New Mexico moves to defuse outrage over science standards

October 26, 2017 by Morgan Lee

New Mexico's public education secretary said the state will adopt widely used school science standards in their entirety in response to public outrage over proposed changes that omitted references to global warming, evolution and the Earth's age.

In an interview Wednesday night, Public Education Secretary Christopher Ruszkowski said a final version of the New Mexico standards would replicate Next Generation Science Standards developed by a consortium of states, with a half-dozen added passages tied to local accomplishments in and industry.

An earlier proposal contained about 35 New Mexico-related passages—detracting from the core mission of science education in the eyes of many critics.

A public hearing on the earlier version of standards drew scores of impassioned pleas for the state to reconsider and adopt an unedited template. The critics included leading scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratory, science teachers associations, faith leaders, as well as teachers and administrators from several New Mexico school districts.

Ruszkowski said he hoped to channel the passions from that hearing into efforts to help children live up to expectations in the new teaching guidelines.

"We as New Mexicans, as a community, are going to have to be equally fired up about how are kids are doing in terms of mastering the standards," he said.

The final state standards will carry a distinctly New Mexican title—the New Mexico STEM-Ready Science Standards—while automatically incorporating future updates and amendments to the widely used Next Generation Science Standards.

One new component of the standards asks students to "obtain and communicate information about the role of New Mexico in nuclear science and 21st century scientific innovations, including how the national laboratories have contributed to theoretical, experimental and applied science." Another asks students to describe the advantages and disadvantages of technologies associated with the state's energy production.

The new standards are scheduled to take effect in July 2018. Student testing under the new guidelines would begin in 2020.

Explore further: Proposed New Mexico science standards omit global warming

Related Stories

Proposed New Mexico science standards omit global warming

October 16, 2017

A proposed overhaul of New Mexico's state science standards for public schools came under intense criticism Monday at a packed public hearing in the state capital for omitting or deleting references to global warming, evolution ...

Common Core used widely, despite continuing debate

September 19, 2017

Most of the states that first endorsed the Common Core academic standards are still using them in some form, despite continued debate over whether they are improving student performance in reading and math.

Recommended for you

Semimetals are high conductors

March 18, 2019

Researchers in China and at UC Davis have measured high conductivity in very thin layers of niobium arsenide, a type of material called a Weyl semimetal. The material has about three times the conductivity of copper at room ...

7 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

thomasct
1 / 5 (1) Oct 26, 2017
What global warming? With reference to the often used '97% of scientists concur', a major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors. They pointed out that the 97% number had appeared in a new and unknown journal. (Suspicious)? The researchers were led by top climatologist Dr David Legates. Their paper was published in the respected Science and Education journal and it clearly demonstrated that number was not 97.1%, as claimed, but only 0.3%!

Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers examined by Dr Legates team explicitly stated that 'Man caused most of the warming since 1950'.
marcush
not rated yet Oct 26, 2017
The IPCC reports do a comprehensive review of the literature. If you want to know what the scientific consensus is, read them, don't listen to internet hacks!
aksdad
1 / 5 (1) Oct 27, 2017
The great irony is that they never omitted evolution or climate science from the standards, but almost no one knows that because they never bothered to read the proposed standards themselves. I did. Everyone just accepted unquestioningly the lies from liberal activists who, with typical totalitarian impulse, punish any deviance from their rigid dogma. The furor was over exactly one thing, using the term "climate variability" in place of "climate change". It means the same thing and is scientifically more accurate because we know that Earth's climate has oscillated between cold and warm phases numerous times over millions of years. But "climate change" has become code for anthropogenic global warming; the theory that humans are the primary cause of warming in the last 4 decades or so, which still remains unproven. The shrieking minority want their religion preached, undiluted by science or facts, to our impressionable children.
aksdad
1 / 5 (1) Oct 27, 2017
Marcush makes a great suggestion. In fact, they should use the IPCC reports as a study guide for climate science, especially chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 which deal with observations and measurements, chapter 6 about the carbon cycle, and chapter 9, evaluation of climate models. You will soon begin to question why they blame human CO2 emissions for warming when the observations show essentially no link and all the crazy claims about increasing drought and more violent weather (hurricanes, floods, etc.) are refuted by the chapters on observations.

The clincher is the graph of climate model predictions versus actual temperature measurements showing how far off the models are, and how much further off they become with each passing year.

https://www.ipcc....S-14.jpg

Those climate models are literally the only "evidence" of human-caused warming and they all vastly overpredict warming.

aksdad
1 / 5 (1) Oct 27, 2017
For IPCC AR5, the Fifth Assessment Report published in 2013, see here:

http://www.ipcc.c...ex.shtml

After reading the hundreds of pages of science written by scientists, be sure to finish up with the "Summary for Policymakers" which was written by politicians and wonder how the statements made by the politicians are so different than—and often refuted by—the scientists. Then consider whether the claims made by climate alarmists represent actual science or the opinions of politicians and activists.
Da Schneib
1 / 5 (2) Oct 27, 2017
And they attach STEM to this travesty?

I smell propaganda.
Da Schneib
2.3 / 5 (3) Oct 27, 2017
@assdad doesn't think anyone should do science. It thinks there should be laws against science because they contradict the Babble about the super magic daddy in the sky by the drunken stone age sheep herders written by jebus. And this is not hatred; it is absolute, complete, unwavering contempt.

I can imagine no more potent curse than that your children live in agony and die young in the world you are making. May you live in interesting times and come to the attention of important people.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.