TruthBook Religious News Blog

A new study says they might, but adds that parents and peers have more influence.
Tobin Grant | posted 2/11/2009 11:17AM

Parents deciding between religious and public schooling face many unknowns. One of the most important factors is how the schools might affect the faith of their children. Yet for all the debates over education, we know little about the effectiveness of Christian education on the spiritual lives of students. Students at religious schools are probably more religious than are public-school students. At issue, however, is why they are more religious. Is it just that they come from more religious families, or does the school itself directly affect the religiosity of teens?

A recent study by Jeremy Uecker, a doctoral candidate in sociology at the University of Texas at Austin, provides a major step forward in answering this question. Uecker uses the National Survey of Youth and Religion (NSYR) — the best survey to date on adolescent religious life — to compare the religious lives of students in different types of schools: Catholic, Protestant (most of which are evangelical), public, home, and secular private schools. The NSYR includes a wide range of questions on the spiritual lives of over 3,200 adolescents, their parents, and their friends. The information on parents is critical because it allows Uecker to tease out the effect of schools while taking into account the religiosity of the family.

There are two major findings that parents — and prognosticators — should consider when evaluating school options.

1. Protestant schools affect the private religious practices of students, but have no impact on church-related activities.

2. Parents and peers have more shaping influence on the religious lives of teens than do schools.

The good news for parents is that while the choice of schooling is important, the most effective thing they can do to affect the religious life of their children is to take their own spiritual life seriously and to encourage their children to build friendships with peers who are also faithful Christians.

As with any study of this kind, it is important to remember that the differences that Uecker finds are average differences. Some students may become more religious in a secular, public educational system. Parents need to consider the unique characteristics of their children and the educational mission of their local Christian schools. This study should help parents as they make their evaluations. While there are still many questions that need to be studied, this is a long, first step toward understanding how different educational choices may affect the religious lives of adolescents.

Labels: adolescents, Christianity, Jeremy Uecker, National Survey of Youth and Religion, public school, religious education, schools, Tobin Grant

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, November 14, 2008

Poll finds support among teachers for creationism

Nearly one-third (29 per cent) of teachers in the UK believe creationism and intelligent design should be taught in science lessons, a new survey has found.

Teachers TV surveyed 10,600 education professions and received 1,210 responses, reports The Guardian.

According to the poll, almost 50 per cent of respondents think that excluding alternatives to evolution would be counter-productive.

Andrew Bethell, Chief Executive of Teachers TV, said: 'This poll data confirms that the debate on whether there is a place for the teaching of creationism in the classroom is still fierce.'

The issue is already a hot topic in parts of the US where religious faith plays a greater role in peoples' everyday lives.

Labels: creationism, intelligent design, public school, science, United Kingdom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Friday, January 04, 2008

U.S. science academy stresses evolution's importance

Thu Jan 3, 2008
By Will Dunham

(NOTE: This is page one of two. Please click on "external link" to view entire article.)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. National Academy of Science on Thursday issued a spirited defense of evolution as the bedrock principle of modern biology, arguing that it, not creationism, must be taught in public school science classes.

The academy, which operates under a mandate from Congress to advise the government on science and technology matters, issued the report at a time when the theory of evolution, first offered in the 19th century, faces renewed attack by some religious conservatives.

Creationism, based on the explanation offered in the Bible, and the related idea of "intelligent design" are not science and, as such, should not be taught in public school science classrooms, according to the report.

"We seem to have continuing challenges to the teaching of evolution in schools. That's something that doesn't seem to go away," Barbara Schaal, an evolutionary biologist at Washington University in St. Louis and vice president of National Academy of Sciences, said in a telephone interview.

"We need a citizenry that's trained in real science."

Evolution is a theory explaining change in living organisms over the eons due to genetic mutations. For example, it holds that humans evolved from earlier forms of apes.

The report stated that the idea of evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith. "Science and religion are different ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future," said the report.

But teaching creationist ideas in science classes confuses students about what constitutes science and what does not, according to the report's authors. Continued...

Labels: creationism, evolution, intelligent design, National Academy of Science, public school, religion, science, Will Dunham

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Wednesday, December 05, 2007

More public schools offering elective religion classes

By CHRISTINA VANOVERBEKE/East Valley Tribune

Saturday, November 24, 2007

MESA, Ariz. (AP) - A group of teenagers gathered in Ahwatukee Foothills on a recent Monday afternoon to discuss the Jewish faith. But they got a little hung up on the concept of the Sabbath as a day of rest.

