, Button outlined the stock sequence: get an idea or ask a question, define a testable hypothesis, design an experiment or study, gather the data, analyze the data, and interpret data. She’s headed the local school science fair for years and has that style down pat.

Hamilton pushed on the theory/law distinction, operating on the ‘laws are higher than theories’ notion. Button agreed with Hamilton’s statement that “The scientific method is designed to constantly evaluate ideas until they become a law, right?” Asked that a scientific law is, she said it was something known to be true. “Indisputable?” She answered, “yes.” Hamilton asked if there is a “scientific law of evolution.” She replied not that she knows of.

Hamilton asked if she was familiar with the recent finding of soft tissue in dinosaur fossils. She is. Asked further about it, she said it was of great interest and further research was going on. Asked, she said students do bring it up. She testified that most controversial issues are brought up by students.

She agreed that teachers can use supplemental materials both from the text published and outside sources to reinforce the teaching of what’s required by the standards.

Both of Button’s daughters, Mary and Kate, had Freshwater for 8th grade science and apparently had different experiences, or at least responded differently to them. Mary, the eldest, made no remarks about Freshwater’s teaching to her mother, while Kate questioned a number of content claims made by Freshwater and asked her mother about some of the material Freshwater was teaching. Button attributed that difference to the different personalities of the two. Kate, Button testified, would question teachers when she thought something was amiss. Button testified that Freshwater was the only 8th grade teacher she had questions about.

There was a long series of questions about her experience and training with the Tesla coil. She used it solely on inanimate objects, the gas-filled tubes that glow with different colors when the coil ionizes the gases. She has never used it on herself or a student and has never seen it used on a student. If students asked for it to be used on them she would refuse. Asked if it spooked or scared her, she replied, “No, it’s crazy.” When Ian Watson, the then-president of the Board of Education asked her to zap him with it she declined to do so, citing safety and health questions about that sort of use.

She testified that she probably learned to use it from another teacher when she came to the middle school,probably from Jeff George, a now-retired teacher. She was aware that George occasionally touched his own tongue and those of students with the arc from the Tesla coil. (See above: crazy.) Late edit: I should make it clear that Button didn’t testify about this from direct knowledge of George touching his or students’ tongues; that testimony was based on reports she heard from students, and from other teachers after all the Freshwater hoorah was in progress.

She also testified that she found an instruction manual– a pamphlet–for the Tesla coil in a drawer sometime after the Freshwater affair blew up, and turned it in the the middle school administration. This is the first mention of any such document in the hearing; previous witnesses, including Freshwater, have testified they weren’t aware of an instructions for the device.

Hamilton asked if she knew of religious items in any middle school classrooms. She identified the posters with scripture in Freshwater’s room. She didn’t recall seeing religious displays in other teachers’ rooms. She testified that at the time she wasn’t concerned enough about the religious items in Freshwater’s classroom to pull her daughters from it.

Hamilton turned to Freshwater’s 2003 proposal for the district to adopt the Intelligent Design Network’s “Objective Origins Policy.” She was at the meeting of the science curriculum committee that rejected it,but didn’t recall the discussion in that committee. She also attended at least one board meeting on it. She testified that it appeared to her that it was an effort to inject intelligent design into the curriculum. Shown the actual proposal, and that it didn’t include the words “Intelligent design,” she said that she still felt it was an effort to smuggle (my word) it in. Hamilton has pushed this idea that there’s no explicit mention of intelligent design or creationism in Freshwater’s materials a couple of times in his questioning over the course of the hearing. My favorite analogy here is that you can take the label off a jar of pickles but it’s still a jar of pickles.

(Parenthetically, a good deal of Hamilton’s questioning rests on, or presupposes, a sort of deification of text in which the words used to describe something are themselves the defining characteristic of the thing, rather than the substance of the thing itself being relevant. It’s consistent with the emphasis on the physical book–even the bibliolatry–evinced by those who are hyper-concerned about being able to have and display their Bibles in the workplace. Some of Freshwater’s remarks in the hearing about the Bible being his “inspiration” have that flavor. From all appearances and given the context, he is referring to the presence of the actual physical Bible, not its content or meaning. I’ve almost had the impression that it’s a sort of rabbit foot for him!)

Button testified that she was aware that the state finally removed the ‘critical analysis of evolution’ language from the state standards in 2006.

Hamilton spent some time on the relative Ohio Achievement Test scores of Freshwater and Button and their class composition. Andrew Thompson, another middle school teacher, had earlier testified that he had done an analysis of class composition that showed that Freshwater had more students on Individual Educational Plans (at risk students) than other middle school science teachers, but nevertheless his students scored highest on the life sciences portion of the OAT. Throughout the hearing Hamilton has been arguing that those test scores imply that Freshwater is a superior science teacher. It has not (yet) been made clear in testimony that the differences in test score means tells us nothing about Freshwater’s teaching, since (a) the test is over material from grades 6-8, not just Freshwater’s class; (b) we don’t have good information on the method of assigning students or any subject matching data across classes; and (c) we have no information on the variability of test scores by means of which to evaluate the differences statistically. Under those circumstances the mean differences are uninterpretable and Mr. Thompson therefore flunks elementary research design.

