It’s very oddly phrased. It’s about educators trying to improve the quality of science teaching, and one choice is to agree, because they need improving…and the other is to disagree, because of this “teach all sides” nonsense they get from organizations like the Discovery Institute. But that’s irrelevant; teaching about evolution and climate change is good science, and they’re correcting an omission of one side, the valid side.
I think it’s a distorted poll, trying to get the knee-jerk positive response to the “teach all points of view!” slogan. It doesn’t look like it’s working, fortunately.
Yes. Our schools aren’t adequately preparing out students in the sciences. 65.2%
No. How can they adequately prepare students if all points of view aren’t heard? 34.7%
That does seem like “Heads we win, tails you lose,” doesn’t it? Is there a place for comments?
Yes = teach creationism and climate change denial
No = teach nothing about evolution or climate change.
Don’t the old standards include evolution?
Isn’t climate change part of geography or current events?
They probably have a message of WIN prepared, whichever way the poll tips.
(emphasis mine)
???
Openly gay students are taught different science classes? (mild snark & hopefully, humor)
@Markita Lynda
That was my thought as well. It seems to be oddly worded for a reason. This poorly written question seems to be poorly written for a reason. The only option is that whoever looks at the poll will say “hey, we were right to think that people want bad science in the classroom.” Either teach both sides or don’t teach at all.
Maybe this is overly cynical, but I wouldn’t put it past them.
Educators recommend new science standards that include teaching evolution and the effects of humans on climate. Agree?
Yes. Our schools aren’t adequately preparing out students in the sciences. 65.2%
No. How can they adequately prepare students if all points of view aren’t heard? 34.7%
Notice that you aren’t agreeing with “teaching evolution” or “climate science”, but rather agreeing to the “new science standards”. So by saying yes, you would be lending support to whatever is in those standards of which evolution and climate are included. I would wonder what else is in those standards that I would be agreeing with. For example, what if those standards also include crap science or crap education. They would be able to point at a poll that supports that initiative. I think this is a very suspiciously worded.
First Mitch McConnell, then Rand Paul, then the Oxford comma, and now this poll? Damn it Kentucky, get it together! (I am from and am living in KY so it’s an internal call for a slim* majority within the commonwealth to pull their collective heads from their asses, if they would be so kind, and not aspersion-casting toward the entire state, just to quell any objections**.)
*And/or slimy. That works too.
**I hope that wasn’t too much like “I know I’ll get flamed for this, but…” ;)
I’m trying not to read too much into the poll or second-guess it, but just look at it from the point of view of the radio station’s intended audience.
Wikipedia says, “WVLK is a radio station serving the Lexington, Kentucky area with a news/talk format. … Weekday programming features local shows during the morning and early afternoon and several syndicated talk radio programs during the late afternoon and evening including Sean Hannity, Geraldo and Mark Levin.”
Do I agree with the new science standards that include evolution and anthropogenic global warming, or do I want all viewpoints presented (which my magic decoder ring translates as creationism)? I think the “all viewpoints” answer is a Trojan Horse. I will reply Yes. …
And the results so far are 72.5% Yes v. 27.4% No.
It’s now 78% v. 21% (my memory blurred the details).
I realise that nobody knows what these “new” science standards are. The most important thing is that “teach the controversy!” is taking a bit of a hiding. Good.
Oh, Kentucky, you disappoint me again.
Educators recommend new science standards that include teaching the Earth is an Oblate Spheroid and the effects of subduction zones on the edge of the “ring of fire”. Agree?
Yes. Our schools aren’t adequately preparing out students in the sciences. 55.7%
No. How can they adequately prepare students if all points of view aren’t heard? 12.2%
Maybe. Our schools need to work more to put food on your family. 32.5%
Educator-designed standards tend to be pretty good. I suspect the only changes listed were the only ones considered at all controversial. So, teach evolution and climate change? Yes.
The link shows a different poll than the one mentioned. Anyone have an updated link?