Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

Upsets will create new look
(By GARY SCHARRER, Houston Chronicle, March 3, 2010)

AUSTIN " Voters in the Republican primary basically guaranteed a new look for the State Board of Education by removing controversial member Don McLeroy and ending the 26-year board career of Geraldine “Tincy” Miller.

McLeroy's leadership as one of the board's seven social conservatives, and his opposition to the teaching of evolution, made him a strong ally for conservative Christian groups and a lightning rod for educators.

Like McLeroy, Miller was a former chair of the 15-member board. But her moderate-to-conservative approach did not attract organized opposition.

“That's the biggest shock of all,” said Dan Quinn of the Texas Freedom Network about Miller's 2,644-vote loss to George Clayton, academic coordinator for North Dallas High School.

“It's hard to know what motivated voters there to make a change,” said Quinn, whose liberal-leaning watchdog group monitors the board. “Even if he had a message, he had no money to distribute that message.”

Clayton spent less than $1,800 on the campaign. Miller spent about $55,000, according to campaign finance records.

Miller could not speculate how a little-known opponent defeated her.

“She was surprised. She knows that elections can take unexpected turns,” Miller spokeswoman Alexis DeLee said.

McLeroy, a Bryan dentist, lost by 860 votes out of 115,916 ballots cast to lobbyist Thomas Ratliff.

Neither Clayton nor Ratliff faces Democratic opposition in the November election.

McLeroy served as chairman of the board until Senate Democrats blocked his confirmation last year on grounds that his strong religious beliefs interfered with his leadership.

Ratliff said he's not sure his win carries a strong message, considering the narrow margin.

“I'd like to think that the message is, ‘Let's get back to education and stop being focused on politics,' ” he said.

McLeroy said he had a good run and will look forward to new opportunities.

“I'm definitely not devastated. We ran a good campaign. We were nice to each other,” McLeroy said.

The board has attracted national attention in recent years after efforts to diminish the teaching of evolution in public schools and fights over other so-called cultural war issues, including a Bible course curriculum.

Christian schools angry over ban on teaching creationism
(MALCOLM BROWN, Sydney Morning Herald, March 3, 2010)

Australian Christian schools will campaign against what they see as the thin end of the wedge - a decision by the South Australian Non-Government Schools Registration Board to effectively ban the teaching of creationism.

Under policies published in December, the board said it required ''teaching of science as an empirical discipline, focusing on inquiry, hypothesis, investigation, experimentation, observation and evidential analysis''.

The board said it ''does not accept as satisfactory a science curriculum in a non-government school which is based on, espouses or reflects the literal interpretation of a religious text in its treatment of either creationism or intelligent design''.

The chief executive of Christian Schools Australia, Stephen O'Doherty, said the board statement was too strident, removing the right to teach ''biblical perspectives'' as part of science.

He said the policy set a precedent which might be taken up in other states, including NSW, where the issue had been the subject of intense debate two years ago.

A spokeswoman for the NSW Board of Studies, Rebecca Lloyd, said the NSW board had made its policy clear last June that science teaching which was not scientifically or evidence-based would not be part of assessment for the School Certificate or Higher School Certificate.

But the NSW Board of Studies had a policy of not loading so much mandatory work on to schools that there was no time for anything else, and other non-core activities offered to students could include extra religious instruction.

The acting executive director of the NSW Association of Independent Schools, Michael Carr, said: ''Our view is that NSW independent schools must follow the Board of Studies curriculum, which dictates that creationism cannot be taught as science. ''Schools wishing to teach creationism must teach it as part of their religious studies.''

But Mr O'Doherty said a close reading of the South Australian policy indicated it was going a step further and banning teaching of the subject altogether. It was the only such subject singled out, he said.

In NSW courses, there was scope in science courses to include cultural or historical aspects, such as the ''Dreamtime'', the theories of the ancient Greeks, or biblical perspectives on the nature of the universe.

He said if the South Australian policy was taken literally, ''it means you cannot mention the Bible in science classes''.

A spokesman for the South Australian Non-Government Schools Registration Board said it was not banning teaching of creationism full-stop. ''It can be taught in religious studies.''

"Turn thy back, and keep thy sight closed, for if the Gorgon show herself, and thou shouldest see her, no return upward would there ever be." Thus said the Master (Virgil) , and he himself turned me, and trusted not to my hands but with his own he also blindfolded me.

O ye who have sound understanding, regard the doctrine that is hidden under the veil of the strange verses.

