Evolution in Education Science Education, Evolution, and Religious Fundamentalism.

Evolution in Education

Science Education, Evolution, and Religious Fundamentalism

Introduction

This final report was inspired by a quote from Westhoff, a required reading for Ed513. The quote puzzled me because it was not referenced and did not provide an explanation. After further reading, I still believe that Westhoff missed the mark with this broad and overarching comment. She neither pays homage nor respects evolution, religious orthodoxy, or their often unnecessary contentious relationship. Westhoff's comments encouraged me to investigate evolution and religion, but more significantly how an educational system entwined with, and sometimes ruled by, religion has taught evolution.

“But by the 1870s, innovations in the natural sciences, particularly

the evolutionary theory articulated in Charles Darwin's Origin of

Species, weakened religious orthodoxy.” Westhoff

Evolution: A Brief IntroductionMany scientists laid the groundwork for Darwin and his theory of evolution. But none

articulated the origin of species, the evolution of a species through natural selection, like Darwin in his 1859 publication of “On The Origins of Species.”

Darwin's Influences

Left Edinburgh's school of medicine at 16 years old. Could not handle medical training before anesthesia!

Studied Theology at Cambridge

Captain Robert Fitzroy invited Darwin on the HMS Beagles' surveying voyage around the world as the ship's naturalist, thus abruptly ending his ecclesiastical career.

Darwin read Lyell's Principles of Geology on the Beagle. Lyell Explains all the features of the earth, not by the hand of the divine or by some catechisms, but by slow, steady processes observable today on the earth; wind and rain, the erosion, volcanoes, and earthquakes.

Married his cousin, Emma Wedgwood, the pottery manufacturer's daughter. The Wedgwoods were a pious family!

1837, took up the idea of evolution from his grandfather's publications and Lyell's book.

Alfred Russel Wallace, working alone in the jungles of Malaysia, came up with exactly the same theory as Darwin. Darwin published his ideas first.

Brief Introduction to Early Public School Science Education

Universities, colleges, and other private institutions were forming scientific programs during the 1800's.

The Culture Demanded by Modern Life, 1867. A collection of essays by American and British scientists and educators arguing for the inclusion of the sciences in the school and science curriculum.

1870s, American religious leaders began considering the theological implications of Darwin's theory. For example, Presbyterian theologian Charles Hodge, in his book What Is Darwinism? (1874), argued that natural selection was unacceptable because it directly contradicted belief in a benevolent and all-powerful God.

There was no formal or standardized science education curriculum until the Committee of Ten was established in 1892. Headed by Charles W. Eliot, the president of Harvard University.

As more students entered public schools, 1900 – 1920, the evolution debate heightened.

1925, the debate reaches a climax with the Scopes Trial.

The Public Debate Begins

Up to this point evolution in education vs. religion

was mostly an intellectual debate. In 1925, the

debate moved to the front burner and into the

public eye. High school biology teacher John Scopes

was accused of violating the state's Butler Act

which made it unlawful to teach evolution. The trial

was a circus. Nicknamed “The Monkey Trial”,

residents poked fun, created foods (monkey shakes),

and lavished in the limelight. This trial was the very

first trial to be broadcast on television!

John T. Scopes is prosecuted and convicted under the law,

although the conviction is later overturned on a technicality.

John Scopes

Butler Act

Butler Act: a 1925 Tennessee law prohibiting public schools teachers to deny the Biblical account of man's origin. It was enacted as Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49 (Education) Section 1922 . The law also prevented the teaching of the evolution of man from what it referred to as lower orders of animals in place of the Biblical account.

30 Years of Silence?

The next year on my timeline is 1958. This was indeed the next major stepping stone for evolution in education. Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS) is founded with funds from a federal government concerned with science education in the wake of Sputnik. BSCS's textbooks emphasize evolution, which was largely absent from textbooks after the Scopes trial. Commercial publishers follow the BSCS lead.

1961

Engineer Henry Morris and theologian John Whitcomb publish The Genesis Flood, which argues that there is scientific evidence to support a literal reading of the biblical creation story. The book becomes a major bestseller and helps spawn the "creation science" movement.

