Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Assuming that this is what Scalia was arguing, the point that the law hadn't been implemented yet was perfectly valid for him to be making.

Emory workshop teaches teachers how to teach evolution
(By LAURA DIAMOND, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, October 24, 2008)

Some students burst into tears when a high school biology teacher told them they’d be studying evolution. Another teacher said some students repeatedly screamed “no” when he began talking about it.

Other teachers said students demanded to know whether they pray and questioned why the had to learn about evolution if it was just a theory.

About 60 public high school teachers from the Atlanta area were at Emory University last week, swapping stories about the challenges they face when teaching evolution.

They said students often walk in with grave misconceptions about the subject, and many parents fear teachers will tell kids that they can’t have their religious beliefs.

“I’ve seen churches train students to come to school with specific questions to ask to sabotage my lessons,” said Bonnie Pratt, a biology teacher at Northview High in north Fulton County. “We need parents and the community to understand why and how we teach evolution.”

The teachers were at a workshop on teaching evolution organized by Emory’s Center for Science Education. They discussed ways to teach it and how to address challenges and misconceptions. The training was part of a two-day evolution conference on campus that ended Friday.

Evolution is the scientific explanation for the gradual process that resulted in the diversity of living things.

Teaching evolution has long stoked a debate over science and religion in public schools. Some view it as incompatible with their religious views about how God created the universe and human beings. But many educators and scientists say it’s the basis for biology, which is a gateway course to future studies of life sciences.

These conflicting ideas have battled in Georgia.

State schools Superintendent Kathy Cox triggered debate in 2004 when she proposed striking references to evolution from state science teaching standards. Cox changed her position following public pressure. The State Board of Education later approved standards calling for students to learn evolution and supporting concepts.

In 2002, Cobb County school officials put stickers in science textbooks warning that evolution was a “theory, not a fact.” A judge ordered the district to remove the stickers in 2005, saying they endorsed a particular religious belief.

Teachers at the Emory conference said the challenges they face now come from the communities around their schools, and that they must find ways to confront them. Many said they tell students that regardless of what they believe, they need to know and understand evolution.

A few years ago, Pratt started holding meetings " open to parents, students, church members and others " to address their questions about evolution. She holds the annual session a few weeks before she begins the unit and gets about 200 people.

“It used to be that the whole unit was a struggle, and we were butting heads,” Pratt said. “This meeting helps everyone understand that science teachers are not the enemy. Now, the kids are showing up ready to learn about evolution.”

Other teachers said they try to fix students’ misconceptions. They explain how humans and apes share a common ancestor that no longer exists, not that humans and apes evolved from one another. They say that while “theory” may describe a hunch in everyday language, in science it is defined as an explanation supported by factual evidence to describe events that occur in our world.

Graham Balch, a biology teacher at Grady High in Atlanta, addressed the controversy head-on. He had his students read about Cox’s actions and the response she got. They learned about efforts across the country to water down lessons about evolution and how other public and private schools teach the material. They debated the cause of the conflict and whether evolution should be taught in public schools.

“I wanted to help them feel comfortable and open so they can embrace evolution,” Balch said. “I wanted them to want to learn about evolution and didn’t want them to be afraid.”

A few of Balch’s students attended the Emory workshop. While they doubted all of their classmates believed in evolution, they said there was agreement they needed to learn about it.

Freshman Caitlin Wade said the activity helped her realize she can balance her religious beliefs with her love of science. “I can pray, read my Bible and study science,” she said. “I don’t have to choose.”

“I don’t have to choose.”

“We need parents and the community to understand why and how we teach evolution.”

State BOE race slips below radar
(By Scott Rothschild, Lawrence Journal-World, October 26, 2008)

Way below the noise of a historic presidential campaign and an epic economic meltdown are the low-key battles between moderate and conservative candidates vying for the Kansas State Board of Education.

Five positions on the 10-member board are up for grabs, and the results of those elections will decide whether moderates maintain their majority, or even increase it " or conservatives gain ground to produce a 5-5 standoff.

Historically, the see-saw battle between moderates and conservatives for control of the board has produced fights over teaching evolution in schools that have attracted international attention.

Currently, the 6-4 moderate majority has established science standards that subscribe to evolution being taught in science classes.

The issue of evolution came up last week during a Lawrence debate in the SBOE, District 4 contest between Republican Robert Meissner and Democrat Carolyn Campbell.

Campbell supports the current science standards.

She said Meissner had a hidden agenda, implying he would be open to allowing the teaching of intelligent design or some other idea about life’s origins in science classes.

Meissner stated: “As far as other theories of origin, the litmus test for me is scientific credibility. When the science community can come to a consensus as to the scientific credibility, then at that point and only that point should we consider including those other theories in our science curriculum.”

Steve Case, a Kansas University research professor, has had a front-row seat as the state board has gone back and forth over education and evolution.

In 2005, he was chairman of the science standards-writing committee that favored teaching evolution, but those standards were rejected by the then 6-4 conservative majority on the board, which put in place standards that questioned evolution and were supported by advocates of intelligent design.

The 2006 election put moderates back in control, and they quickly put in the evolution-friendly standards.