Top home-school texts dismiss Darwin, evolution
(By DYLAN LOVAN, The Associated Press, March 6, 2010)

LOUISVILLE, Ky. " Home-school mom Susan Mule wishes she hadn't taken a friend's advice and tried a textbook from a popular Christian publisher for her 10-year-old's biology lessons.

Mule's precocious daughter Elizabeth excels at science and has been studying tarantulas since she was 5. But she watched Elizabeth's excitement turn to confusion when they reached the evolution section of the book from Apologia Educational Ministries, which disputed Charles Darwin's theory.

"I thought she was going to have a coronary," Mule said of her daughter, who is now 16 and taking college courses in Houston. "She's like, 'This is not true!'"

Christian-based materials dominate a growing home-school education market that encompasses more than 1.5 million students in the U.S. And for most home-school parents, a Bible-based version of the Earth's creation is exactly what they want. Federal statistics from 2007 show 83 percent of home-schooling parents want to give their children "religious or moral instruction."

"The majority of home-schoolers self-identify as evangelical Christians," said Ian Slatter, a spokesman for the Home School Legal Defense Association. "Most home-schoolers will definitely have a sort of creationist component to their home-school program."

Those who don't, however, often feel isolated and frustrated from trying to find a textbook that fits their beliefs.

Two of the best-selling biology textbooks stack the deck against evolution, said some science educators who reviewed sections of the books at the request of The Associated Press.

"I feel fairly strongly about this. These books are promulgating lies to kids," said Jerry Coyne, an ecology and evolution professor at the University of Chicago.

The textbook publishers defend their books as well-rounded lessons on evolution and its shortcomings. One of the books doesn't attempt to mask disdain for Darwin and evolutionary science.

"Those who do not believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God will find many points in this book puzzling," says the introduction to "Biology: Third Edition" from Bob Jones University Press. "This book was not written for them."

The textbook delivers a religious ultimatum to young readers and parents, warning in its "History of Life" chapter that a "Christian worldview ... is the only correct view of reality; anyone who rejects it will not only fail to reach heaven but also fail to see the world as it truly is."

When the AP asked about that passage, university spokesman Brian Scoles said the sentence made it into the book because of an editing error and will be removed from future editions.

The size of the business of home-school texts isn't clear because the textbook industry is fragmented and privately held publishers don't give out sales numbers. Slatter said home-school material sales reach about $1 billion annually in the U.S.

Publishers are well aware of the market, said Jay Wile, a former chemistry professor in Indianapolis who helped launch the Apologia curriculum in the early 1990s.

"If I'm planning to write a curriculum, and I want to write it in a way that will appeal to home-schoolers, I'm going to at least find out what my demographic is," Wile said.

In Kentucky, Lexington home-schooler Mia Perry remembers feeling disheartened while flipping through a home-school curriculum catalog and finding so many religious-themed textbooks.

"We're not religious home-schoolers, and there's somewhat of a feeling of being outnumbered," said Perry, who has home-schooled three of her four children after removing her oldest child from a public school because of a health condition.

Perry said she cobbled together her own curriculum after some mainstream publishers told her they would not sell directly to home-schooling parents.

Wendy Womack, another Lexington home-school mother, said the only scientifically credible curriculum she's found is from the Maryland-based Calvert School, which has been selling study-at-home materials for more than 100 years.

Apologia and Bob Jones University Press say their science books sell well. Apologia's "Exploring Creation" biology textbook retails for $65, while Bob Jones' "Biology" Third Edition lists at $52.

Coyne and Virginia Tech biology professor Duncan Porter reviewed excerpts from the Apologia and Bob Jones biology textbooks, which are equivalent to ninth- and 10th-grade biology lessons. Porter said he would give the books an F.

"If this is the way kids are home-schooled then they're being shortchanged, both rationally and in terms of biology," Coyne said. He argued that the books may steer students away from careers in biology or the study of the history of the earth.

Wile countered that Coyne "feels compelled to lie in order to prop up a failing hypothesis (evolution). We definitely do not lie to the students. We tell them the facts that people like Dr. Coyne would prefer to cover up."

Adam Brown's parents say their 16-year-old son's belief in the Bible's creation story isn't deterring him from pursuing a career in marine biology. His parents, Ken and Polly Brown, taught him at their Cedar Grove, Ind., home using the Apologia curriculum and other science texts.

Polly Brown said her son would gladly take college courses that include evolution, and he'll be able to provide the expected answers even though he disagrees.

"He probably knows it better than the kids who have been taught evolution all through public school," Polly Brown said. "But that is in order for him to understand both sides of that argument because he will face it throughout his higher education."