We then spent a couple of hours with three of the text books used in 8th grade science for the last five or so years. We learned that she doesn’t teach the astronomy text’s section on the beginning and end of the universe, because it’s not in the standards. Asked how she responds when students ask about it, she replied that it’s a hypothetical question – she doesn’t recall it arising. She testifed that kids ask about the age of the universe, though. Asked, she said the solar system is ~4,5 billion years old but doesn’t recall how old the universe is–“Forever? I don’t know.”

Moving to the “Cells, Heredity, and Classification” (life sciences) text, she was asked about the language in a section on geological eras about the chemical origin of life. That’s not in her standards,and she didn’t recall students asking about it.

Asked if kids ask, “Hey, the Bible says the earth was created by God,” she said that while students don’t typically ask in that particular form, she responds to questions in that area by saying (paraphrased) that ‘this is science and what you need to learn in this class.’

Raising the Ptolemaic to Copernican shift in theories of the structure of the solar system, Hamilton asked if it is possible that sometimes theories are wrong. She agreed.

Hamilton asked if Freshwater could answer students’ questions that challenge carbon dating or radiometric dating. She replied yes. Hamilton asked if she was aware of the formation of coal in the Mt. St. Helen’s eruption. She was not.

Hamilton noted that in the investigators’ report she had said she didn’t teach evolution in 2007-8 and asked why she hadn’t. She replied she had time just to get to some natural selection and change over time, but didn’t have time to cover it in the depth she normally does.

We spent some time on a poster that had apparently been in former Director of Curriculum Lynda Weston’s office that had a cartoon picture of a dinosaur with a speech balloon saying “I went extinct because I wouldn’t read.” We slogged through a series of questions about whether 8th graders would take that literally, whether Weston meant it to be taken literally, and whether one would need to ask Weston in order to figure out what it meant. This was in aid of Hamilton’s effort to establish that a symbolic display is uninterpretable without context, and the best way to ascertain that context is to ask the person who created the display. Hence, Hamilton implied. the only way to figure out what Freshwater was doing with the creationist handouts was to ask him, and no one did. This whole series was a muddy mess. Button finally testified that one could take the display/poster as it is, an exhortation to read.

Referring to the dinosaurs and dragons handout Kate Button had given that her mother from Freshwater’s class, Hamilton asked why she hadn’t talked to Freshwater about it. She replied that when ­she tried to have a similar discussion in 2003 when he was offering his “Objective Origins” curriculum proposal, “He shut me down.”

She was asked when the dinosaurs went extinct, and answered 65 million years ago. Asked when humans first appeared, she didn’t know,but thought it was “a long time ago.”

We then spent some time on the question of whether Kate was misinterpreting or misperceiving Freshwater’s intention in introducing the problematic material, and he was actually trying to show what bad science is. Button conceded that it was possible, but given the consistency of what Kate said with what she heard from other students of Freshwater she was quite confident of Kate’s interpretation. Hamilton offered a new tack when he asked Button if perhaps Freshwater was just trying out materials for the new academic standards when he used the questionable handouts. Button conceded that was possible.

Button Cross Examination

In cross examination David Millstone, the Board’s attorney, asked if it was likely that Kate misunderstood Freshwater when she questioned his teaching. Button replied that it was not likely, given both Kate’s intelligence and the consistency of what she said with what Button heard from other students.

Button testified that over the years Freshwater occasionally shared his handouts and materials with her, either directly or sometimes via Kate when she was in Freshwater’s class, that had a religious leanings or implications. She was concerned that Freshwater was using classroom materials that combined religious ideas with the science, or that replaced scientific concepts with religious notions. She testified that it happened often enough when Kate was in his class to cause Kate to be confused and frustrated.

Millstone displayed a copy of the text book that Button had found in a cabinet at the middle school. She had been on the textbook adoption committee several years ago, and that committee had given sample copies of the texts to the teachers. Freshwater had returned his with comments on a number of pages, and it was that copy Button found in the cabinet when she was looking for copies of the texts to bring to the hearing.

Millstone asked if Freshwater had expressed concerns about the science texts that were adopted (a Holt series). He said that he did. Asked by Millstone do identify particular concerns, she paged through the Cells, Heredity, and Classification text, identifying half a dozen pages where comments in the marked up text expressed concerns. Specific examples mentioned included whale evolution and an embryo passage. (Haeckel was not mentioned and I couldn’t see the page from my seat.) Asked whether Freshwater had ever objected to texts based on his religious beliefs, she said that he had.

Button redirect examination

On redirect Hamilton had Button specify the page numbers where Freshwater had made marks or comments in the text. She identified (a) a passage in the section on fossils; (b) a passage on vestigial pelvic and leg bones in whales that could lead to the interpretation that humans were related; (c) an illustration that showed similarities among embryos; (d) an illustration of the basic idea of speciation by geographic separation; and (e) something about peppered moths, where he objected to “how it was proven” and “how it was photographed,” that the photograph was staged and the moths were dead, and it was therefore faked – “it really didn’t happen that way,” she quoted him as saying. She testified that she explained to him that the photo was an illustration. (I’ll note that this is straight out of Wells, and Freshwater depended almost solely on Wells in his 2003 proposal.)

Asked how specifically Freshwater objected based on his religious beliefs, she could not recall, but said it was in his room or hers.

