Science specialist telling pupils god made the sun...

[thinkingmakesitso]

The teacher in question is one half of a job-share in Y1 (ds2's class) but is also the whole-school science specialist. I am very unhappy about ds 2 now insisting that god made everything and stating, very clearly, that it is this teacher who told him that, in the context of learning that the sun is a star, is made of gases, is very hot etc etc. I don't feel that religion should be brought into science lessons, or should ever be reported as fact.

Opinions or other experiences would be great - I feel I need to raise it at school.

Hmmm DD is at a C of E school and has done evolution ( in great detail) and now Darwinsim this term. So even in quite religious schools what you are experiencing is the norm.

I, too, would raise that with the school. Firstly to enquire what was actually said & what the school's view is.

What sort of school is it? If you've sent him to a faith school then it isn't surprising. But main stream school it would be pretty unusual. I am both a Christian and a science teacher but I keep the two separate (other than stating that the two aren't incompatible!).

Talk to the teacher and see what they say.

I would want to know if it was said during Assembly (ie as part of "collective worship") or during Science.

During Assembly would be within the rules AFAIK; during Science should not.

Is it a VA school or community?

Well you can't say for sure, the Big Bang is a theory. Lol.

The fact that they are the science coordinator is neither here nor there as these roles are just assigned by the head. Hopefully the person will have some preexisting knowledge but often not.

I think if the teacher is just randomly spouting off about how God made stars, it's a bit ott. However if a child has asked 'where did it all come from' then really they should be saying scientists have a theory...but other people believe x y or z. Certainly not a one sided 'God did this'

I totally agree that religion has no place in scientific teaching but in this one instance, I think there needs to be a little latitude.

Speak to the teacher /head to initially find out if this happened as described then make a complaint if necessary.

I wouldn't be happy about this especially if its not a faith school, but I would ask for clarification first to check how the statement came about as it could well be the type of conversation soupboxqueen outlined above.

I have certainly had conversations with students in my class who are very religious about the possibility of God making the universe despite not personally believing this at all.

reeky gravity is a theory and a lot less explained than the big bang - now try floating.

Why does science and religion have to clash? Plenty of Christians believe in evolution and the Big Bang and see it as mechanism that God made the world.

Schools are stuck between a rock and a hard place as state schools are not allowed to be secular.

Could it have been said in an RE lesson and the teacher was explaining what Christians believe? He's in year 1. Lots of kids get the wrong end of the stick at that age.

The father of the Big Bang Theory was a Jesuit priest, honoured by the Vatican for his work in this area.

So zero incompatibility between church and science there.

If the teacher with the science lead was taking a general class, then teaching Biblical accounts is fine, and if a faith school, to be expected.

It should not be taught in a science class (explicitly against rules) and so should be complained about.

Though of course if the message was the more subtle one 'what caused TBB to happen?' ie "in the beginning was the Word" - so what is the nature of that word (which is God) and religion is exactly what Dawkins is so fascinated with.

Not a faith school. He has come out with this alongside lots of scientific facts about the sun and says that his teacher has said that, for example, the sun is made of gases because that is how god made it. However, I do accept that he could have got confused so will try to ascertain what has been said exactly. Interesting, and reassuring, to know that this is explicitly against the rules IF it was part of a science lesson, thank you.

I have to say, I've never heard anything about religious teachings in science being against any 'rules'. I think for the most part it is poor practice but never in all my career heard about rules.

Creation is pretty much the only area (especially in the younger years) where science and religion really collied. It is the only time science rears it's head in RE for units on creation.

The big problem being is that if a child asks and you say 'big bang theory.... Etc' and one child says 'what about God?' You can't stand there and say well no that's wrong because this is a science lesson. Those children will then go home and say 'teacher said there is no God'. While that would be fine for some parents, others would be up in arms. A better answer would be 'yes, people who believe in God and follow a religion believe that God made everything but in science we have the big bang theory'.

So while I entirely agree that RE should keep its nose out of science. Creation needs a different approach.

That's assuming in this case the teacher was fielding a creationist type question. They might just be crap at science.

My DC attend a CE school, which is the school that serves our local community. There is no faith requirement.