Fasting caused more head-scratching.

Questions about religion and faith are not unusual among young people. But this conversation was different because it was part of a religion class taught in a public school.

Mountain Pointe High School social studies teacher Marissa Chavez spends much of her world religion class dispelling myths and explaining the most basic elements of the major faiths - and she couldn't be happier about doing it.

She proposed this class to the Tempe Union High School District governing board last year because she saw a need for students to be better informed about religion, particularly with regard to world events such as the war in Iraq.

This is the first year Mountain Pointe offered a world religion elective, open to any student at the school. It's the only course in metro Phoenix focused on teaching public school students about religion.

While it's an exception here, offering religion classes to high school students is a growing trend in the U.S., said Charles Haynes, senior scholar for the Nashville-based First Amendment Center, and world religion is one of the most popular courses.

Twenty years ago, Haynes said, there was little to no mention of religion in the core curriculums of public schools.

Curriculum directors from around the metro Phoenix confirmed that world religion topics are a regular part of world history courses.

Still, when Chavez proposed her class, she said many people warned her against it.

‘‘They said, 'I wouldn't touch that with a 10-foot pole,''' she said. But, so far, she has had no complaints and Desert Vista High School is planning to offer the class in the spring.

There are no national statistics on how many public high schools offer religion courses, but in Fairfax, Va., where Haynes resides, there are 12 different offerings and he's aware of other classes in surrounding areas. He thinks the courses are generally more prevalent in the East and also correlate to areas where there is religious diversity.

Only one school district in the U.S. requires students to study religion. For eight years, the school district in Modesto, Calif., called the ‘‘Bible Belt of California,'' has required all ninth-graders to take a world religion course.

Parents and community members often express concerns where religion is taught in school because they fear their children's own faith will be shaken. But Haynes said a study of the course in Modesto proves otherwise, showing that students who went in with one faith came out with the same faith. The study also showed learning about religion strengthened students' support of First Amendment rights of others.

But schools can get in trouble when a teacher ‘‘pushes'' one religion over another in class or when the teacher includes material that could be considered devotional.

In Chavez's class, students often read from various scriptures. She said it was difficult to find textbooks that didn't preach one point of view, but she's been able to piece together materials from many sources, including books, the Internet and movies. She creates presentations for each religion, and relies on questions to guide the discussion.

Offering world religion instruction is not just an education issue, Haynes said.

There's a civic argument that can be made for it.

‘‘Ignorance is the root of so much intolerance. So many Americans know so little about religion,'' he said. ‘‘It's not just important to understanding world events, but for living with each other in this country.''

Arizona State University professor Charles Barfoot, who studies the sociology of religion, says students taking classes like Chavez's are getting a head start on college and life beyond school.

The Phoenix area, he said, is becoming more religiously diverse, but many students who take his introductory world religion course are hearing about these different faiths for the first time.

Labels: Christina Vanoverbeke, faith, public school, religion, students

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Founders and religion: Is this what they had in mind?

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

The strength of any nation is found in its heritage. America is fast becoming a nation without a heritage.

According to Donald Lutz in "The Origins of American Constitutionalism," during the two decades of our nation's founding, there was one book quoted by our founders more than any other. This book states a very important principle: "Do not remove the ancient landmark which your fathers have set."

The book is the Bible, and the quote is Proverbs 22:28.

America has been working overtime this last half century to expunge from the public sphere as many of the ancient landmarks it can get its hands on, i.e., our country's Christian heritage.

See if you can answer the following questions.

1. Shortly after signing the Declaration of Independence, which committee member proposed that the official seal of our brand-new nation should be a depiction of the children of Israel in the wilderness, led by a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night?

2. Which president, acting as chairman of the school board, authored the first plan of education adopted by the city of Washington, D.C., which used the Bible and Isaac Watts' "Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs" as the primary books for teaching reading?

3. Which of our Founding Fathers, who also became a president, said, "Of all the systems of morality, ancient or modern, which have come under my observation, none appear to me so pure as that of Jesus"?

