The Longstanding Debate: Teaching Evolution in Public Schools

How did life originate? -The Competing Theories: Theory of Evolution Theory of Evolution  Proposed by Darwin in 1859  Driven by natural selection; evolution infers that new species develop over many generations from a common ancestor. Creationism  Biblical Genesis description explaining the origins of ALL life forms by a divine creator  Intelligent Design is the Contemporary form of Creationism

The Official Position of Pedagogical Organizations:  NSTA, the National Academies of Science, and The American Association for the Advancement of Sciences share the same position concerning the teaching of evolution: Evolution is a “major unifying concept in science that should be included in K-12 science education frameworks and curricula. Furthermore, if evolution is not taught, students will not achieve the level of scientific literacy they need.” (NSTA, 2003)

The Dos and Don’ts of Teaching the Origins of Life: Theory of Evolution: Should be taught in a professional manner; presented as a theory with factual evidence (NSTA, 2003) Should be taught in a professional manner; presented as a theory with factual evidence (NSTA, 2003) Disclaimers (verbal or written) should not be given prior to instruction Disclaimers (verbal or written) should not be given prior to instruction - see Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education & Cobb County School Board textbook sticker case

The Dos and Don’ts of Teaching the Origins of Life: Creationism or Intelligent Design: Cannot legally be taught in PUBLIC SCHOOL classrooms Cannot legally be taught in PUBLIC SCHOOL classrooms -see Edwards v. Aguillard & Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

The Legal Basis The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contains the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. These clauses together state: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The Legal Basis The Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses create the “separation of church and state.” The Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses create the “separation of church and state.” McCarthy, Cambron-McCabe, & Thomas (2004), state that “public schools must abide by Establishment Clause restrictions on government promotion of religious creeds. Because teachers and other school personnel are working with a vulnerable captive audience in public schools, their actions have been scrutinized to ensure that classrooms are not used as a forum to indoctrinate sectarian beliefs.”

The Constitution has established both freedoms from and of religion The courts have affirmed that “evolution is science (not a secular religion)” The courts have affirmed that “evolution is science (not a secular religion)” - see Epperson v. Arkansas Creationism intends to advance a PARTICULAR religion Creationism intends to advance a PARTICULAR religion - see Edwards v. Aguillard “Intelligent Design is a form of creationism, not science” “Intelligent Design is a form of creationism, not science” - see Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

History of the Legal Debate The Scopes “Monkey” Trial First case to question the legality of teaching evolution in public schools. First case to question the legality of teaching evolution in public schools. State of Tennessee had passed an anti-evolution statute (1925). State of Tennessee had passed an anti-evolution statute (1925). John Scopes was on trial for teaching evolution, likened to atheism, at that time. John Scopes was on trial for teaching evolution, likened to atheism, at that time. Tennessee Supreme Court upheld the law, prohibiting the teaching of any theory that denies the Genesis version of creation or suggests “that man has descended from a lower order of animals,” (McCarthy et al., 2004). Tennessee Supreme Court upheld the law, prohibiting the teaching of any theory that denies the Genesis version of creation or suggests “that man has descended from a lower order of animals,” (McCarthy et al., 2004).

History of the Legal Debate Epperson v. Arkansas Biology teacher Susan Epperson, challenged the Arkansas anti-evolution statute that made it unlawful for a teacher in any state-supported school or university to teach or use a textbook that teaches “that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals,” (Wikipedia, 2007). Biology teacher Susan Epperson, challenged the Arkansas anti-evolution statute that made it unlawful for a teacher in any state-supported school or university to teach or use a textbook that teaches “that mankind ascended or descended from a lower order of animals,” (Wikipedia, 2007). U.S. Supreme Court held that the statue was in violation of the Establishment Clause, reasoning that “evolution is science (not a secular religion), and a state cannot restrict student access to such information simply to satisfy religious preferences,” (McCarthy et al., 2004). U.S. Supreme Court held that the statue was in violation of the Establishment Clause, reasoning that “evolution is science (not a secular religion), and a state cannot restrict student access to such information simply to satisfy religious preferences,” (McCarthy et al., 2004).

History of the Legal Debate Edwards v. Aguillard Louisiana’s “Creationism Act” required the teaching of evolution in conjunction with the teaching of “creation science,” in public schools. The act, however, did not require the teaching of either unless the other was being taught. Louisiana’s “Creationism Act” required the teaching of evolution in conjunction with the teaching of “creation science,” in public schools. The act, however, did not require the teaching of either unless the other was being taught. U.S. Supreme Court ruled that providing “equal time” to evolution and creationism was unconstitutional, because the law specifically intended to advance a particular religion in violation of the Establishment Clause (Dorman, 2005). U.S. Supreme Court ruled that providing “equal time” to evolution and creationism was unconstitutional, because the law specifically intended to advance a particular religion in violation of the Establishment Clause (Dorman, 2005).

