How's your child's science curriculum? I bet it's not as "creative" as this one!

Snopes says they are still trying to verify the validity of this claim, but they did post the alleged page two of the quiz:

No, the ultimate responsibility still lies with the parents. 

There are teachers teaching in public schools with atrocious spelling and grammar and they are passing those lessons onto the children in their class.  While these might not be as dramatic as an example as that test or 2+3=4, it is still teaching the children incorrect lessons.  Nobody is shutting down those schools or telling parents their children cannot go to school there.  I don't see this as much different.

Those examples are like comparing apples and oranges though.  One ends in death while the other one just ends up with an uneducated person, not quite the same end result.  Besides which, schools teaching what the general public would consider appropriate curricula fail on a daily basis. 

One could say, however, that not being able to hold an intelligent conversation with an potential employer or being able to produce a well-written resume may cost someone a job whereas thinking dinosaurs and people lived at the same time may not even come up.

Tricrazy, I am not even sure of where you are basing your arguments on. Please list the data source that shows a good number of teachers in the US have "atrocious" grammar and spelling, and therefor are the reason that young people do not have the skills to get a job.

If young adults have a poor resume, or have poor communication skills, it's because they did not put in much effort into their preparation. 

If kids want to blow off their opportunities, it's their own fault.

Cultivating poor/good work ethics, comes right down from MOM and DAD. 

Q.  The next time someone tries to tell you that the US declared independence in 1776, what's one thing you can tell them?

A.   WERE YOU THERE???

See, it's not just for science...

I didn't say a good number.  I am speaking from my experience teaching.  The point I am tying to make is that schools fail in all kinds of ways without the government telling parents they cannot send their children there and I don't see the original example any differently.  I am putting the responsibility on the parent to ensure that their children are getting the education the parents see fit, not the government.

I just gave the quiz to my 6 and 7 year-olds.  I'm happy to report they would have failed it at the school where it was given.  I gave them the quiz orally.  Some of their answers:

1.  The earth is billions of years old: "True"

2.  Dinosaurs are millions of years old: "True"

3.  Dinosaurs lived with people: "False!" (an emphatic false)

4.  On what day did God make dinosaurs: (very confused looks), "Uh, he didn't." (at this point my oldest one asked me if the quiz was a joke)

5. What did people and animals eat in the beginning: "The beginning of what?" "Everything.  It depends on the animal."

6.  I didn't bother with #6;)

7.  If an animal has sharp teeth, it must mean it's a meat eater: False (we'll work on this one)

8, 9, 10 N/A

11.  Whom should we always trust: "Our parents" (7 yr old) "And Grandparents, if they're nice" (6 year old)

12.  What is the "History Book of the Universe?"  Long pause and quizzical looks.  6 yr old then said, "The sun?"

13.  What did God tell Noah to build? "An ark"

14.  Is this what Noah's ark looked like? "False" "False, because it was never built."

18.  The next time someone tells you the earth is billions (or millions) of years old, what can you say? "Yeah, and?" (more confused looks) "It is billions."

Hallelujah!

Is every "failure" equivalent?

No of course not but, again, that is not the point I am trying to make.  I am trying to say it is a parent's prerogative what kind of education they want their child to get, not the government's.  The market, especially since the original school in question is a private school, will answer those desires.  

Unfortunately, you're right, a child's education--both by what they learn at home, and by where they go to school--is, in large part, determined by their parents.  What happens when these kids (kids who are used to getting "A+" at this school) take standardized tests?  Do these kids go to colleges?  Perhaps they go to creationist colleges as well? Teaching a child to respond to a scientific fact, "Were you there?" seems to be setting that child up for a lifetime of issues in the real world.

The example I used of teaching a child 2 +3 = 5 is no less far-fetched than teaching a child that dinosaurs and humans coexisted, or that the earth is not billions of years old; is teaching creationism more defendable because it is science instead of math? I don't think so.  I think setting kids up to fail this drastically--learning lies instead of truths--is a form of child abuse.

I do not believe in big government, but I do believe there is a role for government in protecting children--physically, emotionally, psychologically and intellectually. 

Yo Switch, it's totally outrageous if this is actually true.  Now, if this private school received one penny of public funds, it needs to be investigated and if true, stripped of public funding.  If real, how pathetic...and sad for the kids.

A while back I started a thread after having attended an educational family outing to the local National Wildlife Refuge.  All was fine until the former public school teacher of many decades popped in a dvd that kept spouting off pseudo-scientific "intelligent design." (makes me angry thinking about what she may have been doing over the decades in a public school classroom)  Here's a 2-minute trailer for the item which led me to report this to the National Wildlife Service who guaranteed this was 100% wrong and would not happen again.  btw, the instructor was kind enough to let me know that day that if I didn't like it, I could leave with my family.  How nice.  :/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHUYjk6RRlU&list=PLABCD6C1EDA54046A&index=105

One more recommendation.  The 1998 Simpsons episode, The Joy of Sect, pretty much sums up my views on organized religion.  

I  think a very eloquent way to sum this up and to reinforce the mathematical argument was said best by Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."

If it had been up to Bobby Jindal, schools such as this in Louisiana would have received public funding in his voucher program that thankfully got thrown out by our Supreme Court.

This stuff infuriates me.  There's always going to be a 'market' for this sort of education unfortunately.  And the kids subjected to it won't know any better, and they'll subject their kids to it.  And then we can continue to have stupid arguments on climate change or whatever other subject the crazy wing of the GOP is pushing.

Wow, troll much?

I love how Christians get painted by such a broad brush when it comes to science when it comes to evolution and creation.  I've read several different Christian books on the subject and you'd be amazed at the diverse opinions on what creation really looks like.  There are strong Christians who believe very strongly in God using evolution as his mechanism for creation and those that believe it was a light switch turned on over seven literal days 4000 years ago and everything in between.

I also chuckle at the blind following of "science" even when science becomes so politicized that the science ultimately gets ignored.  I am a very strong Christian and I absolutely trust in science.  However, my issue is that I don't trust scientists.

Also, could you elaborate on what damage is being done to society by kids being "incorrectly" taught about dinosaurs and how old the earth is?

There is nothing about my post that is "trolling;" just because it doesn't align with your beliefs does not mean that it is a "troll."

There is absolutely nothing politicized about the science of radiocarbon dating.  "Chuckle" all you want. 

I can't imagine that anything constructive will come out of engaging you in a discussion about the damage that can be done to a society by purposefully teaching children things that are not true.  If you don't see the harm in that on your own, we can just agree to disagree.

Science is most certainly not always true.  Science uses experiments to explain the world around us based on theories.  When theories are proven over and over again through experiments they are generally accepted as true.  Like the world being round or gravity.  However, many scientific theories have been proven untrue over time so the accepted "scientific truth" at the time wasn't really true at all.

Now, to the topic at hand;  I'll say that a 4000 year old earth can certainly be a valid scientific theory but obviously there's little scientific experimentation that will corroborate the earth being that young.  So, scientifically speaking I'm in agreement with everyone here that the earth doesn't exhibit any evidence that the earth is that young.
Now, if an all powerful spaghetti monster were to be able to create the earth and all the stars in the sky in seven literal days then one could argue that he could make it look older or younger than it was.  That would be a theory as well, and obviously there's no way to scientifically prove it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /'tro?l/, /'tr?l/) is someone who posts inflammatory,^[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.^[3] The noun troll may also refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted."

I'd say you succeeded.

**edit

Also, what is my belief on this subject?  I don't think I mentioned it.