A Movement to Change Science
Education
In the United States, there is much public
debate, also some courtroom action, pertaining to a current social movement
to include “intelligent design” as subject matter in public school science
classes and/or to label evolution
as “simply a theory.”
This movement for curricular change in
science teaching is stirring turmoil and reaching the doorstep, if not in
the boardrooms, teachers’ meetings, and science classrooms of many schools
and districts across the nation. (Note:
The commotion is primarily an American phenomenon; educated persons in other
nations are baffled by the situation in the United States.).
The evolution/intelligent design
controversy, as it is usually named and presented, has engendered much
confusion about criteria for what is to be taught.
American media and some others have framed
the situation as a science controversy with advocates on “both sides.” This
competition model feeds emotion in the public at large. It also presupposes
that any scientific theory is merely another “guess at the truth” or "belief
system" and that one can accept or not accept as one chooses. The “just
decide for yourself” framing nourishes a “to be fair, just teach both sides
of the issue so students can make up their minds” sort of impulse that
distorts current policy and unsettles science teachers. Science teachers,
and others well grounded in science, recognize the distortion inherent in
this framing, which operates as if scientific fact were decided by citizens
in the same manner as public opinion.
To the typical parent, board member, or
teacher of some subject other than
science,
the controversy seems to be between one science concept (the theory of
evolution) and a rival science concept (intelligent design). It is not,
though.
Making Curricular Decisions
Regarding evolutionary theory and intelligent design:
What should biology teachers
be teaching in their science classrooms?
It is crucial that educators answer this
curricular question in an academically
legitimate manner. To whom should they turn in order to get an
accurate understanding as to what concepts
do belong in a public school
science curriculum and what concepts do
not?
Academic legitimacy derives from
disciplinary integrity. Educators need to rely on the established and much
respected scientific organizations of our nation. They are the keystone for
the discipline of science. It is these, and these alone, which can validate
concepts and propositions as to their
scientific authenticity.
Interestingly, the scientific organizations
have spoken, and spoken clearly and
uniformly, on the matter of teaching evolutionary theory and/or
teaching intelligent design as science.
The consensus conclusion
of the scientific (also many religious, civic, and educational
organizations), is summarized as follows:
The Theory of Evolution (through natural selection) is a scientific theory.
It is bedrock science—used throughout the world by biologists, medical
researchers, pharmaceutical developers, anthropologists, chemists,
biochemists, geologists, and a multitude of different types of scientists
you may not have
ever heard of.
The
word “theory” as used in science means a well-developed scientific idea that
has stood the test of experimentation and observation and is accepted as the
best explanation for a given set of observable phenomena. Other scientific
theories include the Theory of Gravitation (Newton), Heliocentric Theory
(Copernicus’s theory that the earth moves around the sun), and The Theory of
Relativity (Einstein).
Intelligent design (ID) is something
other than
science. ID
is not a scientific theory. It is an idea that one may “believe in” but
which cannot be scientifically demonstrated.
Science Is As Science Does
You will find that the statements of the
following illustrative groups verify the three statements above and the
conclusion that intelligent design does
not belong in a science curriculum for one reason, and one reason
alone: It
is not science.
In view of that, it is
important that educators recognize the actual academic situation with
respect to the question of ID: Intelligent Design has no
scientific legitimacy: There may
be controversy raging in the public and political arenas, but there is
no controversy whatsoever
among the
scientific institutions that comprise active scientific enterprise that ID
should be in the science curricula of public schools.
Resources with which to garner some
understanding of the consensus conclusions are arranged below, beginning
with those requiring the least investment of time, and then on to the
lengthier expositions. First among the listed are two of the most respected
scientific organizations that have spoken directly to this issue: The
National Science Foundation (NSF) and the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS).
The National Academies (of Science, Engineering, Medicine, and Research
Council)
This Web page is designed to
provide easy access to books, position statements, and additional resources
on evolution education and research. These materials have been produced by
the National Academies and other sources and represent the latest statements
from the science community.
http://www.nationalacademies.org/evolution/
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
AAAS Board Resolution on
Intelligent Design Theory. AAAS Board Resolution Urges Opposition to
"Intelligent Design" Theory in U.S. Science Classes
http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2002/1106id.shtml
The National Science Foundation (National Science Board)
“More than a century after
Darwin, evolution still under attack in science classrooms.” This is the
first sentence of a report prepared by the National Science Board of the
National Science Foundation (May 2004). It is a “must read” for any public
school teacher who is interested in the contemporary challenges to sound
science instruction.
nat_sci_board.htm
National Center for Science Education
A set of resources on the topic
of Intelligent Design.
http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=2
Voices
for Evolution,
a project of NCSE, displays the diversity of organizations and perspectives
in support of teaching evolution in the public schools. Statements are
included from the following types of organizations:
religious,
civil liberties,
educational, and
scientific and scholarly. If this set of materials does not convince you
of the case against Intelligent Design, nothing will.
National Science Teachers Association
http://www.nsta.org/pressroom&news_story_ID=48786
Wired Magazine (general overview of the whole issue)
Currently a number of schools
are embroiled with this controversy. A number of public schools are under
pressure from their community to include a topic called Intelligent Design
in biology classes. In addition, there is pressure to include in text books
and classes a statement to the effect that evolution is “simply a theory.”
You can read about this controversy in a very fine article found at:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/evolution.html?pg=1&topic=evolution&topic_set=
Natural History Magazine
Natural History magazine is the
voice of The American Museum of Natural History. Its April 2002 issue
featured the special report "Intelligent Design?" which is reprinted here by
permission.
Three proponents of Intelligent Design (ID)
present their views of design in the natural world. Each view
is immediately followed by a response from a proponent of evolution (EVO).
The report, printed in its entirety, opens with an introduction by Natural
History magazine and concludes with an overview of the ID movement.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/nhmag.html
Catholic News Service: Concerning Church – Evolution
(Feb-1-2005)
Church needs better evolution
education, says bishops' official David Byers, executive director of the
U.S. bishops' Committee on Science and Human Values from 1984 to 2003.
Link
to this on site news release
The “theory of evolution
through natural
selection” is a robust scientific theory that is well-supported within the
scientific community. It is not, as some ID proponents have insinuated, a
"disputed view." Rather, as a product of scientific inquiry, it is hale and
hearty. The Board of Directors of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) has urged citizens across the nation to oppose
the establishment of policies that would permit the teaching of “intelligent
design theory” as a part of the science curriculum of the public schools.
Summary:
Intelligent Design is a modern-day creationist movement. Its
proponents put forth, and seek to defend using scientific terminology and
data, a hypothesis that cannot ever be scientifically tested or verified.
Although such ideas have their places in society (and every individual can
choose to believe or not believe the basic religious premises of the proponents of
Intelligent Design), the topic is not appropriate for inclusion in the
science curriculum of a public
school. Is it
science? No.
Mynga Futrell, Ph.D. in Science
Education
Paul Geisert, Ph.D. in
Instructional Systems
2005/05/06
