CSCOPE Not Aligned With TEKS

Print Friendly

News Blast CSCOPE Lessons Not DeletedEdited by Janice VanCleave on June 21, 2013

I received a comment about this article. The person questions the correctness of some statements. I agree that some of the material is more my personal views and that I do not have facts to back up the statements. So, I will fix this problem. The original text is indented.

But first, the news that CSCOPE lessons will be deleted after Aug. 31, 2013 is not correct. The Texas Education Service Centers voided the non-disclosure contract with school districts who currently are registered CSCOPE users. These schools may download and copy the CSCOPE lessons until Aug. 31, 2013 when the lessons will be deleted from the School District’s CSCOPE Users Website. CSCOPE lessons in the possession of schools after Aug. 31, 2013 belong to the schools and they have the legal right to do what ever they want to with these lessons–Even teach the lesson content to your children.

NO! The CSCOPE Lessons were never reviewed by the State Board of Education and revised. This was part of the bargain the ESCs made with Senator Patrick. The ESCs will no longer be responsible for the biased, anti-American, pro-Islamic, pro-Agenda 21, anti-Christian, incorrect factually CSCOPE lessons after Aug. 31, 2013. Until this date, you might want to find out if your school district is downloading and copying the CSCOPE lessons. If so, why?

Now for my comments about the original article:

Evolution is a theory explaining how every organism was formed.

Can I disprove evolution? No
Can evolution be proven? No

I personally do not support evolution in the sense that all living organisms started with the Big Bang and via evolution have the form presently on Earth.

I know people who support evolution and we have no problem agreeing to disagree. What I do not agree with is teaching evolution as the end solution. This slams the door to any further research. If nothing else, technology has taught us that science theories and even science laws could be shown to be false by a students we teach today. No one would get upset if someone questioned Newton’s Laws. But evolution strikes at the foundation of the most important thing in the lives of many people, their belief in the God of the Bible. I have lived for 71 years believing in Jesus Christ and loved everything about science. I have never personally found the two to be conflicting. In fact, the same company who published my science experiment books published a Bible experiment book that I wrote. The owner and many of the employees, including my first editor are Jewish.  Our religious beliefs are different but it was never a factor and should never be.

Yes, it seems that I have opened Pandora’s Evolution Box by suggesting that scientists should not try to fit all research into an evolution mold. Students should not be taught that that evolution is the only and absolute answer to creation. Nothing about science is absolute and final. That is what makes science so wonderful. Students should ask questions and they do. The job of an educator is to provide as best as possible, unbiased information. CSCOPE lessons are not doing this was the objective of the article. For example, one CSCOPE lesson presented Christopher Columbus as being responsible for the death of native Americans because of diseases he brought from Europe. Then, students were to decide if the U.S. should have a Christopher Columbus day to celebrate this man.

As to religion being part of the Texas State Standards called TEKS. I have viewed these TEKS in other curriculum materials and they were presented very effectively. The CSCOPE lessons that are said to be aligned with the TEKS have a definite bias.

NOTE to Parents: CSCOPE lessons may still be used to teach your children in the upcoming, 2013-2014 school year. This is because the ESCs gave the registered CSCOPE school permission to copy these lessons until Aug. 31, 2013. The deal made with Senator Patrick has nothing to do with CSCOPE lessons in possession of schools after Aug. 31, 2013. Sneaky? You Bet!

I am amazed that some scientist so adamantly defend evolution as the only possible answer. This contradicts everything about what true science is all about. Scientists are to never accept any idea as the only possible answer. Students should be taught to keep an open mind–to never think there is only one solution to a problem. Instead to embrace the fact that what is known is limited by current technology.

Since I have no documented proof that the Federal Government is more likely to give grants to science projects that support evolution, I need to leave this as a question. Are any government grants given to disprove evolution? Are their teachers who have recently been fired for teaching evolution?