Answers: If you answered Thomas Jefferson to any of the above questions, you are correct in every instance. I asked questions about Jefferson because he is often considered the least religious of all our Founding Fathers.

The debate as to whether Jefferson was a Christian, deist, or atheist misses the point that Jefferson, in his own writings and official acts as president, supported the teachings of the Bible.

Why are these facts about Jefferson and similar facts about other Founding Fathers no longer taught in public schools? Is it because we are kowtowing to Big Brother? In the public school district where I teach second grade, my students often tattle on one another by saying, "So-and-so said the s' word"— the "s" word being "stupid."

Sadly, as a teacher, I feel I should always be looking over my shoulder for tattlers before I say the "g" word in class. The "g" word is God.

It wasn't always this way in America. It wasn't until 1962 that our Supreme Court decided voluntary student participation in reciting a school-board-sponsored prayer was "unconstitutional." A little arithmetic tells us that for nearly the first 200 years of our nation's history, neither most people nor the Supreme Court saw conflict between our nation's Christian heritage and our Constitution.

Remember, the same man who penned the phrase "wall of separation between Church and State" in a personal letter to reassure a group of Baptists that its religious liberties would not be trampled upon by the Congress, is the same man who, while president, installed the Bible and a book of Psalms and hymns to teach reading in a public school system.

Could it be that Jefferson never intended his phrase to be used as a substitute for the First Amendment, which does not contain the words "wall," "church," "separation" or "state"? In speaking of the Supreme Court, Jefferson wrote to William Jarvis in 1820, "The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots."

Our country's roots are seeped in the Christian religion. To erase this fact from our nation's heritage is to erase the very character of our nation itself. And a nation without a heritage, without a genuine history, is a faceless nation, a weak nation, a nation that places itself in grave danger of losing the very freedoms and liberties our Founding Fathers fought for.

It is further a nation that can only lose in confrontations with other nations and peoples who cling tenaciously to their own heritage, whatever it may be.

— Christina Wilson lives in Westlake Village.

Labels: Americans, Christianity, Christina Wilson, God, heritage, public school, Thomas Jefferson

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Study ties religion to student success

Researcher points to effectiveness of parochial schools in lifting academic achievement of youths

By Rebecca Rosen Lum
CONTRA COSTA TIMES

The White House has embraced a researcher whose work suggests religion can do what ample federal nourishment has not -- narrow the achievement gap between white and minority students.

The gap narrows by 25 percent in religious schools, said William Jeynes of Cal State Long Beach in the current issue of the Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion.

When the student comes from an "intact family" and professes religious commitment, the gap disappears.

Jeynes says his research results support the idea of school vouchers. "It once again appears illogical and potentially racially oppressive and discriminatory to deny minority students the right to more fully reach their potential via a school choice system," he said.

Religious educators cheered the findings, but some researchers debunked the study, saying Jeynes omitted critical factors and cited himself in a roundup of social science perspectives.
Jeynes drew data from the National Education Longitudinal Survey, which tracked a national sample of students from eighth grade through high school. The survey provided information about religion, school culture, curriculum, race relations, discipline, exposure to violence and homework.

The critical factor is a private or parochial school's freedom to choose its students, said Marc Egan, director of federal affairs at National School Boards Association in Alexandria, Va.
"He just didn't address the private school being able to screen out at the front end and at the back end," he said. "They can unceremoniously show the students the door."

And they do.

"I don't want to use the word luxury, but we don't accept just anyone," said Sister Liam Brock, principal of the inner-city St. Elizabeth's High School in Oakland. "We have criteria. We can also say, if you are not going to abide by our rules, take advantage of counseling, mentoring, we can ask you to leave."

East Bay parochial schools admit students based on grades, test scores and other factors, but administrators say they also welcome some students who have performed poorly in public school.

De La Salle High School in Concord and Sacred Heart in San Francisco devote 5 percent of their slots to students on full need-based scholarships. Sacred Heart's funders established a middle school for the poor in the Tenderloin district as a feeder for Sacred Heart.

Both the study's findings and its critiques resonated with Brock.

"There is tuition, and you have parents who, because they are paying, keep on the kids," she said. "A lot of our students are sponsored by outside people. They will set up stipulations -- you must maintain an A, B, C average. You must keep up your attendance. You must get involved in things."

