teaching - Earth Science Teachers' Association

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TEACHING EARTH SCIENCES ● Volume 31 ● Number 4, 2006 Further Education and Sixth Form Colleges. They are in competition with each other for students, and likewise within the colleges, individual faculties and departments are also often in competition. If a subject is losing students, to maintain staff in employment you may have to offer new subjects. The student perception and that of many teachers is that maths, physics, chemistry along with foreign languages are ‘hard’ subjects whereas the newer subjects are not only easier but; ‘sound interesting’. There is evidence that students tend to choose ‘easier’ subjects. If a college tries to restrict student choice or decides not to offer a subject because it does not believe it has a place on the curriculum, it risks losing the student to a rival college. Targets are all about total student numbers and pass rates, not about curricular content. It is a crazy situation. A level geology is a small subject with entries around 2,000 - 3,000 mark, and yet probably provides a significant number of professional geologists. It is kept going in schools and colleges by a band of enthusiasts, but like all sciences it is expensive to deliver, requiring laboratory space, and cost is another consideration in our market orientated further education system. Bill Groves billgroves300@btinternet.com Also printed in the Newsletter of the Black Country Geological Society, August 2006 Dear Editor “I tell my friends, ‘I’m gay!’” These are the words of a Past Master Cutler of Sheffield, the late Raymond Douglas. He would then bring down the raised eyebrows by saying, “Gay is a lovely little English word that means happy and carefree, and I refuse to have it highjacked by a certain section of the community.” In a similar way, in response to Antony Wyatt’s article on creationism (Teaching Earth Sciences, 31.3), I can say that I am a creationist. In case any geological eyebrows are on their way up, I should explain that what I mean by the term is that, for me, God did it, and goes on doing it. My role, as a geologist, is to enjoy finding out how he did it and how long it took him. Fortunately for the geological profession, there is still a lot more to be found out than is contained in the first few verses of Genesis! In common with other Christians who are also scientists (and there are many among the membership of ESTA), I have had to work out my own position over the years and be ready to consider fresh ideas as I go. For me, there is no major problem – the Bible and science are addressing different aspects of human experience. We were never meant to learn all our biology and geology from a text whose main purpose is to point to a creator. The Bible is also intended to show that humankind is not what that creator would have it to be. However, he has also provided the remedy in sending Jesus Christ as our saviour. (Incidentally, chemists and physicists have less of a problem, since the Bible has little to say about these sciences). I can understand where the “creationists” (i.e. literalists) are coming from. In accepting the Bible as God’s Word, they fear that it will be diminished if we view different bits of it in a different way. Rather than accept, as I do, that some is poetry, some is real history, some allegory and much (especially the New Testament) is literally true, they opt for the simplistic solution of having every word as literally true, contradictions and all. They forget that the Bible itself says that the Holy Spirit guides us in its interpretation, and makes it all relevant to our needs (but not as a science textbook). Antony asks the question, “Does it matter?” and I agree with him that it does, which I can perhaps illustrate with a few anecdotes of my own. I once went to a meeting addressed by an eminent Professor of Biology who called himself a “scientific creationist”. I was not qualified to comment on the accuracy of his biological arguments, opposing evolution (me, I dropped Biology at 14!), but when he started on supposed geological evidence, my hackles rose. He talked about radioisotopic dating, but only mentioned the C14 method and not those techniques that are of more use to geologists. He was at pains to point out that if the graph were in error in one direction, then the resultant date would be an overestimate: he totally failed to discuss what would happen if the equally likely error were to occur in the other direction! The rest of his talk was just as full of inconsistencies and I became annoyed enough to tackle him afterwards over a cup of tea, accusing him of taking my beloved science back to the 18th Century! At that time, I had a number of sixth formers who were enquiring about Christianity and I had nearly invited them to the meeting – I am glad I didn’t! The Professor and I agreed that the most vital thing about our shared faith was the centrality of Jesus Christ and our personal response to him, but we clearly differed strongly on “creationism” As we parted, he called me a “theistic evolutionist” – I don’t think he was being rude! I gather that some devout Moslems take a similarly literalistic line, but I knew little of a modern Jewish viewpoint until I heard the comments on the radio of Lord Robert Winston, the eminent fertility expert. He is a practising Jew, and stated that Jews are quite happy in seeking scientific explanations for miracles such as the parting of the Red Sea. The miracle to him would then be in the timing of God’s actions rather than in the method. Antony considers the influence of “creationist” beliefs on science, and I too would express some anxi- www.esta-uk.org 6