Not every scientist supports evolution. Since evolution generally excludes creation of organisms by God, humanist, who do not believe in God promote evolution. Thus CSCOPE and common core, both educational instruction materials credited to  humanist, Linda Darling Hammond. Thus evolution has become the lever for federal grants. Support evolution or the liberal federal will not approve grant money. So our scientists and higher education embrace evolution for $.

Evolution should be viewed as an idea to consider but certainly not an idea to be considered as the only possible answer. Is true research that doesn’t support evolution not considered?  This is the same archaic idea that inhibited scientific advancement for about two thousand years when scientists were forced to accept anything Aristotle had said.

In retrospect, I do not agree with my following statement. Is it possible not to support evolution or creations? Why not?

Evolution is always associated with Creation by God. Those who support evolution refuse to admit evolution might not be correct. This just might open the door for a full fledged acceptance of creation.

One correction for the following statement is that some people believe that things evolve, but not from one species to another. There develope an attitude that only those who support evolution are competant enough to teach or write about science. I disagree and  I am proof that this is not true.

How sad this tunnel visioned idea is. Would it not be more productive to teach kids that some animals have the same basic bone structure and that one idea is that organisms “evolved.” Leave it open ended so that new ideas are encouraged and those of us who give God credit for the creation of all things are not labeled as uneducated and lacking intelligence.

Since this website as well as this article is intended to be about CSCOPE. Ms. Cargill is one of the most fact based person I know.

Barbara Cargill is the chairperson of the state board of education. Her testimony was given before the senate education committee about the instructional material called CSCOPE. Barbara’s duty is to see that instructional material approved by  TEA are included in instruction materials. Her testimony was factual and her duty to report that CSCOPE does not include creation options other than evolution. Thus CSCOPE is not aligned with the TEKS.

Share Button


  1. Scott Klump says:

    Why don’t you believe in evolution? If you were on a jury would there ever be enough evidence for you to convict? If man can manipulate genetics to select for the best traits in organisms (selective breeding) why can’t nature do it as well? The artificial selection of traits leads to the evolution of organisms as does the natural selection of traits through deep time! It doesn’t take many critical thinking skills to understand this concept! It is only those blinded by superstition that refuse to see the truth.

    • Janice VanCleave says:

      Have you noticed that those who believe in evolution main defense is:
      “If a person doesn’t believe in evolution they lack critical thinking skills needed to understand evolution. Also, only those
      blinded by superstition refuse to see the truth of evolution.”

      I am 72 years old and have never believed that I am a product of evolution–a by product of some manipulated chemicals.
      Instead, I chose to believe that I am important. I choose to believe that God is sovereign and I am part of His plan. I was conceived by the man and woman God selected to be my mother and father. ETC……………………….Nothing happens –absolutely NOTHING HAPPens that is not under God’s control. I no no more provide convicting evidence that the Bible is the Word of God than you can provide convicting evidence for the Big Bang.

  2. The problem with your argument is that fact that the principles of evolution can be tested using the scientific method (molecularly, embryologically, paleontologically, etc) . This can’t be done with creationism. The idea of creationism is so intertwined with religion that like the belief in God itself, it requires a leap of faith. Leaps of faith can’t be tested!

    • Janice VanCleave says:

      Neither can the Big Bang nor the evolution of non-living elements to form living organisms.

      I find it interested that evolutionists say it is just a matter of time.
      When we see any vehicle, or even a pencil, we know that it had a creator. No evolutionist
      states that buildings, watches, vehicles, pencils, etc….. would eventually evolve from basic
      elements if given enough time.
      But, living organisms are said not to have a creator. They just evolved over billions and billions of years.

      Neither evolution nor creationism can be proved. Both are accepted by faith. Evolutionists have created their own starting
      point–the Big Bang and collect information that supports it. Evolution restrict scientific advancement because only evidence that
      supports evolution is considered. Those of us who believe that God, Jesus Christ, is the creator of all things are not trying to prove
      God is real. Instead, we have the freedom to investigate nature and make discoveries. All information is important. We can compare and see
      the similarities between species, but do not spend the rest of our lives trying to prove that one species evolved into the other. How much more
      would we know about science if evolutionists were not spending so much time trying to prove that there is no God.

