Am I going to teach science as a seemingly static list of what we know today?
Am I going to teach science as a seemingly static list of what we know when the textbook was published?
Or am I going to teach the process of looking at the world with our God given senses (and yes, "God" is an incomprehensible word), looking for patterns, testing predictions, and expanding what we know?
If you do not "get" science, please step out of the way.
If you are not in awe of the universe, or humbled by its very possibility, please get off the stage.
If you think science can be learned from a monitor, please move over.
If you confuse technology with science, please get off the curriculum committee.
Science is not defined by school boards, governors, or even Presidents. It leads to where it leads--unpredictably but consistently.
I have two goals in class--to teach science, and to preserve a child's wonder. When they become contradictory, something is very wrong....
Ain't xkcd just grand?
And maybe I'm just too old, but "bitches" sounds misogynous....