Button recross

In recross Button testified that Freshwater did indeed give the marked text back to her. Millstone walked her through a number of exhibits that were invisible to the gallery and that were mostly not identified in testimony. I think they were copies of sections from the text, but that’s all I know. Button’s testimony with respect to them was to answer whether Freshwater had raised them specifically with her. Some he had, some he had not. Two that he had raised with her concerned comparative anatomy and skulls. That’s all I could get from the testimony.

Finally, asked if she had evidence that Freshwater taught that material in his classroom, she said just what students, including her daughter, had told her.

That ended Button’s testimony.

Three things stood out in Button’s testimony: (a) the finding of the Tesla coil instruction book, (b her testimony that Freshwater objected to a text on religious grounds, and (c) and introduction of the textbook in which Freshwater had marked his objections. The first refutes earlier testimony that the instructions were not available to teachers. And I’d dearly love to sees that textbook. There’s a bit more about the instruction book in White’s testimony below.

December 4

December 4 was a very brief session, just over an hour. I don’ t know why – there was some speculation in the gallery about Hamilton not having his other witnesses ready, but that’s not been confirmed. The sole witness was Bill White, the middle school principal. He had previously testified in the Board’s case. (My Google-fu is failing me and I can’t find my post on that testimony. That may be one of the days I had to miss.)

David Millstone, the Board’s attorney, objected to the recall of White since he had testified in direct examination in the Board’s case, and Hamilton had done cross-examination then. The referee over-ruled the objection with the stipulation that White testify only about matter that have arisen since his earlier testimony. Over the course of Hamilton’s direct examination Millstone objected whenever Hamilton seemed to be straying from that stipulation. Some objections were sustained, some were over-ruled.

White direct examination

Hamilton first questioned White about the note that Elle Button had sent him accompanying the instructions to the Tesla coil. He did not recall receiving the instructions from Button. After some palaver, Millstone described how the note was found last night (Dec 3) when a search was instituted on the basis of Elle Button’s December 3 testimony that she had found it and given it to the administration. It was found in a file, paper-clipped to the back of an unrelated document, and thus hadn’t been noticed before.

Permitted to read it, Hamilton asked White if it said anything about not touching people with the Tesla coil. It does not. (Recall that those Tesla coils have been at the school for decades, and may predate OSHA.)

Moving on, Hamilton questioned White about the sequence of events regarding Lori Miller. White testified that she has a Bible on her desk, and has a right to have it there. He testified that any teacher could keep a Bible on their desk if it is only for personal use without students present, and if it’s not used as part of a religious display or for use in instruction.

Hamilton quoted from a memo from Bill Oxenford, head ot the middle school science department, to Miller which said “devotional materials must be out of sight.” (Miller had previously had a stack of Christian devotional material on her desk.) White wasn’t sure what those materials consisted of.

Hamilton noted that the memo was sent to Miller just four days after she testified in the hearing that she had religious materials on her desk, and asked why the note was sent to Miller. White testified that it was sent based on a walk-through of the building he had conducted the week before. He said the memo was sent to Miller to clarify what is and is not permitted by way of religious materials in classrooms as a followup to a discussion between Miller, White, and assistant Principal Ritchie (concerning the walk-through? That wasn’t clear).

Hamilton asked if White had ever had a similar meeting with Freshwater, and White replied that he had. He testified that middle school staff had never been told that they couldn’t have a Bible on their desk.

Pressed by Hamilton, White testified that the memo to Miller was not stimulated by her testimony in this hearing, and that he had not been instructed by Superintendent Short or the Board of Education to have it sent.

Hamilton asked White what the definition of “display” is. Millstone objected on the ground that the topic of “display” had been covered in White’s earlier cross examination. That objection was sustained.

We were then treated to an analysis of a poster created by a child that was displayed in Superintendent Short’s office. It had “World’s Greatest Dad” on it, and at the bottom a Bible verse, Romans 12:6, identified as such. Hamilton asked if the poster was in color. White couldn’t tell – he’s red-green color blind. He was asked if it constituted a “display.” White responded that he supposed any art work that’s in an office could be a display. Asked, he conceded that having a Bible verse on it, the drawing could be a religious display.

Hamilton asked if it was in the Superintendent’s office in July 2008, was it appropriate after Freshwater had been chastised for an alleged religious display? White responded, No. Hamilton asked if it’s possible the poster/drawing is not a religious display? White replied it was possible, he didn’t know.

Hamilton asked what the best way to find out whether it’s a religious display. White replied to ask them if it’s a religious display.

Hamilton asked what would make a Bible devotional. White responded, “How you use it.” Hamilton asked if a person had several Bibles could it be for comparative evaluation and not for devotional purposes. White’s answer was inaudible.

Asked if a teacher could have more than on Bible on their desk, White responded that he would have to request clarification from the superintendent in that case.

Hamilton asked if he knew that the teacher union was reluctant to act on Miller’s behalf. He did not.

Hamilton then turned to the notes written by Deb Strouse, the classroom monitor who had been assigned to Freshwater’s classroom. He asked how often they were turned in. He replied at least weekly. As Hamilton began to pursue the topic of the notes, Millstone objected, there was some explanation by Hamilton, and the referee finally over-ruled the objection. Then Hamilton and Freshwater had a brief conference outside the hearing room and when they returned Hamilton dropped that whole line of questioning.

