No 'A' for effort on Texas Bible class plan

defending the First Amendment against the Christian right ...

... because if Jews don't speak out, they'll think we don't mind

Web JewsOnFirst

Optional Member Code

Please email us
(click here)
catcher@JewsOnFirst.org

And "bookmark" us at
JewsOnFirst.org

Jews on First
P.O. Box 33821
Washington DC 20033

310-553-1146

No 'A' for effort on Texas Bible class plan

By Linda P. Campbell, The Star-Telegram, April 5, 2007

Texas lawmakers shouldn't be asking, "What would Jesus do?" but rather, "What makes sense for Texas students?"

And a bill insisting that every one of the state's 1,031 school districts set up elective classes on the Bible doesn't make sense.

The reasons aren't rooted in hostility toward religion.

Just a few years ago, many school districts had to ramp up offerings in science, foreign languages and social studies when the Legislature dictated that the Recommended High School Program, which requires 24 credits (only 3.5 from electives) would become the standard for graduation.

Pushing more students toward a tougher lineup to prepare them for college and the work world makes sense. But that's already pressuring districts, especially with the current emphasis on finding qualified teachers to improve math and science instruction.

The flaws with state Rep. Warren Chisum's proposal to require that every Texas school district offer an elective Bible course go beyond piling on to an overflowing plate.

HB 1287 says the Bible would be the main textbook and then leaves it to school districts and individual teachers to choose which version to use. The State Board of Education wouldn't be allowed to set curriculum standards or designate essential skills to be taught, which differs from any other course.

The bill would prohibit teachers from engaging in religious indoctrination, but there's no prerequisite for specialized training, either in biblical studies or First Amendment law. But teachers need both in order to conduct a worthwhile class and avoid crossing into endorsement of religion.

At a Tuesday hearing, SMU biblical studies professor Mark Chancey told lawmakers that they should compel that teacher preparation -- "otherwise, I'm afraid our school districts are going to court."

Chancey is helping develop Web-based resources for teachers. He also completed a study for the Texas Freedom Network analyzing Bible classes at the 25 Texas districts offering them in 2005-06.

Texas schools already can offer a Bible elective if there's enough student interest. But most of the available ones might be doing more harm than good.

Chancey found that most promoted a particular religious viewpoint, failed to meet minimal academic standards and approached the material more from a Christian devotional perspective than as a literary or historical exploration. Teachers often had no training in biblical studies, some had only taught Sunday school before, and some districts had clergy doing the instructing.

Chancey said three districts were doing it right: "The Influence of the Old Testament on American Culture" at Leander's Cedar Park High; "Literature of the Bible" at Madison High in San Antonio's North East school district; and "The Bible as History" at Whiteface Consolidated school district.

Students in North East, for instance, examined the poetic elements of the Psalms. By contrast, the Forsan school district included a lecture on "God's road to life" and VeggieTales videos.

Now, Larry the Cucumber and Bob the Tomato present entertaining biblical interpretations. They taught my children that 70 times 7 equals 490 (the number of times Jesus says to forgive). But Larry and Bob probably shouldn't be a high school teaching tool, except maybe as an example of savvy entrepreneurship.

Chisum, R-Pampa, claimed that his bill "is about education and not religion." College professors testifying before the House Public Education Committee made a compelling case about the indispensability of biblical literacy, particularly to understanding such authors as Dante Alighieri, William Shakespeare and Friedrich Nietzsche.

How can an educated person not know about the fall of man, David and Goliath or biblical perspectives on justice and mercy? How can a responsible citizen not appreciate the Bible's influence on our culture and laws and its relevance through national history?

Those actually are persuasive arguments -- for making a properly constructed, well-taught class mandatory for high school upperclassmen or college freshmen. But if, as one professor said, teaching the Bible would be "the No. 1 thing" that the state could do to improve college readiness, simply mandating a new elective would not serve that end.

Chisum sure gave me pause when a fellow legislator asked what he wants to accomplish.

"I would hope that we get a better-prepared student to go out into the world and understand what they believe, ... how it's [this country] put together, why we are different from some others on this planet."

The United States doesn't have more resources, he said, "but we do better. A lot of it's because of what's written in that book, because we have a moral standard. Not everybody has a moral standard."

If lawmakers really want to improve education, they'll provide training, standards and academically sound materials to districts with the interest in teaching the Bible as a rich and vital literary, historical, legal and cultural resource.

But if legislators are trying to sneak religious and morality instruction into public school classrooms, that's committing our tax dollars to litigation rather than education. And that does not make sense.

Fair Use Statement: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.