Public Ed Liveblogging: Bible Bill

[Ed note: This is fairly choppy because I'm just typing what happens]

Chisum has just laid out his bill to mandate teaching of the bible in Texas public schools.

Hochberg has asked Chisum (paraphrasing) if his goal is as it says it is why doesn’t he want to set out what should be taught?

Hochberg: Wouldn’t it make some sense for the State Board…to sit down to a public process like they do with every other curriculum area they adopt and decide what things need to be taught…Do we want to tell every smaller district that they have to go through the process [of creating a curriculm from scratch]?

CHISUM: Says that there are curriculums out there.

Branch is asking questions now.

Asks about the three percent of state schools teaching bible now if it is taught as literature?

Chisum says one of the teachers is going to testify.

Branch asks Chisum fears we are growing a culture of children in Texas who are illiterate of this important literature and then have trouble understand other literature because of the allusions.

[gag]

“The point here is to have some literacy,” said Branch.

Now Branch is asking about the versions. Asks how the bill deals with deciding what versions to use.

“If they want to use NIV or King James, or American Standard, you know the different ones, we don’t specify a version here,” Chisum says.

Now Branch is getting into the “history” part of the bill as opposed to just the “literature” aspects.

Branch: So the study is of that time period?

Chisum: Absoloutley…It’s probably the greatest history book we have. All time is based on it.

Branch: Are you concerned that a particular teacher may cross the line, instead of just teaching history or literature…may have difficulty not getting into evangalizing, prostelyzing or giving a subjective view…

Chisum: It’s covered in here that they aren’t to do that…

“It’s one book where you can get the letter of the law and the spirit of the law,” Chairman Eissler chimes in.
Dutton asks about intentions:

“A better prepared student to go out into the world and understand what they believe and why they are different than other people ont his planet. We don’t have as many natural resources as other nations and we do better. We have a moral standard. I’d say that some of the Eastern countries now don’t have a moral standard,” Chisum said.

Now Dutton is asking Chisum about the seven books in the Catholic bible not in the Protestant bible.

I cannot believe a Legislative committee is wasting such valuable time on such stupid legislation.

Dutton: [After talking about the story of David] I’m just wondering…some of the things in the bible are difficult..I’m willing to listen, but…

Now, Dianne Patrick is asking more about the bill…Points out it requires every school district to offer the course if it has 15 students.

Chisum: We want a class, we don’t want a one-on-one on this. There are some schools that may not be able to put it together and they may chose to teach it with less than that.

Now she’s into the bill analysis: noting that this doesn’t prohibit courses on Koran, etc.

Chisum: this is not the intent of this. The intent is to teach the bible, but it does not prohibit anything else from being taught.

Now, Dr. Dorothy Hill of Sam Houston State U is up testifying for the bill…says she teaches Renissance and Medievil literature…”What I’ve decided to focus on in my testimony is students who have come to me and talked to me and say they feel robbed because they do not have the bible knowledge to understand the literature.

She suggusts, using a quote from JRR Tolken, that the stories in the bible have been forgotten. “Even students who are churched don’t know the bible stories.”

Now she’s talking about things students have told her, that they can’t grasp literature because they don’t know the bible.

[Amazing and difficult to believe]

[If all of this is true (I minored in English and never had this problem), then the colleges should make a bible course a prerequisite to a literature degree...still no need for it in high schools....what percentage of texas students get higher ed degrees in literature?]

Dutton asks if they teach a class in the bible as lit…the good Dr. says they don’t require students to take it.

[OK, so we are creating this legislation specifically for English majors??]

[OH! She just admitted that "history and literature of the Bible" can be badly taught. Dutton's cross examining her and she's stumbling. Go, Dutton.]

She just said the course is only open to English majors and minors and Dutton asked why and she says it is a good question but she has no idea. Says if she’s advocating it for all students they should consider that.

[Now, I have no idea who is talking, but it's a member of the committee who I'd dare say is no expert on Renissance literature explaining why this helps understand that literature...NOTE: pick up a college textbook...all that's in the footnotes....]

Now she’s mentioned Karavelov and probably lost 90 percent of the committee.

[How much money is this hearing costing the state? What a waste!]

Branch has a question for Dr. Hill. Dan Branch just mentioned Dante and Milton in the same sentence and the capitol didn’t collapse. That’s good. Asked if they require the works of Shakespere of English majors. They don’t (I’m unaware of any Texas university who does simply for an English major…]

Hochberg: If you were graduating from Sam Houston and didn’t have to take a course in Shakespere or the Bible, you might be bankrupt when it comes to teaching western literature.

Now a UT professor is up. Missed his name. Says this is “single greatest thing you could do to improve college preparedness.”

You have got to be kidding! The R’s are framing the debate here as a college preparedness debate!

Hochberg asks if this is number one, what should be dropped? Asks if it should replace an English or History course, asks what to swap it with.

Prof. says it is an elective. Says he could think of a couple hundred. Hochberg asks him to name five. [Still waiting]

Hoghberg says if you put something in you’ve got to take something out with all of the curriculum addition bills. He’s holding the professor to a point and he says he’s skeptical of some of the technology requirements because it’s outdated by the time they get to college.