Finally, there were several confusing questions about whether and under what circumstances permission slips would be required for field trips. Net of the answers: It depends. I have no idea where that line of questions was going.

White cross examination

Millstone asked White If he had directed or authorized Freshwater to destroy the Tesla coil. He had not.

That ended White’s testimony and the day’s abbreviated session. We resume next week, with five days still scheduled for December, three of them next week.

I’ll add a couple of additional notes. Before the session this morning near the hearing room in the County Commissioners domain I ran into an attorney friend who has often served as an acting judge. He remarked that it appeared the referee long ago lost control of the hearing. I agreed.

Second, last week I and my colleagues in the biology department at Kenyon received what was apparently a mass mailing from an Islamic proselytizing organization in Egypt (I provide a link, but be advised that McAfee Site Adviser has a caution about downloads from the site). It was a flier and a pamphlet extolling the virtues of Shi’ite Islam. I took it along and showed it to several of the evangelical pastors who have been regular members of the gallery. Even when I suggested it would be useful to be acquainted with the competition I couldn’t rouse much interest. (Hey c’mon, I gotta have a little fun!)

Finally, I made a late edit of the title of this post to add the year. I’d forgotten (repressed?) the fact that this hearing has been going on for 14 months now, covering two Decembers. Argh!

72 Comments

In your personal opinion, how does the outcome of this case look?

What does the law say happens if Freshwater, his lawyer, the school board, most of the teachers and some of the students have died, mostly of old age, by the time the case is finally settled? What happens when he crosses the mandatory retirement age threshhold, if such there be?

Marion, that is a question I think I started wondering about last year. It’s here in the official record somewhere. LOL.

Enjoy.

Thanks for the writeup! I appreciate the time you are devoting to this matter. Just for the record, was the witnesses name Elle or Ellen? The Mount Vernon news story has her listed as Ellen. http://www.mountvernonnews.com/loca[…]04/top-story. I also read that headline and groaned at the bad pun!

Richard wrote in the article: “(Recall that those Tesla coils have been at the school for decades, and may predate OSHA.)

The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHAct) was passed by Congress in 1970. I very seriously doubt that the “Tesla coils” are 39 years old or older. (Somehow I have the impression they are only a decade or at most two decades old.)

Hamilton pushed on the theory/law distinction, operating on the ‘laws are higher than theories’ notion. Button agreed with Hamilton’s statement that “The scientific method is designed to constantly evaluate ideas until they become a law, right?” Asked that a scientific law is, she said it was something known to be true. “Indisputable?” She answered, “yes.” Hamilton asked if there is a “scientific law of evolution.” She replied not that she knows of.

This is a classic misunderstanding of the word “law” in science. It is unfortunate that Button agreed with Hamilton on this point. Except for that bit of confusion, it seems she comported herself quite well. It also sounds like she is a good science teacher.

We spent some time on a poster that had apparently been in former Director of Curriculum Lynda Weston’s office that had a cartoon picture of a dinosaur with a speech balloon saying “I went extinct because I wouldn’t read.”

This sounds like a fundy knee-jerk response to any written word as having to be interpreted literally regardless of context. Was Hamilton trying to convince the audience that words in a cartoon are interpreted literally by middle school age children or just that he has no imagination or sense of humor? I was a big fan of Bugs Bunny, Roadrunner and Coyote, Tom & Jerry, Pink Panther, The Ant and the Aardvark, and so on when I was a wee lad (OK, I still am) and I guarantee that I knew that if I fell off a huge cliff or shot myself in the face, that I wasn’t going to unfold like an accordion or wipe off the gun shot residue and live to fight another day.

Chris Caprette said:

Was Hamilton trying to convince the audience that words in a cartoon are interpreted literally by middle school age children or just that he has no imagination or sense of humor? I was a big fan of Bugs Bunny, Roadrunner and Coyote, Tom & Jerry, Pink Panther, The Ant and the Aardvark, and so on when I was a wee lad (OK, I still am) and I guarantee that I knew that if I fell off a huge cliff or shot myself in the face, that I wasn’t going to unfold like an accordion or wipe off the gun shot residue and live to fight another day.

Just watching the way that the fundamentalist ID/creationist trolls argue on the various discussion boards (including PT and UD), this fundamentalist literal mindedness could very well be the reason these cartoons were said to cause violent behavior in children.

With them, it still does. Humor and irony is lost on them.

FSM_Ed said:

Thanks for the writeup! I appreciate the time you are devoting to this matter. Just for the record, was the witnesses name Elle or Ellen? The Mount Vernon news story has her listed as Ellen. http://www.mountvernonnews.com/loca[…]04/top-story. I also read that headline and groaned at the bad pun!

Her name is Ellen, but she goes by Elle. I think it’s spelled “Elle” and not “Ellie.” I could be wrong.

Button, I suppose, is the ‘good’ science teacher in distinction to Freshwater. But her ignorance is appalling: she doesn’t know the age of the universe, when hominids first evolved, if there are competing scientific theories to the big bang or what they might be, what a theory is in relation to a law, and she admits she can be out-argued (“shut down”) by Freshwater.

This is just more evidence of a crisis in teaching (and not just of science) that makes the threat from creationism seem insignificant that no one wants to examine or address.