Our local Church is on the evangelical end of the spectrum and the local vicar is anti-evolution. Over the years the school has not taught evolution, and when children ask questions about it or the Big Bang, the children are told something along the lines of: this is a Church school, we can't discuss that. So, imagine my surprise when DD1 (in yr6) came home and said, "We are learning Evolution now because the teacher said it might be on our SATs this year!" Too funny.

I personally, don't see why faith and science need to be in conflict. Easy enough to say that Evolution is God's mechanism for continuous creation, or something like that. I expect the Church of England has a plurality of views, some much more sophisticated than our local church.

Why can't science and religion mix BTW? Personally as a Christian I think science is bloody marvellous. The cleverness of how stuff works astounds and awes me. I think a lot of Christians who don't look at science and marvel are missing a trick.

Anyway, that isn't the point of the thread. It may have been an off the cuff remark by the teacher, he may have been mixing up two different lessons. It's worth an ask in any case if you're worried.

Hayfever I totally agree, I know some people don't. But who am I to say it's not a method God would use.

easy enough to say Evolution is god's mechanism for continuous creation

Well, yes it would be easy to say that, Hayfever but without any evidence it would be a silly thing to say - it would be just as easy to say that Evolution is the Flying Spaghetti Monster's method of confusing atheists, but I suspect you'd be rather less than impressed if your child's school presented this as factual information.

PieArseSquared, we've been very tolerant of our local, state funded school, refusing to teach the national curriculum. We've been polite and forbearing with people who instead feel entitled to teach that good made Adam and Eve 6 thousand years ago.

There is a wealth of evidence that the Earth is much, much older than this. There is much evidence to show that Darwin was species do change. While Darwin's theory was incomplete and far from a perfect explanation, it's hardly a "flying spaghetti monster."

All this said, I do not see why evidence contrary to some people's literal interpretation of the Bible is threatening to the concept of a Christian God. For me personally, they can co-exist quite comfortably.

good = God

Because one is based on faith/trust.

The other on evidence.

They are entirely incompatible. Individually people may reconcile the two but as individual subjects to teach they are oil and water.

If the teachers IS telling them that God made the sun, raise it with the head because they will ALL fail their SATs if they write that

"but as individual subjects to teach they are oil and water." not really, people think that - but taught PROPERLY they are not at all incompatible. I trained as an RE teacher, also taught maths, biology, sociology in my time, I eventually retrained and did a PhD in comp science and moved into HE. I was a bloody good RE teacher and LOVED teaching the creation myths and debunking some wrong headed ideas about what they were trying to say. Creation myths are not scientific explanations about HOW things happened, they are human attempts, using the language of their time, to explain WHY things happened.

you could easily argue that Dawkins theory of the selfish gene totally debunks any romantic ideas about love. Love doesn't exist - only the urge to reproduce the fittest specimens - so we should NOT teach about love and relationships and the romantic poets are just telling lies..... mind you I do know some evolutionary psychologists who are pretty downbeat about the idea of love, but to be honest I think they live impoverished lives I prefer not limit my understanding of the human condition to mere biology, I prefer not to limit my understanding of the universe to mere physics. i don't reject biology or physics - I'm a proper geek, always have been, I just don't think in reductionist terms.

But if a science specialist in a primary school has told kids that god made the sun I would be up there hoiking my judgy pants. Both science and RE should be taught by people who know what they are doing, especially at primary!

Bravo catsrus, wish DD1 had you as an RE teacher!

Catsrus good luck finding an actual RE specialist at primary level. Science ones are hard enough to come by. I suspect that the one the op is talking about is the science coordinator judging by what was said but I'm prepared to be wrong about that.

I'm afraid I still disagree. At the very base of science is the need for evidence to base any theory or idea on. Nothing is taken on trust or hope. Individual scientists may believe something to the core of their being bit it ain't science until they can prove it or as near as damn it.

Religion is not based on fact but in faith and trust that you cannot see the evidence but that it is still true. If you have to ask for the evidence then you have no faith.

What goes on in most RE lessons at primary is more like cultural learning eg This is what x, y and z do during a, b and c celebrations.

This all needs to be achieved while respecting the fact that many people have very deeply held beliefs and debunking them would be very disrespectful in either a science or RE lesson.

At our (C of E) school the deputy head told the children not to be scared by thunder because it is God clapping .