Still, small class sizes allow staff members to focus on each student. The school's religious nature allows St. Elizabeth's teachers to talk extensively about values.

Few track students by race or ethnicity, but principals say most students excel.

"I don't know if I could say I see the gap disappear, but the way we approach things allows us to approach them holistically," said Brother Christopher, principal of De La Salle. "You're talking about the whole individual."

For instance, the melding of Catholic religion and culture spurs achievement for Latino students, he said.

Jeynes' study cites "caring" teachers and "an overall more disciplined lifestyle" as pivotal traits in religious schools.

Peter Imperial, principal of St. Mary's College High School in Berkeley, said he doesn't necessarily agree with that assessment, but he said frequent communication between students, teachers and administrators ensures students don't fall through the cracks.

"There are a few more safety nets in place," he said. "The economics of public schools are that the money is tight," he said. "At a Catholic school, anonymity is a tougher thing to achieve."
Jeynes, who has written extensively on religion, family and schooling, said stereotypes are informing his critics' judgments.

Most religious schools usually can't afford to weed out candidates, he said.

"Yes, there are some (schools) who only allow students in who pass certain tests, but for a lot of religious schools, it's a nail biter economically," he said.

And most who send their children to religious schools are not the wealthy elite, but working people who sacrifice.

That's just it, Bracey said: "The motivation of parents who pick a private school and pay for it is a big factor."

But Jeynes said the nationwide data, which encompassed urban, suburban, inner city and rural schools, show an undeniable consistency.

"I was surprised by the robust nature of the results," he said.

The results point to school vouchers as public policy, he wrote. That earned high grades from the Black Alliance for Educational Options, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit group.

Whether his findings hold water, policy analysts said the political momentum for vouchers has dissipated.

"The issue is dead," said Bruce Fuller, professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley. "Maybe not 6 feet under the ground. Maybe 2."

Rebecca Rosen Lum covers religion.
Reach her at 925-977-8506 or rrosenlum@cctimes.com.

Labels: Catholic, parochial school, public school, school vouchers, students, William Jeynes

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

The State of Schools in American Perception: From Dissatisfaction to Religious Necessity

Daniel Downs
May 26, 2007

When it comes to education, over 82% of Americans still send their kids to public school. So why are Americans not happy with public education? As will be shown, secularism, an offshoot of American socialism and humanism, is the problem.

According to the most recent Gallup Polls, 52% say they are very dissatisfied with America’s education, and only 37% are only somewhat satisfied. The educational reform No Child Left Behind (NCLB) is not the reason for the negativity about public schooling. If most Americans really understood NCLB, they would probably feel something is finally being done about our educational problems. The dissatisfaction is not about school safety either. For only about a third voiced any concern about school security. More emphasis on academics does not appear to be a major problem. Only between 30% and 40% of Americans believe there is not enough emphasis on the 3Rs, History, Science, Health, Arts, and Foreign Languages. Although a significant number of people think better teachers are needed.

So why then are so many Americans dissatisfied with American schools? The answer may surprise you, but the real problem with America’s public schools is the lack of religion. Sixty percent (60%) said they believed America has too little religion in its public schools. The survey does not give us any clear idea of what Americans mean by it. However, over 92% think prayer should be allowed and over 76% would support a constitutional amendment allowing voluntary prayer in state-run schools. It gets even better. Most Americans think creationism and intelligent design should be taught along with evolution in science class. Fifty-four percent (54%) were for creationism, 22% were opposed, and 23% were unsure. Concerning intelligent design, 43% favored it, 21% were opposed, and 35% were uncertain. The relative large number of people who were uncertain indicates insufficient knowledge about the issue.

It is encouraging to see that most Americans hold to at least some of the core views and values held by our predecessors at our nation’s founding. Early Americans debated not about whether religion should be taught but rather who should be responsible for teaching it to America’s school children. The issue was not a conflict of church versus state. It was one between federal and state governments, which also extended to state versus local jurisdiction. The outcome of the debate was defined by Congress in the Northwest Ordinance. This legislation regulated the creation of territories, states and local communities. The Ordinance specified land to be set aside for community schools in which religion would be taught among other subjects. Notice, the same Congress that established our nation and constitutional form of governments also authorized public schools--not Sunday Schools--to teach religion. Why? Because a free self-governing people require the moral understanding and discipline only religion adequately provides.