Case said it is possible that conservatives could make gains in this election because people have been focused on other issues.

“The economy is dominating the news and people’s thinking these days,” he said. The SBOE races, he said, “have faded to the background. People need to pay attention.”

The 6-4 moderate majority that supports the current science standards, which include evolution, is tenuous.

Of the five positions on the board up for grabs, three are held by moderates and two by conservatives. Of the moderate seats, all three incumbents are not seeking re-election.

Campbell and Meissner are running for a seat currently held by Democrat Bill Wagnon, a moderate. Wagnon defeated Meissner in 2004 in a close election.

In District 8, based in Wichita, Republican Dennis Hedke and Democrat Walt Chappell are running for a seat held by Republican Carol Rupe, who is a moderate.

Chappell supports the present science standards, but Hedke said he is open to considering changes and supports private school vouchers.

On his Web site, Hedke stated: “In the interest of academic integrity, we must remain open to consideration of adjustments of any ‘standards’ we attempt to define at any given moment.”

Hedke has been endorsed by board members Kathy Martin, Kenneth Willard and Steve Abrams, all of whom voted for science standards critical of evolution. And he is endorsed by the conservative Kansas Republican Assembly.

In the District 2 race, which includes Johnson County, both Republican Mary Ralstin and Democrat Sue Storm are considered moderates. They are running for a seat to replace a moderate.

In the District 10 race, Republican David Dennis and Paul Casanova have said they both support the standards. One of them will replace the conservative Abrams, who is running for state Senate.

And in the District 6 race, Republican incumbent Martin, who is critical of evolution, faces moderate Democrat Christopher Renner.

If Meissner and Hedke win and Martin wins re-election, the board would be tied 5-5. If Campbell, Chappell and Renner win, the moderates would have an 8-2 majority.

Evolution belongs in schools
(By Terry Maxwell, San Angelo Times Opinion, October 26, 2008)

The Texas State Board of Education has announced the appointment of six people to a panel that will review new science curriculum standards in our state.

Although three of them are recognized and accomplished Texas scientists, incredibly the other three are anti-evolutionists and two of those are out-of-state authors of an anti-evolution textbook, "Exploring Evolution," which could end up adopted as a text in Texas classrooms.

Texas has a large list of distinguished scientists who could have ably served on this panel, but the ideological goals of the creationist members of the board are front and center. Here we go again.

A newspaper editor once said to me that one of evolution's public problems is that scientists don't do a good job of explaining it. I don't agree. They explain it well but do so in a text-length format that much of the public is unmotivated to endure.

The U.S. public now gets its evolution "education" predominantly from anti-evolution sound/print bites or by word of mouth. Take for example the mantras about the supposed problems that thermodynamics presents to evolution and the claimed absence of fossils with transitional features indicating shared ancestry. Physicists and paleontologists laid those claims to rest long ago, but it's like whistling in the wind before people who make no sincere effort to understand it.

The heart of this dispute is not the science in evolution. It has been pointed out elsewhere that there has been no need for a scientific article titled "new evidence for evolution" in the past 100 years. The reality of an evolutionary history of life was settled within mainstream biology and geology at least that long ago, and there remains no scientific debate. The evolution questions today involve details of pattern and process, indicative of an active and vibrant science.

Rather, this dispute is one of ideology between science and certain religious viewpoints about a subject addressed in Scripture. You notice that we aren't sparring over the germ or atomic theories that are not directly addressed in the Bible. It is confusing and misleading to students in science class to single out biology and historical geology as uniquely discredited by a religious-based perspective.

The "strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories" language in the Texas school curriculum is an anti-evolution ploy and everyone knows it.

Supplemental teaching aides, like the anti-evolutionary "Exploring Evolution" that present so-called weaknesses of evolution, would work their way into science classrooms. But in those classrooms you are unlikely to find other teaching aides that would present the abundant scientific refutation of the so-called "weaknesses" claims.

Current "strengths and weaknesses" is a way for students to hear fundamentalist religion's objections to evolution under the misleading guise of scientific discourse. There are clergy who know this and object.

Christian ministers testified before the SBOE hearing in 2003 in favor of keeping Texas science classrooms involved in mainstream science. In effect, they argued for the science classroom to steer clear of religious interpretation - a role they preferred to handle in their ministries and homes. And as of Oct. 17, there were nationally 11,708 (539 from Texas) cleric signatures to the Christian Clergy Letter Project and 364 cleric signatures to the Jewish Clergy Letter Project.

Those letters support that the "theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth. To reject this truth or to treat it as one theory among others is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children."

Mainstream science, including evolution, is that actually practiced by Texas scientists in the laboratory and field. The 21st Century Science Coalition has more than 800 signatures (including 406 Texas science faculty) to the statement: "the science community in Texas will accept nothing less than the best education for our kids. We will not allow politics and ideology to handicap the future of our children with a 19th century education in their 21st century classrooms."

It is time for Texas to embrace sound science education for the next generations of citizens who will carry the culture and science-based economy of our state into this new century.

San Angelo Standard-Times is a daily newspaper based in San Angelo, Texas, USA since 1884. It is owned by the newspaper group, The E.W. Scripps Company.