TEACHING EARTH SCIENCES ● Volume 31 ● Number 4, 2006 ety. Is the growing publicity about “creationism” and the underlying confusion which it sows another factor in the perceived drift away from science in our schools, in favour of “arts” subjects? I have recently been made aware of the influence of literalistic beliefs on politics too. My wife and I were able to visit Israel/Palestine during a relatively peaceful time, two years ago. One day, we entered into a lunchtime conversation with a group of English people wearing badges proclaiming “Friends of Israel” or something similar. These were Christians, mainly middle aged ladies, who were adamant that God had given the land to the Israelis for all time, based on an Old Testament passage, and taking no notice of Jesus’ teaching in the New. Their leader was a charismatic man, whose following clearly adored him. In order to counteract his seven day creation diatribe, my wife asked him if he knew any geology. He then claimed to be qualified in palaeontology, astronomy, archaeology, etc, but sadly was called away by one of his disciples before we could test the evidence! We were later reminded that American policy in the Middle East is, at least in part, dictated by the President looking over his shoulder at his electorate, not it would seem, the relatively small Jewish vote, but the much larger and more vociferous “Christian Right”. If these people are as literalistic as the folk we met, it may explain why, to many of us, the U.S. treatment of the situation in Israel/Palestine seems unbalanced. Oops! I have erred and strayed from the geological way, like a lost sheep! I must now attend to those things that I have left undone and cast myself on the mercy of the editor as to how much of the above gets published!! Peter Kennett peter.kennett@tiscali.co.uk Greetings to ESTA Members Iwrite this piece having just returned from an actionpacked, fun-filled and inspiring weekend – our Annual Course and Conference which this year was held at Bristol University. Here I was duly elected ESTA Chairman (person?). As a practising A level Geology teacher I am not completely new to ESTA Council. Some of you may remember me as ESTA Secretary (1999-2003). I thoroughly enjoyed my involvement with ESTA then and I am honoured to be serving on Council once more and looking forward to an exciting and fulfilling term of office. The Bristol Course and Conference was a great success in every respect, with over 120 people being involved over the three days. The success was mostly due to our retiring Chairman Martin Whiteley, who as Conference Convenor, worked with a number of key aides to ensure that the whole event ran smoothly and efficiently. A programme of lectures and workshops formed the mainstay of the weekend and I’m delighted that some of these appear in this edition with others to follow in due course. These important contributions serve to both update us on current topics in Earth science and to provide inspiration for the classroom. A wealth of activities took place during the conference. Friday was the specific INSET day – with separate activities taking place for Primary (Earth Science to the Core), Key Stage 3 & 4 (Teaching the Dynamic Earth), Post-16 (Teaching for the Future) and, for the first time in a number of years, a workshop for Higher Education Staff specifically involved in Schools Liaison (Geo- Science in Transition). As a practising A level Geology teacher in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, I was lucky enough to experience “Lifting the Lid on Vulcanism” – the experimental modelling lecture and practical flume tank demonstrations from Jeremy Phillips (Bristol University), “Mining is (y)our future business” – Toby White (Leeds University), “Getting more out of Fossils” – Joe Botting (Natural History Museum), a fascinating and thought-provoking facilitated discussion on HE and Post-16 collaboration and the ever-excellent regular feature, the all-inspiring “Bring and Share” session which every year amazes me with the new ideas for teaching and learning it provides. Even after 10 years of Earth science teaching I am still discovering new and innovative ways to ensure our students have understood key concepts and ideas. Some of these will appear in later editions. Maggie Williams and I presented our own work in progress which was conceived at the A level workshop day in May this year – a PowerPoint encouraging students to choose Geology as a subject by making them aware of the different career paths it can lead to. This work is to be further developed for inclusion on both the ESTA (GEOTREX) website and the re-launched and updated Geological Society website. Any comments are invited, especially if you have student profiles we could use as examples. A wine reception (sponsored by Bristol University) was followed by the evening lecture given by Professor Mike Benton, Head of Department at Bristol on the popular topic of Mass Extinctions. Saturday dawned a little too soon for some participants who had been out in Clifton until the early hours, generally catching up on a year’s gossip and teaching stories whilst enjoying some of the local curry houses and bars. One group of delegates arrived to find that the public house had “run out of beer”. The other geologists had obviously got there before them! Saturday morning included parallel sessions for Secondary and Continued on page 8 7 www.esta-uk.org
Page 1 and 2: teaching EARTH SCIENCES From the Ed
Page 3 and 4: Magazine of the EARTH SCIENCE TEACH
Page 5: TEACHING EARTH SCIENCES ● Volume
Page 9 and 10: TEACHING EARTH SCIENCES ● Volume
Page 39 and 40: ● Science Activities and Work She

teaching - Earth Science Teachers' Association

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?