Several restaurants in this area serve dinosaur soft tissue. We even have a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant.

One would need a rock hammer and diamond edged saw blade to cut up the soft tissue mentioned by the defense attorney.

Thanks again for all your effort on this. It will undoubtedly be touted as either an example of “persecution” or a “victory for creationism.”

CharleyHorse said:

Several restaurants in this area serve dinosaur soft tissue. We even have a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant.

One would need a rock hammer and diamond edged saw blade to cut up the soft tissue mentioned by the defense attorney.

They don’t even give you a Tesla coil to cut it up?

Helena Constantine said:

Button, I suppose, is the ‘good’ science teacher in distinction to Freshwater. But her ignorance is appalling: she doesn’t know the age of the universe, when hominids first evolved, if there are competing scientific theories to the big bang or what they might be, what a theory is in relation to a law, and she admits she can be out-argued (“shut down”) by Freshwater.

This is just more evidence of a crisis in teaching (and not just of science) that makes the threat from creationism seem insignificant that no one wants to examine or address.

Helena, Are you or have you ever been a middle school teacher? It takes a special person to teach the kids Elle does. She is the kind of teacher who will admit when she doesn’t have all the answers and will get it for her students when they ask. She has a huge amount of empathy for kids, and they adore her. She is someone who seeks the truth. You could have a PhD in the 8th gr. classroom with ready answers but he/she may not know how to communicate/motivate students - or even really WANT to. This public forum is great for sharing information, but has it occured to you that Elle may read what you wrote? Part of the reason for a “crisis” in public education is the lack of respect shown for teachers by students, parents, and the public. What Elle said at the hearing was brave. She could have answered so many questions with “I don’t recall,” but she didn’t. We want her teaching our kids.

Lyn, I agree it was brave of her and I think she sounds like an excellent teacher. She did a GREAT job! Especially when you compare her to Freshwater

Helena SAID Button was a good teacher, but the reported speech shows she hasn’t got a good grasp of the key subject under investigation - science itself.

If she is, as you say, seeking the truth, she has some catching up to do. The comments she made showed an egregrious lack of knowledge in really key areas.

That Tesla coil sounds cool. I wish we’d had one in the classroom when I was in school! Since we didn’t have a Tesla coil when I was in MtV city schools in the ’60s, that probably puts the acquisition of one no earlier than 1969 or so in any case.

Helena and Steve:

Those of us who are pro-science are also more humble than the anti-science denialists. When we’re asked a question we understand there are changes all the time - is the Big Bang in fact completely solid? What about the idea that the speed of light changed? Does that make the universe older? younger? what about those fossils they just found? does that change when hominids emerged?

It’s way easier to keep up with religious doctrine than scientific consensus.

Also, if she shoots her mouth off too confidently she could well become a target in Mt. Vernon . And it’d be worse if she was also misspeaking at the same time, so she hedges her bets and goes the extra mile to not pretend to know it all.

By the way, I think Freshwater was a potentially good teacher ruined by neglectful administration. He should have moved to a religious school long ago.

But Elle Button’s statements are not egregious, or evidence that her lack of knowledge is, either.

by the way I have taught grade school and middle school. middle schoolers can handle a lot more complexity, though less than high schoolers. Grade school kids are completely unquestioning. When they’d ask me stuff like how much good does recycling do, etc. etc. I would be very hesitant to say anything too confidently unless I was sure I wanted it sinking in and being part of how they think. For SOME teachers, teaching kids modifies how you express yourself. Please bear that in mind.

It’s an understandable take, but not an issue.

The idea that the speed of light changed is, as far as I know, part of creationism.

Anyone concerned about mediocre science teaching ought to read this post:

http://www.theness.com/neurologicab[…]31#more-1331

Helena Constantine said:

Button, I suppose, is the ‘good’ science teacher in distinction to Freshwater. But her ignorance is appalling: she doesn’t know the age of the universe, when hominids first evolved, if there are competing scientific theories to the big bang or what they might be, what a theory is in relation to a law, and she admits she can be out-argued (“shut down”) by Freshwater.

This is just more evidence of a crisis in teaching (and not just of science) that makes the threat from creationism seem insignificant that no one wants to examine or address.

To be fair, consider that middle school science teachers have at most a 15 to 20 year-old undergraduate degree in some science-related discipline, possibl a degree in “science education,” face on the order of 150 students per day, are not embedded in the controversy as most of us here are, and are working from texts that don’t give particularly in-depth coverage of a lot of content. To my direct knowledge Ms. Button is an enthusiastic and committed middle school science teacher and runs the school science fair.

Freshwater did not “out-argue her” but rather declined to discuss the issues. He is a largish man and can appear intimidating. He’s glib with creationist arguments and damned few high school or middle school teachers would be able to handle him in an argument about them. I could, and many posters here could because we’re embedded in the controversy and know the arguments. But the average public school science teacher hasn’t a chance against his glib Gish Gallop. I can go in as “Dr. H”, former college bio faculty who’s been in the creationist wars for more than 20 years, and smoke him. Even the best public school teachers by and large can’t do that.