The newspaper, owned in the 1920s by Houston H. Harte, in 1924 became one of the two original flagships of the Harte-Hanks newspaper chain.[1] Scripps began operating the newspaper in 1997 after purchasing it from Harte-Hanks.

The U.S. public now gets its evolution "education" predominantly from anti-evolution sound/print bites or by word of mouth. Take for example the mantras about the supposed problems that thermodynamics presents to evolution and the claimed absence of fossils with transitional features indicating shared ancestry. Physicists and paleontologists laid those claims to rest long ago, but it's like whistling in the wind before people who make no sincere effort to understand it.

Texas Ed Agency Opens Public Review Period for Science Standards
(TFN Insider, October 28, 2008)

The battle between creationists and supporters of sound science in Texas public schools has moved to another important stage. Texas Education Agency has formally opened the public review period for the state’s proposed science curriculum standards.

Once the State Board of Education adopts the final standards (an action
currently set for March 2009), publishers will use those standards to craft new science textbooks for schools in Texas and other states across the country.

First the good news: the standards proposed by the work groups drop language requiring that public schools teach students phony “weaknesses” of evolution. They also include language making clear that supernatural explanations (such as creationism/”intelligent design”) have no place in a science classroom.

Now the bad news: creationists who control the state board have already said
they oppose the work groups’ proposed standards on evolution. The board’s
creationist chairman demands that teachers water down instruction on evolution by teaching so-called “weaknesses” and says science should be redefined to include supernatural explanations. Far-right groups agree, attacking the proposed standards as the product of “educrats.”

Now the general public gets a say. The state board will also hear public testimony on the standards in November.

The board’s creationist chairman ... says science should be redefined to include supernatural explanations.

Former Freshwater students testify
(By Pamela Schehl, Mount Vernon News, November 1, 2008)

MOUNT VERNON " Dinosaurs, dragons and Darwin were discussed Friday during the contract termination hearing of suspended Mount Vernon Middle School science teacher John Freshwater.

David Millstone, attorney for the Mount Vernon school board, introduced several handouts allegedly distributed by Freshwater in class. Former Freshwater students Simon Souhrada and Kate Button testified the dinosaur handout implied that humans and dinosaurs probably coexisted, contradicting the generally accepted theory of evolution. Button said Freshwater told her class there was new evidence that dinosaurs probably were around when people were, because of the global incidence of legends of dragons.

Both students also alleged Freshwater indirectly made it clear to students that he disagreed with Darwin’s theory of evolution, and exposed creationism or intelligent design as an equally valid theory.

Souhrada said Freshwater was a very good teacher with just a few exceptions, and those exceptions concerned the evolution chapter. He said Freshwater seemed to be trying to discredit evolution and that it seemed like he didn’t really want to teach it, although it was in the textbook.

Souhrada said what is called the Tesla coil was used when he was in Freshwater’s class. He said the tool was used to show the properties of different gases, and that Freshwater also used it to “draw” on students who volunteered. Souhrada said he was one of those volunteers, and Freshwater drew the shape of a cross on his arm.

Kelly Hamilton, Freshwater’s lawyer, asked why Souhrada didn’t tell his parents about the mark.

“It never registered as being anything, really,” Souhrada said. “I was in eighth grade and thought it was a cool, shocky thing on my arm.”

Button said Freshwater was a well-liked teacher, but that his teaching style was “scattered.” She testified she disagreed with his views on things like evolution and dinosaurs, and that he presented some material she could “connect” to science. One example given was Freshwater reading “Chicken Soup for the Teenage Soul” to the class. Another was a discussion about Noah’s flood.

Middle school special education teachers Katie Beach and Kerri Mahan have spent time in Freshwater’s class, and testified as to his teaching style, topics discussed in class and religious items in the room. Both said to their knowledge Freshwater did not pick up and read his Bible during class. They also said some of the “nonscientific” discussions could have been initiated by the students.

Mount Vernon High School Science Department chairman Richard Cunningham was also called to the stand by Millstone. He talked about some of the same handouts referred to by the students, and said he and the science committee felt the material was written with a clear bias and did not pass the test of scientific peer review. Cunningham gave a detailed explanation of scientific methods and science standards and benchmarks in the school curriculum.

Hamilton asked whether Cunningham had spent any time in Freshwater’s class. Cunningham said he had, and said he believed Freshwater was a very influential teacher, which could be a good thing or a bad thing.

“If he misleads students about an issue, that would be bad,” he told Hamilton.

He also said he had no evidence that Freshwater misleads students.

Cunningham mentioned Biblical references on the wall, which he said seemed unusual for a science classroom or in a public school classroom. He said he did not report those concerns to the administration.

“Do you have any empirical evidence that John Freshwater taught creationism or intelligent design?” Hamilton asked.

“No,” replied Cunningham.

“Can a teacher possibly teach standards from another grade level?”

“Yes, it could happen.”

“Is it permissible?”

“I’m not sure.”

“Do you know where it is specifically prohibited?”

“No.”

Souhrada’s father, Paul, also testified at the hearing. Following completion of testimony on Friday, the hearing was adjourned until Jan. 6, 2009.