      We are regressing in science advancement because evolutionist are trying to mandate that students believe in evolution. Sounds much like science during the time that one had to believe in what Aristotle said was true. Scott, evolutionists are tearing at the fiber that made the US strong–freedom. You can believe and support evolution and I can believe and support creationism. Neither needs to be mandated in public schools. I was never forced to teach evolution with fidelity and never will. But this is the direction that education is moving and I will object and block this movement if possible.
      Janice VanCleave

      • Scott Klump says:

        Your comparison of living organisms to inanimate objects is asinine. It is quite clear that the exchange of DNA in LIVING organisms is the mechanism which allows for mutation and change! Non living objects have no such mechanism! As for the spark which animated the non living even that in my opinion will be discovered. Science is the search for understanding by observation, collection of evidence, and inference. The inferences that are made are the result of careful analysis of a preponderance of evidence (after all we send people to death row using the same analytical process). Creationism is totally devoid of ANY observable and/or collectable evidence and is therefore philosophical and NOT scientific! I also do not believe that a belief in evolution necessarily precludes the existence of a deity, it’s just not the deity of the Judeo-Islamic-Christian superstition because the stories in these traditions defy any reasonable and/or critical thinking. That is; how is it possible for an entire population To arise from only two people, and how is it possible for two of every animal to be placed on a big wooden boat and service for a year. Again the only way to answer such questions is to call on the supernatural, which is beyond exploration or observation. The science classroom should be reserved for a critical and reasonable use of the scientific method and the pulpit should be used to endorse and enspouse superstition.

  3. Neva Kelly says:

    This is a very interesting response, Janice. From reading other posts on this website, it appears that opinions about encouraging kinds to question do not apply to other topics. To see what I mean, take a few sentences from this post, but modify a few words:
    “The first step is to start encouraging kids to question ______ and every other _____. This is rigor… My students were allowed to study _______ and decide for themselves if all, any, or none of the theory sounded credible to them.”
    Now insert in the blanks other topics about which you consistently fault the CSCOPE system for mispresenting and/or poisoning our students: religion, historical events, political philosophies, to name a few. Why is it appropriate for teachers to encourage students’ questioning — thus creating rigor — concerning evolotion but not other topics in the classroom?

  4. Mark Webster says:

    Babara Cargill is right. There IS an alternative to Darwinian Evolution. It’s called Lamarkian Evolution. It IS important, it should *not* be overlooked, and it *should* be taught alongside Darwinism.

    • I totally agree. The idea of accepting evolution and not being able to disagree with the theory puts science back in when Aristotle’s ideas had to be accepted. Stifled science discovery for about 2000 years. Evolution has become an item on the PC list. I personally am ready to discard the PC list. Who created the list in the first place?

      The first step is to start encouraging kids to question evolution and every other science theory. This is rigor. This is encouraging kids to think outside the box. Absolutely no theory is set in stone–if we treat evolution like it is the only truth and anyone who doesn’t believe in it is stupid—OOPS! We are back to the children’s story about the Emperor Clothes. The Emperor was talked into having special clothes made for him. Anyone who could not see the clothes was stupid. Since there were no clothes to see, the Emperor pretended he could see them as well as everyone in his kingdom except for a little girl. During a parade. the Emperor was dressed in his “special clothes” and the little girl said, “Look Mommy, the Emperor doesn’t have on any clothes.”

      I don’t believe in Evolution and I am not stupid. My students were allowed to study evolution and decide for themselves if all, any, or none of the theory sounded credible to them. They had the right to question and know that any research they might do in the future may or may not support evolution. Unfortunately, there are groups that adamantly try to force feed evolution to every student. This is a short sighted view and certainly not one that I want taught.