History of the Legal Debate Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education A Louisiana school board resolution specified that teachers must tell their students that the presentation of evolutionary theory is not intended to dissuade them from the biblical version of creation, (McCarthy et al., 2004). A Louisiana school board resolution specified that teachers must tell their students that the presentation of evolutionary theory is not intended to dissuade them from the biblical version of creation, (McCarthy et al., 2004). The Fifth Circuit Court ruled the disclaimer unconstitutional for not being neutral, (Wikipedia, 2007). The disclaimer was intended to discredit scientific information. The Fifth Circuit Court ruled the disclaimer unconstitutional for not being neutral, (Wikipedia, 2007). The disclaimer was intended to discredit scientific information.

History of the Legal Debate Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District The Dover Area School District (Pennsylvania) was challenged for a statement regarding Intelligent Design that had been added to its biology curriculum. The statement read, “Students will be made aware of the gaps/problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to Intelligent Design,” (Wikipedia, 2007). The Dover Area School District (Pennsylvania) was challenged for a statement regarding Intelligent Design that had been added to its biology curriculum. The statement read, “Students will be made aware of the gaps/problems in Darwin’s theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to Intelligent Design,” (Wikipedia, 2007). The statement appeared in the Dover Area curriculum, clearly requiring the teaching of Intelligent Design as an alternative theory to evolution, despite the fact that the Pennsylvania Academic Standards required students to learn only about Darwinian evolution and take a standardized test, which included evolution (Wikipedia, 2007). The statement appeared in the Dover Area curriculum, clearly requiring the teaching of Intelligent Design as an alternative theory to evolution, despite the fact that the Pennsylvania Academic Standards required students to learn only about Darwinian evolution and take a standardized test, which included evolution (Wikipedia, 2007). Court ruled that Intelligent Design is a form of creationism, not science. Furthermore, because it approved this curriculum, the Dover Area School Board had violated the Establishment Clause (Wikipedia, 2007). Court ruled that Intelligent Design is a form of creationism, not science. Furthermore, because it approved this curriculum, the Dover Area School Board had violated the Establishment Clause (Wikipedia, 2007).

History of the Legal Debate The Cobb County School Board Case (Georgia) The school board had approved placing stickers on the covers of biology textbooks stating, “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.” The school board had approved placing stickers on the covers of biology textbooks stating, “This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered.” Federal court ruled them to remove the stickers that were designed to “undermine the teaching of evolution,” and were clearly a violation of the Establishment Clause. Federal court ruled them to remove the stickers that were designed to “undermine the teaching of evolution,” and were clearly a violation of the Establishment Clause. The Judge in this ruling, was quoted as follows: “Adopted by the school board, funded by taxpayers, and inserted by school personnel, the sticker conveys an impermissible message of endorsement,” (Gross, 2005). The Judge in this ruling, was quoted as follows: “Adopted by the school board, funded by taxpayers, and inserted by school personnel, the sticker conveys an impermissible message of endorsement,” (Gross, 2005).

Quotes from Science Teachers (Concerning the teaching of evolution) “I don’t teach the subject because it goes against my religious beliefs.” Dave, 35 yrs experience “Because it’s so controversial, I always put it on the bottom of my list of topics to teach. I never have time to get to it.” Karen, 6 yrs experience “I never really knew what I could legally teach, and what I could say. I present it as a theory and tell the kids what the facts are using lots of examples.” Lisa, 4 yrs experience

Expert Advice The National Science Teacher’s Association, (2003) recommends professional development to assist teachers in teaching evolution in a comprehensive and professional manner. NSTA further recommends that public school administrators support teachers against pressure to promote nonscientific views that may diminish or eliminate the study of evolution in schools.

NSTA Quote “The professional responsibility of science teachers and curriculum specialists to provide students with quality science education should not be compromised by censorship, pseudoscience, inconsistencies, faulty scholarship, or unconstitutional mandates. Science textbooks shall emphasize evolution as a unifying concept. Publishers should not be required or volunteer to include disclaimers in textbooks that distort or misrepresent the methodology of science and the current body of knowledge concerning the nature and study of evolution,” (NSTA, 2003).