The prof says something about FORTRAN and Hochberg says, “Be careful, I’m still programming in BASIC.” laughter. I remember taking Pascal in high school…it was a waste…

Dutton asks what students would have now they don’t have when they get to college with this course.

PRof. says the bible is presupposed by nearly every great book, poetry, etc., for the last 2000 years. Says coming with out that is like reading without the alphabet. “The bible is like the alphabet to cultural literacy.”

[Again, I cannot believe this is how the R's are framing this debate.]

Hochberg has asked if non-Christian Asian students are at a disadvantage to well-versed Christian students at UT b/c of no bible teaching? The guy can’t really say for sure.
Now we’re getting into biblical allusion in art…

[Did I mention I can't believe how the debate is being framed on this?]

[Did I mention what a waste of time this is?]

Oh, now we’re into the great political theorists of our time were all bible based. Talking about Locke. Oh, “it’s relevant to civic responsibility.”

Understanding of biblical context=understanding of philosiphical context??? Ok, then.

Branch says this is only a “modest response” to the fact college students are so biblically unprepared….oh, my.

Branch just said “if you go back 20, 40, 60 years, the Bible is used as the text for many subjects.” What? Penmanship?

Dutton: Is there any danger in doing this?

Prof: There is always the danger that the course will be done badly. Is it worthwhile because of that to deprive hundreds of thousands of millions of students of the opportunity to gain this important portion of knowledge?

Kathy Miller of TFN is now up to testify against the bill. (Thank god). Pointing out some challenges in facing this legislation. Points out their study concerning how badly bible courses have been taught in Texas.

Two big problems: courses lacked academic rigor b/c teachers had no training in how to teach the bible. Some high school bible courses were taught using Veggie Tales videos (Oh, lord!) & religious practices and traditions of teacher were taught to student and whether intentionally devoutional or not, they became devoutional. Can cause students’ faith to be belittled in public schools.

Five recommendations on how to improve the bill:

1.) A law about teaching the bible should require adequate training including constitutional and legal issues that may arise.

2.) should use scholarly reviewed material. Problematic to use bible as text.

3.) Stronger and more specific language to protect religious freedoms of students and families to make sure we teach about the bible and not teach the bible.

4.) TEA should monitor and have curriculum standards.

5.) State should not require every district to teach it if 15 kids want it.

Hochberg asks if it might be better to put together a panel of experts to “design the road map” for this.

Now Mark Chancey, author of the report for TFN, a biblical studies professor from SMU, is speaking against the bill.

Says he’s all for promoting the cultural and religious literacy aspects but that the bill has unintended consequences.

Says the fact that teachers may teach it different than parents do at home causes a lot of problems that can tear communities apart. Hate to see that in 1,031 Texas school districts.

“Even the choice of curriculum is a political dogfight.” “What I don’t want to see is 1,031 school districts in court.”

Dr. Marie Wachlin, an ed professor who has studied the bible in education is congratulating the committee for the bill and says they are on the educational cutting edge…

Now someone from the Heritage Alliance is speaking for the bill. Richard Ford. Free Market Fdtn. Rep also speaking for it.

The Free Market Foundation guy is blabbing about “outside groups” that come into communities and stir uptrouble about bible courses. Yeah, but Hochberg points his group is an outside interest, too.  The Free Market Fdtn guy then calls out the Texas Freedom Network as one of the outside agitators.

Now John Ferguson, a Howard Payne professor is there offering some info from a constitutional perspective. Asks the committee not just to add TFN changes but other constitutional provisions. Says we need broader First Amendment training and reevaluation of using bible as sole text.

Now a Muslim gentleman is speaking on the bill.  Says in principal no concerns about a religion course as an elective but asks the committee to consider three things:

ACLU up to testify against now. Don’t want high schools to become taxpayer funded Sunday Schools. FINALLY, someone says it like it should be said.

Zedler just asked the ACLU rep if he had a case about the bible being taught as literature that’s gone through the courts. The rep told him the cite and handed him the case and he said, “Ok. We’ll see.” What the…?

Now, someone with an association that promotes Bible teaching is up there. Essentially, though he doesn’t say so, he wants the bill so Texas schools can buy their products. We are the single largest market for this kind of thing in the nation, after all.

OH! This guy’s group offers an online training course for $200!! Two hundred times 1,031 is $206,000. He’s harping on the Time Magazine article alleging that this should be taught. Oh, god.

Chisum is closing now.

“It boils down to one thing: there has got to be a way to do it and do it right.”

“If we stick our heads in the sand and say this is too risky to do and we’re all going to get sued, that’s not the right thing to do.”

Chisum is asked why other ISDs haven’t taught it.

“Sure, because the ACLU runs in and says they’re going to sue you,” Chisum says.

These are trying times, the Chair asked.

“If you’re afraid,” Chisum said.

It was left pending before the committee for part two next Thursday!

Bookmark It