What kind of religion did early Americans propose? Most believed biblical religion was the best of all possible religions. When early Americans spoke of religions they usually meant Christian denominations such as Congregationalist, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Quakers, Catholics, and the like. However, they often included in their discussions discussed the religions of Buddhists, Mohammedans or Muslims and Jews. Complementing a pluralist view, many early American leaders held to a type of religious universalism. They believed all world religions taught the same basic morality. The only real difference was the extent each religion comprehended the moral laws of human nature. Most, if not all, early Americans thought Christianity had obtained the fullest understanding both by revelation and by reason of the divinely created moral law in human nature and human society. (For more on early American views concerning education and religion read Thoughts upon the Mode of Education Proper in a Republic written in 1786 by Benjamin Rush.)

Why do modern Americans think more religion is needed in public education and what kind of religion do they propose? Again, a clear answer is not found in the Gallup Polls. It is reasonable to assume most Americans still agree with the founders and their views. For example, nearly 70% say America is a Christian nation, according to a Pew survey. Most Americans (59%) see religion is losing its influence in society. They regard it as a bad trend. Only 34% of Americans think the public influence of religion is increasing, and the majority (62%) says it is a good thing.

The importance of religion’s public influence goes back to the historical necessity of moral discipline. It is a prerequisite to living in a free self-governing society. While 71% of Americans want more religion in the public square, 51% want more religious influence in political or law-making affairs. When we consider the fact that early America was dominated by Puritan ideals and that Puritans were called evangelicals, it should be less difficult to understand why 60% of evangelicals still believe the Bible should be the most important influence in shaping laws. The same is generally true for most Protestants but oddly enough not for Catholics and certainly not for liberal Protestants. Put in perspective, the majority of Americans (63%) say the ‘will of the people’ (law of consensus) should be the most important influence in law, while only 32% say it should be biblical precepts and biblical law.

Now, we have a paradox. Americans say they want more religious freedom. They want more religious influence in schools and in society including government, but Americans also say they do not want social law to be shaped by that influence. If by religious influence Americans mean its affects on people in schools and government some of whom make legal decisions, they still hold to the founding ideals. However, early American law reflected biblical precedents. Why? Because they applied the moral ideals and laws derived from the Bible to laws governing human behavior in society. It is likely, therefore, that what most Americans mean when they say they want more religion in society, government, and education is more of religion’s moral influence in all aspect of life. (For more on biblical precedents of American law read Biblical Law in America by John W. Welch.)

If so, the hope for America’s future is much brighter than imagined, one in which life, liberty, equity, equality, prosperity, and happiness may remain supreme. The one obstruction to fully realizing this hope is like minded leaders. If Americans will only insist on having moral leaders of this kind, leaders who genuinely support religion and morality will arise to the demand, but Americans will also have vote them into office at local, state, and national levels of government. When America do, restoring religion to public education will then be possible.

Labels: Christianity, education, intelligent design, morality, Northwest Ordinance, prayer, public school, religion, religious freedom

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Saturday, March 31, 2007

Consensus Is Sought on Religion in Schools

Published: March 12, 2007

Diverse groups meet to weigh issues that vex public education.

By Andrew Trotter
Digg This
Nashville, Tenn.

How can the nation’s public schools accommodate students’ religious practices, prepare them for living in a society with a multiplicity of faiths, and avoid related conflicts that disrupt the schools’ educational mission and consume time and money in lawsuits?

Those were the central questions that a conference of some 50 educators, curriculum experts, religious leaders, and legal scholars tried to tackle here last week.
And none too soon, because “there’s a lot of religion going on in public schools,” said Charles C. Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center of the Washington-based Freedom Forum, one of three groups hosting the conference at Vanderbilt University, which is also affiliated with the First Amendment Center.

Like a few others at the conference, Mr. Haynes has been working for more than two decades on building a consensus on religious issues in the public schools. He has seen students become more assertive about expressing religious sentiments in school, a growth in the number of religions embraced by students, and heightened interest in adding instruction about world religions and the Bible as a cultural text to the curriculum.

Teaching, Not Advocacy

Those trends create more areas of potential conflict—especially when national groups and the news media get involved in local controversies, many here agreed.