I’ve got a couple of comments awaiting review before going through(?_

Wheels said:

I’ve got a couple of comments awaiting review before going through(?_

Wheels, I have no email notifications of comments awaiting review (which we automagically get), and there are none showing in the Movable Type control panel. I dunno where they might be. Sorry.

RBH,

That is just the point I think. Science teachers ought to have a training much closer’s to a scientist’s.

You can smoke Freshwater, by the way, after I’ve dismantled his conception on the Bible (my formal training is in New Testament Criticism).

Well, I was just fuming a bit about Hamilton trying to pull that “coal in Mt. St. Helens” crap, and groaning about the fact that it wasn’t easily refuted.

Could this hearing go on for another 14 months?

When it finally comes down against Freshwater is there an appeal process?

Paul Burnett said: Richard wrote in the article: “(Recall that those Tesla coils have been at the school for decades, and may predate OSHA.)” The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHAct) was passed by Congress in 1970. I very seriously doubt that the “Tesla coils” are 39 years old or older. (Somehow I have the impression they are only a decade or at most two decades old.)

I just got an e-mail from the manufacturer of the BD-10 “Tesla coil” which says thay probably started making it about 20 years ago.

And in Googling for information on the BD-10 and other members of its genus, I found that it has “other uses” - Google “violet wand” (NOTE: Not Work Safe).

Helena Constantine said:

RBH,

That is just the point I think. Science teachers ought to have a training much closer’s to a scientist’s.

Sure, but like the best science teacher I ever had, Mr. Bauermeister back in the 1950s, the better the science training the more likely one is to leave teaching for more lucrative and less hassle-full work in industry.

Once again, consider that a public school teacher in this district faces on the order of 120 to 150 students per day. On top of that, he or she has bus duty or parking lot duty or lunch room duty or detention room duty; has reports and grading and paperwork and meetings; and damn little leisure for reading or learning new stuff during during the school year. It is not an easy job and it has too few rewards. When we pay even mediocre investment bankers and professional athletes in the millions but pay the very best public school teachers in the low to mid tens of thousands we are defining our society’s values, and it ain’t a pretty sight.

It takes special people to endure the crap public school teachers have to put up with, crap that has increased over the years. My wife has taught high school special ed for over 40 years and I’ve watched the crap–from kids, parents, and administrators–increase decade by decade. I wouldn’t last 20 minutes in her classroom.

Doc Bill said:

Could this hearing go on for another 14 months?

When it finally comes down against Freshwater is there an appeal process?

M guess is that the hearing will wind up in late December, or perhaps January. After Hamilton finishes putting on Freshwater’s defense, the board’s attorney has the opportunity to put on a rebuttal case and then Hamilton has the opportunity to put on a rejoinder to the board’s rebuttal case. I don’t know if the latter two will happen; if they do then we’re doomed.

Depending on what the referee recommends and what action the Board takes on the recommendation, we may see further legal proceedings. If the referee recommends against Freshwater and the Board accepts that recommendation, Freshwater can take his case to the Court of Common Pleas, suing to overturn the Board’s action. This is a state issue, and so doesn’t enter the federal courts.

Bear in mind that two federal suits are still active, the Dennis family against Freshwater (they settled with the Board and administrative defendants), and Freshwater’s suit against the Dennis family, the Board, some administrators, and a bunch of John and Jane Does. I have no idea how long they will take, but at this stage they’re still taking depositions in preparation for court hearings sometime later.

And I see above in my description of a teacher’s duties I neglected to mention actually preparing for the classes in which one faces 120-150 students. All that other stuff is piled on top of the actual preparation and teaching of content.

Think about that: You’ve got a teaching professional with a Master’s degree plus more than two hundred credit hours of additional graduate-level course work and 40 years of teaching experience standing out in a forking parking lot to ensure that students don’t speed as they leave school. That’s a real intelligent use of human resources there.

RE: The first part of Elle Button’s direct examination by Hamilton

What exactly are they getting at asking her about things like scientific laws and theories, evolution and BB being theories, etc.? When I read that, it seemed to me like Freshwater and his attorney are almost conceding that he taught creationist material, but that it was justified. Otherwise, why go into all that? Why ask about “soft tissue” in dinosaur fossils?

That seems a very strange strategy on their part. First they deny Freshwater taught creationism, but later on they start putting creationist talking points into the record?

Maybe that’s the consequence of Freshwater hiring a lawyer who also seems to share his fundamentalist Christian beliefs. Rather than get an objective attorney who’s only goal is to present the best case he can in your favor, when you get a fellow fundie as a lawyer he starts mixing up the legal case with your shared evangelical/proselytizing agenda.

Jose wrote:

“What exactly are they getting at asking her about things like scientific laws and theories, evolution and BB being theories, etc.?”

Apparently their defense goes something like this:

If any other faculty member can be shown to lack a basic understanding of scientific principles, then that is an excuse for Freshwater to use his classroom to illegally peddle his own “brand” of religion under the guise of science.

Makes perfect sense to me. This is obviously a perfect “expert” witness in these matters. Of course the issue here is not anyone else’s understanding of science, only Freshwater’s. The issue is not whether his behavior is illegal or not, that has already been decided by the Supreme Court. The only issue here is whether he should be fired for breaking the law and mutilating his students or not. The fact that they let him get away with it for years is not a defense. The fact that others may have misconceptions or incomplete knowledge is not a defense.