On another related issue is the HOME SCHOOL crowd. It appears that most(but not all) of the parents of home schoolers are those who have Evangelical leanings. The biology texts available to the Home SChoolers are many produced by Evangelical Presses so the presentation of science is a bit skewed to the Biblical. Those parents who are trying to rise above the culture differences and present their kids some science that is at least main stream, are having a deuce of a time trying to acquire texts from the book companies that publish texts used in the public schools.

Wile countered that Coyne "feels compelled to lie in order to prop up a failing hypothesis (evolution). We definitely do not lie to the students. We tell them the facts that people like Dr. Coyne would prefer to cover up."

Does state board need a history test?
(By Gary Scharrer, San Antonio Express-News, March 9, 2010)

AUSTIN " This is what can happen when you ignore experts, don't fully know your history, and are responsible for approving textbooks for Texas schoolchildren, according to critics worried about the State Board of Education:

You might delete someone recognized by Ladies' Home Journal as one of the 100 Most Important Women of the 20th Century " citing her membership in a socialist organization.

You could ban a popular children's author from textbooks because his name is the same as a professor who wrote favorably about Marxism.

You might even vote to teach youngsters that U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy's 1950s crusade to smear suspected Communists was vindicated by later research on Soviet spying.

The State Board of Education will meet again this week before taking final action in May on new social studies curriculum standards that will influence history and government textbooks for 4.7 million public school students.

In January, board members ignored the recommendation of experts it appointed to help draft the new social studies standards when it rejected Dolores Huerta as required reading for third-graders. Huerta co-founded the United Farm Workers of America with César Chávez and is a former regent for the University of California System. Seven schools are named after her, including Dolores Huerta Elementary School in Fort Worth.

Geraldine “Tincy” Miller, R-Dallas, encouraged colleagues to yank Huerta because “she was a prominent member of the Democratic Socialists of America Party” and, therefore, did not “exemplify good citizenship” like Helen Keller.

Helen Keller joined a socialist party in 1909 and advocated for socialism the rest of her life.

Without discussion, the board voted 7-4 to remove Huerta.

“This goes to the fundamental issue. The board is not made up of educators, let alone historians,” said Julio Noboa, a history professor at the University of Texas at El Paso, who was one of the board's socials studies experts offering recommendations. “It really makes them look stupid.”

Miller spokeswoman Alexis DeLee said the veteran Dallas board member “thought the story of a child (Keller) who overcame tremendous hardship through the help of her teacher would resonate with small children, especially children with disabilities.”

“She was not referring to (Keller's) political views as an adult,” DeLee said. “She did not know she grew up to become a socialist.”

DeLee noted Huerta remains in the high school history curriculum.

Huerta is now president of the non-profit Dolores Huerta Foundation, which works on issues important to low-income communities.

“I don't know what this silliness is all about,” Huerta said of the board's action. “Probably the real reason is not because I'm a member of the Socialist Democrats of America organization but the fact that I am a registered and voting Democrat. And I've also been an advocate for farmworkers.”

She said her work is what's important " not herself.

The board tentatively decided to add W.E.B. DuBois, who co-founded the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, to the reading list for elementary school students.

“I was just stunned that I never knew who this man was. He is a true, great American,” board member Don McLeroy, R-Bryan, told his colleagues.

DuBois spent his final years in Ghana, having broken with the NAACP. He joined the Communist Party and pronounced capitalism “doomed to self-destruction.”

Some of the board's votes were embarrassing, McLeroy acknowledged. But, he said, the process can catch mistakes before final action in May.

“Those things will be corrected,” McLeroy said, adding he believes Huerta belongs in the curriculum " along with DuBois, whose communist beliefs did not undermine his status as “an influential leader in helping establish civil rights.”

McLeroy also influenced the board to change a section on McCarthyism so students learn “the Venona Papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” In a memo to curriculum writers last fall, McLeroy said McCarthy “was basically vindicated” by the archival documentation.

McCarthy was right about some of the bigger issues, but “virtually none of the people that McCarthy claimed or alleged were Soviet agents turn up” in the new research, Venona scholar and Emory University history professor Harvey Klehr has said.

“The new information from Russian and American archives does not vindicate McCarthy. He remains a demagogue,” Klehr has said.

Some of the 100-plus board appointees say the process is frustrating.

Judy Brodigan, immediate past president of the Texas Council for the Social Studies, said she pushed to have Revolutionary War hero Nathan Hale removed from the first-grade curriculum as inappropriate for that age.

“How do you talk about someone who is hung for being a patriot to a 6-year-old? They can't write, so they draw pictures of a man hanging from a noose,” she said.