“Schools are a battleground for the culture wars,” said Steven Shapiro, the national legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which has sued districts to enforce strong church-state separation in schools.

The ACLU, based in New York City, co-sponsored the conference, and Mr. Shapiro explained that he hoped the discussions would clarify the difference between students’ “expression of religious speech and government endorsement of religion.”

The third co-sponsor was the Council for America’s First Freedom, a Richmond, Va.-based group that promotes the use of dialogue, rather than litigation, to solve conflicts over religion in the public schools.

The council’s president, Robert A. Seiple, told participants that “slash-and-burn litigation” civil-liberties groups has been harmful to the nation.

Oliver “Buzz” Thomas, an ordained Baptist minister who is the executive director of the Niswonger Foundation, an educational and charitable organization in Greeneville, Tenn., said, “People get so polarized by this emotional stuff, they can’t get on with the primary task of the school district.”

Seeking Consensus

Meeting March 5-6, participants representing a range of religious and nonreligious perspectives tried to identify areas of agreement that could help districts and outside groups avoid unnecessary conflict, and especially litigation.

Working groups tackled religion in the public school social studies curricula, including world religions and religious holidays; religion in the science curriculum; Bible courses; and student religious expression.

The talks were a reminder that consensus on general issues—say, that public schools should teach “about religion”—can evaporate as discussions get into specifics or touch on current legal cases.

A working group considering religion in science curricula ran into trouble on how to handle “intelligent design,” which many scientists say is religion masquerading as science.

Some participants said the concept, which holds that humans and other living things show signs of having been created by an intelligent being, deserved mention as an alternative to the theory of evolution, which is overwhelmingly accepted by scientists. But curriculum specialists in science said that intelligent design should be handled in social studies—a position opposed by the social studies experts in the room.

A group discussing the school calendar pondered the “December dilemma,” in which Christmas dominates the scheduling of the winter school break. One school superintendent described how he found consensus to close schools on the most significant Jewish and Muslim holidays as well. He assembled a committee of educators and community members that designed a calendar, which was approved by the school board, that gave evenhanded treatment to all religions represented in the district’s schools.

A Muslim attendee described ways that school districts have successfully accommodated Islamic religious holidays and used classrooms after the school day for Friday prayers by students. He advised that by consulting with local religious authorities, school administrators would learn where Islam permits flexibility in certain practices—useful information for accommodating students within the confines of school operations.

The group also agreed that teachers’ jewelry that used religious symbols, such as a cross or a Star of David, could be permissible and an opportunity to teach about religious pluralism.

During a general session, an attendee reporting on the discussions of the Bible-as-an-elective working group said that some conservative Christians in the group argued that the public schools cannot teach about the Bible without undermining students’ faith. Those with this perspective also disapproved of schools’ teaching about sacred texts in general, preferring as a less troubling option a general course in world religions.

Although most participants seemed to accept that schools could teach about religion in the school curriculum—something that is permissible under court rulings, as are elective courses about the Bible—several people acknowledged that many teachers resist taking up the subject. Either the teachers fear that their lessons will interfere with their students’ religious training at home or church, this argument went, or they have objections to courses that may inadvertently help spread a particular religion.

The participants agreed to exchange summaries of their deliberations; and the organizers plan to craft a document discussing the conference’s key points, including strategies and recommendations.

Teaching About Religion

Experts in law, education, and religion at a recent conference on religion in public schools discussed how conflicts over religion could be minimized.

• School districts should develop policies on handling religious issues before disagreements at schools explode into public controversy and lawsuits.

• Educators should develop such policies in consultation with their communities, including local religious leaders. They should try to identify areas of agreement, as well as “safe harbors,” where groups disagree but will not take school districts to court.

• Schools that address religion in the curriculum need better instructional materials, including textbooks and Web sites.

• Teachers need to be better trained about the law on religion in the public schools; of the facts about major religions; and of the recommended pedagogies for teaching about religion.

• Public schools can lessen friction over religion by promoting neutrality, on matters such as the religious holidays that are recognized on the school calendar, and by making reasonable accommodations, such as allowing teachers to wear jewelry featuring religious symbols.

SOURCE: Education Week

Labels: Andrew Trotter, Christmas, evolution, Freedom Forum, government, public school, religion