Or maybe the lawyer is just trying to pad his own pockets with money from the faithful. That seems to be the only reasonable explanation for the proceedings.

I’d like to thank you for elaborating on the witnesses name, Elle or Ellen Button. I hope the community is getting real tired of how much this is costing them. Hopefully they’ll have less tolerance for such shenanigans in the future.

Richard:

What’s your sense on what FSM Ed says above?

Is Mt. Vernon tired of what this is costing them, and in which direction would their resentment, if any, go?

RBH said:

Cheryl Shepherd-Adams said:

I’d be *very* interested in seeing the data behind your claim that “public school teacher salaries exceed those of university professors.”

So would I. My wife has been a public school teacher for over 40 years while I was a college professor for a couple of decades, so we’re directly aware of the disparity between them and it doesn’t go in the direction Chris claims.

My sample was certainly biased in two ways, as most of my science ed contacts were high school teachers in suburban districts and in my mind compensation must be considered in the context of what you do for your pay. For example, my former supervisor is a scientist at a D1 research university and his wife is a high school science teacher in a suburban district. She worked half-time and was paid more than half of his salary and had none of the research or committee responsibilities. She basically had summers off. Also, we have a life-science licensure program shared between our dept and the education dept. I was told that the graduates from that program (that go to high schools) typically get placed in districts that pay very well (frequently more than us). Otherwise, why would they shell out the bucks for a private education to prepare for a career that wouldn’t pay them well enough to pay off their loans?

As for the second bias let’s also remember that the comparison is not reasonable on the face of it. While both university and K-12 educators are often paid on 9-month contracts, science professors (especially untenured science professors) are under enormous pressure to produce research that must pass muster through stringent reviews for publication, apply for and obtain significant extramural funding and still manage to stay current in the courses that they teach. Frequently, most of that work is performed during off-contract hours and is not supported by the institution. When was the last time a middle school or high school science teacher was canned for not maintaining an extramurally-funded research program or for not keeping up an 2-per year (or greater) publication rate in addition to maintaining a record of positive teaching evaluations (student and peer observer)?

Both jobs have their burdens but please don’t throw college professors under the bus as well-paid slackers to prop up the image of long-suffering poverty-stricken school teachers.

Chris Caprette said:

…Frequently, most of that work is performed during off-contract hours and is not supported by the institution. When was the last time a middle school or high school science teacher was canned for not maintaining an extramurally-funded research program or for not keeping up an 2-per year (or greater) publication rate in addition to maintaining a record of positive teaching evaluations (student and peer observer)?

Both jobs have their burdens but please don’t throw college professors under the bus as well-paid slackers to prop up the image of long-suffering poverty-stricken school teachers.

I don’t recall being paid to grade papers for an hour or two every night either.

And you started your post with “Public school teacher salaries exceed those of university professors…” As a general statement, that is simply inaccurate by tens of thousands of dollars a year.

And more importantly: Saying that middle school teachers are underpaid is not the same thing as saying professors are overpaid. So what was your point?

Marion Delgado said:

Richard:

What’s your sense on what FSM Ed says above?

Is Mt. Vernon tired of what this is costing them, and in which direction would their resentment, if any, go?

Yeah, there’s a good deal of resentment over the cost, and the blame is spread around. Freshwater gets a fair share, as does the Board. In the recent Board of Education election two incumbents were defeated on what I suspect was the ‘throw the rascals out’ principle, while one Freshwater supporter and one who I think can be fairly called a Freshwater critic were elected. So that outcome was equivocal.

It’s ironic, though. Back in 2003 Freshwater offered a proposal to add the Intelligent Design Network’s Objective Origins Science Policy to the science curriculum. A BOE member then, Sam Laudeman, remarked in the Board meeting on the proposal that he’d searched the web and found the proponents of that policy talking about a culture war. He voted against the policy because, he said, he didn’t want that war fought in Mt. Vernon. Now, 6 years later, here it is.

Chris, I didn’t “throw college professors under the bus as well-paid slackers to prop up the image of long-suffering poverty-stricken school teachers.” I’m fully aware of the differences between teaching K12 and teaching at the university/college level. Apples and oranges.

I simply asked for data to support the statement you made that “Public school teacher salaries exceed those of university professors … “ Thank you for admitting that your data was anecdotal and not composed of area-, state-, or nationwide statistics.

Chuck said:

Chris Caprette said:

…Frequently, most of that work is performed during off-contract hours and is not supported by the institution. When was the last time a middle school or high school science teacher was canned for not maintaining an extramurally-funded research program or for not keeping up an 2-per year (or greater) publication rate in addition to maintaining a record of positive teaching evaluations (student and peer observer)?

Both jobs have their burdens but please don’t throw college professors under the bus as well-paid slackers to prop up the image of long-suffering poverty-stricken school teachers.

I don’t recall being paid to grade papers for an hour or two every night either.

And you started your post with “Public school teacher salaries exceed those of university professors…” As a general statement, that is simply inaccurate by tens of thousands of dollars a year.

And more importantly: Saying that middle school teachers are underpaid is not the same thing as saying professors are overpaid. So what was your point?

The original comment to which I replied lamented that school teachers were paid less than college professors. I knew of specific cases where that was not so. I was then asked to cite those examples. I did.