The experts moved Hale to the fifth grade, but state board members returned him to first grade.

Pat Hardy, R-Fort Worth, encouraged the board to pull Bill Martin Jr. out of the standards.

The board apparently confused the author of “Brown Bear, Brown Bear What Do You See?” with a different Bill Martin who wrote about “Ethical Marxism.”

It's a process that relies only sporadically on expertise, said Keith Erekson, director of the University of Texas at El Paso Center for History Teaching & Learning.

“Experienced review committees, invited experts and the public provide their feedback early in the process before the State Board of Education closes the door in order to do what they want to do,” Erekson said. “That would be like hiring top-rate engineers to design a car only to rush it off the assembly line without inspecting the final accelerator pedal.”

We would like to point out the biased nature of the March 7 article "Religious views in home-school texts dismay some." As 14- and 16-year-old sisters, we have used Jay Wile's Apologia curriculum for our science studies since seventh grade. We are well aware that Wile's curriculum is Christian-based and dependent on the fact that Creationism is true and that the Theory of Evolution is still a false hypothesis.

As the article states, 17 percent of home-schoolers profess no evangelical views and would rather use textbooks in sync with their own worldviews. We would propose, then, that this minority should either write their own textbooks or go to Ebay, Amazon, or elsewhere to purchase their secular curriculum.

Public school (evolution-based) textbooks are also available for purchase by home-schoolers. As these books are available in abundance, it seems the greater purpose of this article was to revile Christians for their convictions against what they believe to be truthless teaching.

As Jesus tells His disciples in John 15:20, "If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also." This article is a fulfillment, if even in a small way, of this verse, for it represents the press's prejudice against those who wish to follow Jesus' teachings.

for it represents the press's prejudice against those who wish to follow Jesus' teachings.

TEXTBOOKS FOR HOME-SCHOOLING UPDATE

Last week the Associated Press reported on the problem of parents who do not want to use textbooks from Christian publishers for home-schooling their children. A local newspaper in North Carolina published this "letter to the editor" responding to the Associated Press story:

Quote:

We would like to point out the biased nature of the March 7 article "Religious views in home-school texts dismay some." As 14- and 16-year-old sisters, we have used Jay Wile's Apologia curriculum for our science studies since seventh grade. We are well aware that Wile's curriculum is Christian-based and dependent on the fact that Creationism is true and that the Theory of Evolution is still a false hypothesis.

TEXTBOOKS FOR HOME-SCHOOLING UPDATE
As 14- and 16-year-old sisters, we have used Jay Wile's Apologia curriculum for our science studies since seventh grade.

As you will learn when we study the hypothesis of evolution in depth, there is precious little evidence for such an idea and quite a bit of evidence against it. As a result, it does not make sense to us to base a classification system on such a tenuous hypothesis. Instead, it makes more sense to base our classification system on the observable similarities among organisms.
This is the essence of what Carrolus Linnaeus developed in the 1700s, and it has served biology well since that time.

Since we have touched on a classification system that has been inspired by the hypothesis of evolution, we should at least mention a classification system that has been proposed by those who believe that the earth and the life on it were specially created out of nothing by God. This classification system, usually called baraminology (bear’ uh min ol’ uh jee), attempts to determine the kinds of creatures that God specifically created on earth. Indeed, the word “baraminology” comes from two Hebrew words used in Genesis: bara, which means “create,” and min, which means “kind.” Thus, baraminology is the study of created kinds.

Those who work with baraminology think that God created specific kinds of creatures and that He created them with the ability to adapt to their changing environment. As time went on, then, these created kinds did change within strict limits that we will discuss later on in the course. This led to a greater diversity of life on the planet than what existed right after creation. As a result, baraminologists think that all organisms we see on the planet today came from one of the many kinds of creatures that God created during the creation period discussed in the first chapter of Genesis. Baraminologists, then, try to define groupings called “baramins.” Any organisms that exist within a baramin came from the same originally-created organism. For example, some baraminologists place domesticated dogs, wild dogs, and wolves into the same baramin because they believe that God created a basic kind of creature called a “dog,” and the various forms of dogs and wolves that we see today are simply the result of that basic kind of creature adapting to a changing environment.

Although we think that there is a lot of evidence in favor of this new classification scheme, we still do not think that it should be used in this course. It is still relatively new and not fully developed. We doubt that it will be fully developed for many, many years to come. As a result, we think that the five-kingdom system still provides the best overall means by which to classify the organisms of God’s creation, and we will limit ourselves to that system. Nevertheless, we will mention the other systems (the three-domain system and baraminology) from time to time, so it is important that you understand the basics of each.