The benefits of illegal proposals

[Dennis R. Preston]

Tom is right to point out the anti-intellectual trend in the US; I was just
holding out for Kansas and Texas since I suspect they are not alonme in
this trend.

dInIs

>Not to dispute Dennis' more general point, but the references to Kansas and
>Texas aren't slurs.  The acts of the Kansas legislature regarding the
>teaching of evolution should be well-known.  Less commonly known perhaps is
>that in Texas public school textbooks are (or at least were until recently)
>adopted on a state-wide basis.  That's an incredible amount of purchasing
>power.  Consequently, textbook publishers who aim for big sales aren't
>likely to put something out that doesn't pass muster with the Texas board
>of ed.  You don't have to think of these folks as hopelessly retrograde to
>see them as a seriously narrowing influence.
>
>--Tom Kysilko (who is expressing his own views, not those of his kinfolk.)
>
>At 02:47 PM 2/28/2000 -0500, Dennis wrote:
>>Hmmmm. This is a very interesting reponse. Since teachers in US public
>>schools aren't qualified to teach a subject, let's not do it. The second
>>part I find hard to understand is that we should not even attempt such
>>curricular innovation since school boards in Kansas and Texas (I hope y'all
>>Kansans and Texans take care of this slur on your own; I got my own
>>Kentucky problems) won't go for it. What if they don't go for math,
>>physics, algebra? . . .
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  Tom Kysilko        Practical Data Services
>  pds at visi.com       Saint Paul MN USA
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Dennis R. Preston
Department of Linguistics and Languages
Michigan State University
East Lansing MI 48824-1027 USA
preston at pilot.msu.edu
Office: (517)353-0740
Fax: (517)432-2736