That original comment may have asked why don’t we pay school teachers as much as bank managers and it would have been just as relevant a comparison but the commenter specifically used college professors. I took that as a sideways swipe at college professors, implying that we are undeserving of greater compensation as school teachers. Thus my later comments were an attempt to explain why I think we do deserve greater compensation. Perhaps I mistook the intent of that original comment. If so, I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

By the way grading papers off hours pales in comparison to what untenured science faculty have to do to keep their jobs, especially at the small- to medium-sized liberal arts colleges where the administrations have delusions of D1 research levels of funding but are entirely unwilling to invest a penny to support the work necessary to achieve it.

Ack! Dinosaurs are *not* extinct! They *do* live at the same time as humans! We call them “birds”.

I certainly haven’t seen any data demonstrating this. Moreover, there have been too many instances where I have seen comments from notable teachers and former teachers (I’m going to break my promise, but it is relevant here.) such as my high school English (and creative writing) teacher - known of course as a bestselling memoirist late in his life - the late Frank McCourt, stating that teachers are among the worst-paid professions (While I will not rely solely on ancedotal data from even Frank himself, the sorry state of secondary science school education in the United States merely confirms what he and others have been saying for years.):

Cheryl Shepherd-Adams said:

Chris, I didn’t “throw college professors under the bus as well-paid slackers to prop up the image of long-suffering poverty-stricken school teachers.” I’m fully aware of the differences between teaching K12 and teaching at the university/college level. Apples and oranges.

I simply asked for data to support the statement you made that “Public school teacher salaries exceed those of university professors … “ Thank you for admitting that your data was anecdotal and not composed of area-, state-, or nationwide statistics.

White testified that she has a Bible on her desk, and has a right to have it there. He testified that any teacher could keep a Bible on their desk if it is only for personal use without students present, and if it’s not used as part of a religious display or for use in instruction.

-snip-

Hamilton quoted from a memo from Bill Oxenford, head of the middle school science department, to Miller which said “devotional materials must be out of sight.” (Miller had previously had a stack of Christian devotional material on her desk.) White wasn’t sure what those materials consisted of.

A right to have “devotional materials” on your desk?

These people are at work, right?

Every place I’ve ever worked had some sort of policy on what you could and couldn’t have going in your workspace, especially if you’re on the public end of the operation.

I suspect that if one of the other teachers had chosen to prominently display a Koran on the corner of his desk, or better yet, a Satanic Bible replete with a tasteful cover engraving of the Horned God of Wicca, the administration would have quickly found a paragraph about clean desktops somewhere in their policy manual.

Fact is, if your Bible really is “private devotional material” and “only for personal use without students present” then you’re not exactly suffering if you keep it in a drawer and take it out on break.

the real issue is that people like Freshwater and Miller don’t actually want to limit their Bibles to “personal use”, they want to make public display out of it, otherwise it would be no big deal to just leave it in the briefcase that you bring it in with every morning.

(Unless, of course, you have a “desk copy” which stays there 24/7, in which case it’s even more of a statement.)

Somehow, I still can’t shake the feeling that the real issue here is that the school was just asking for this sort of problem by not having a simple, clean policy that said “pray on your own time and don’t display religious stuff in the public spaces”.

You would think, that in light of all the high-profile, high-cost cases there have been all these years, and the subsequent sensitivity any school board should have about how easy it is to get sucked into the legal morass of one of these things, their lawyer would have absolutely insisted a clearly worded “You are at work here, pray at home” policy.

You have the school board that, for legal reasons, must keep the separation high, but you have proselytizing individuals that want to erode any separation at all. And it all unfolds against an existing background of expensive lawsuits.

And in response, Mount Vernon chose the whole spineless “you can have some devotional materials on prominent display in your room but not too many” policy that’s supposed to place the dividing line.

Purposely putting the line on a slippery slope, with a lot of emotional judgment calls on each side. Doomed from the start.

If there’s any place where the bright red flashing “gonna get sued someday” light should have been going off and any lawyer who could fog a mirror should have insisted on simple, clean, “don’t do this” policy, this is it.

stevaroni said:

[SNIP]

Fact is, if your Bible really is “private devotional material” and “only for personal use without students present” then you’re not exactly suffering if you keep it in a drawer and take it out on break.

My pretty clear impression is that Freshwater has a sort of talismanic attitude toward that particular Bible as a physical object:

A talisman is an amulet or other object considered to possess supernatural or magical powers.

It’s not all all that far from a lucky rabbit’s foot, as far as I can tell.

RBH said:

stevaroni said:

[SNIP]

Fact is, if your Bible really is “private devotional material” and “only for personal use without students present” then you’re not exactly suffering if you keep it in a drawer and take it out on break.

My pretty clear impression is that Freshwater has a sort of talismanic attitude toward that particular Bible as a physical object:

A talisman is an amulet or other object considered to possess supernatural or magical powers.

It’s not all all that far from a lucky rabbit’s foot, as far as I can tell.

–Isn’t there something in the Bible that forbids idolatry? Just one more example of whakaloon hypocrisy

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Richard B. Hoppe published on December 5, 2009 9:42 PM.

Hunter: not young earther. Agnostic-age earther? was the previous entry in this blog.

Heliconia is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.381

Site Meter