Young Earth Creationist

Bless Miss Epperson, 1968

Supreme Court rules in the case of

Epperson v. Arkansas that laws barring

the teaching of evolution in public

schools are unconstitutional. Laws

violate the Establishment Clause in

the First Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution.

Teacher,

Miss Epperson

Think ? Tank...1970

Henry Morris founds the Institute for Creation Research, a creation science think tank.

This was the first of a few creationist “think tanks”. “Discovery Institute” is a modern variety “think tank”. Creationist became savvy with their choice of words to describe their organizations.

Lemon Test, 1971

In Lemon v. Kurtzman, although unrelated to the teaching of evolution, the Supreme Court establishes a set of legal criteria for determining whether a law violates the Establishment Clause. Under the "Lemon test," a law must have a secular purpose, not advance or inhibit religion and not excessively entangle the government with religion.

This decision establishes ground rules for the Establishment Clause. The Lemon test will be used in subsequent cases when considering the teaching of evolution and/or the teaching of an alternative theory of evolution.

In Support of Evolution, 1981

The National Center for Science Education is founded to advocate the teaching of evolution in public schools.

A great resource!

The States Step in, 1981

Louisiana passes the “Balanced Treatment for Creation-Science and Evolution-Science in Public School Instruction Act”. Legislators in more than 25 states introduce bills calling for "creation science" to have equal time with evolution. Nearly 60 years after Tennessee's Butler Act... you haven't come a long way baby.

The difference... Creationist, i.e. the conservative christian fundamentalists, have taken a new approach with the same rhetoric. Specifically, they have abandoned trying to outlaw the teaching of evolution and will now focus on adding creationism to science curriculum.

You Decide...

A rose by any other name...

Creationists, intelligent design, etc. have tried to put forth an alternative theory to evolution to be added to public school science curriculum. They have tried to distance themselves from “religion” by denying, or ignoring, that their theory is religious.

The problem most scientist have is that creationism is not science. While evolution answers questions of a natural and scientific nature, creationism answers questions of a religious and/or spiritual nature. Most scientists do not dispute creationism on principle or as a spiritual model. They do, however, reject it as a scientific alternative to evolution.

Round and Round We Go...1987

In Edwards v. Aguillard, The Supreme Court rules that the Louisiana Balanced Treatment Act violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The teaching of evolution in public schools can be taught without creationism being taught alongside it. The court rules that the law had a religious purpose.

Remember the Lemon Test?

Leave the Pandas out of it...1989

As if Pandas aren't in enough trouble....

Of Pandas and People, the first book

to systematically use the term

"intelligent design" is published.

The book is offered as an alternative

to evolution.

Same old story... 1999

States continue to buck the federal system in new and creative ways. Change the language, change the standards, its the same old story.

The Kansas Board of Education says that biology teachers can offer instruction on evolution but that evolution will not be included on statewide standardized science tests. This ruling sparked many battles over state standards... as if standards weren't complicated enough!

In Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, a federal appeals court strikes down a Louisiana law requiring public school teachers to read a disclaimer urging students to question evolutionary theory.

No Shortage of Bad Ideas, 2001

“No Child Left Behind Act” supports science education and emphasizes the importance of state science standards. Inclusion of evolution in science standards, which have become a new battleground between creationism and evolution, might pave the way for a nationwide discussion of evolution in science curriculum.

Although the Act has its flaws and critics, it does support science education and pushes for state standards. It does not, however, dictate what those standards should be.

Scope's trial, Round 2, 2005

Decision in Federal District Court (PA), Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District rules that teaching “intelligent design” in the public schools is unconstitutional. See the next slide for more information.

Georgia's federal court rejects, as unconstitutional, the Cobb County school board's requirement that a sticker be placed on the cover of public school biology textbooks instructing students to think critically about evolutionary theory.

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

This trial revealed a social condition that was absent 80 years earlier. Mainly, the Scope's trial was televised and gained much public attention. The pageantry that was present in 1925 was completely absent in 2005. The Dover trial was not televised, in fact no cameras were allowed. There was little attention paid and no fanfare. This represents a numbing of the American public and a lack of energy surrounding the issue.

Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial

I watched this documentary, based on the Dover trial in 2005, by Nova. It is available through Netflix and can also be streamed from the NOVA website for free. If you are interested in this topic, this is a must see. This trial put the world's most renowned experts on the stand from both camps. It is a tragedy they did not allow cameras in the courtroom. Nova presents the trial as a reenactment based on court transcripts.

Just Semantics...2006

The South Carolina Board of Education adopts new science education standards that call on public school students to "investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory."

There is now an official trend in State education standards... Planting a seed of doubt in a student's mind about evolution. Are public school science teachers withholding information about the origins of life and the “Descent of Man”?

Heading in the Right Direction, 2007

The Kansas Board of Education, consisting of newly elected members, overturns a 2005 directive allowing public school students in the state to hear criticisms of evolution.

“The Board of Education does not

mandate what will be taught to

public school students, a decision

left to local school boards. But the

board standards typically influence what students learn”.

Kathy Martin and fellow Kansas Board of Education members

And back again...2008

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal signs the “Louisiana Science Education Act” into law. Marketed as supporting critical thinking in classrooms, critics say “the law threatens to open the door for the teaching of creationism and for scientifically unwarranted critiques of evolution in public school science classes.” Glenn

Branch and Eugenie C. Scott 

Survey Says... as of 2006

“According to an August 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 63 percent of Americans believe that humans and other living things have either always existed in their present form or have evolved over time under the guidance of a supreme being. Only 26 percent say that life evolved solely through processes such as natural selection. A similar Pew Research Center poll, released in August 2005, found that 64 percent of Americans support teaching creationism alongside evolution in the classroom.”

From Pew Research.org

Why do you Reject Evolution?

Critics say that evolution goes beyond contradicting the biblical creation story and conflicts with the Judeo-Christian concept of an active and loving God who cares for his creation.

Darwin's ideas, in particular "survival of the fittest", led to social Darwinism and has been used by social thinkers, dictators and others to justify eugenics. This is clearly a bastardization of Darwin's theory and not a reason to reject the theory of evolution.

A familiar Name...

John Dewey marked the 50th anniversary of the Origins, in 1909, by writing an essay entitled, “The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy.”

“Prior to Darwin the impact of the new scientific method upon life, mind, and politics had been arrested...The gates of the garden of life were barred to the new ideas....The influence of Darwin...resides in having conquered the phenomena of life for the principle of transition.” Dewey believed Darwin made it possible to develop a truly scientific understanding of human psychology and human morality— “and it is here, in evolutionary accounts of mind and morals, that Darwin may have his most significant influence on our understanding of religion.”

Dewey Continued...

John Dewey concluded, “contrary to the fears of traditional religious believers, Charles Darwin’s influence would not result in a moral deadening of the world, it would not rob life of its beauty or wonder, nor would it render existence meaningless. Rather by fully integrating humans, and human experience, into the natural world, evolution would make that natural world more truly our home; that by undermining our faith in ancient and unchanging dogma, we would be made more fully involved in charting our own destinies; and by providing a natural grounding for our most cherished values evolution opens of the possibility of imbuing our natural existence with a sense of the sacred. As Darwin said of evolution, “there is grandeur in this view of life.”

Who's Arguing?

Many religions do not oppose the teaching of evolution. In addition, many Judeo-Christians do not adhere to a literal interpretation of the Bible. Historically, the argument was not between Darwin and the fundamentalists, at least not for many years after Darwin's death. The argument, early on, was between progressive Christians and the social Darwinists. As social Darwinist faded away, the argument was between Christian fundamentalists and scientists.

We cannot ignore the opponents of evolution because they often influence public science education. Science teachers, as a whole, have consistently resisted adding “intelligent design” to the curriculum and have often been the heros in the evolution debate.

What Religions Think

Conclusion

Evolution is the best theory we have for how life on earth evolved.

Darwin's “Origin of Species” was arguably the most important science book ever written.

Darwin's theory did not weaken religious orthodoxy. On the contrary, it polarized the opponents and gave fundamentalists fodder for their campaign.

Many religious scientists let go of their biblical view of creation long before Darwin.

Many scientists maintain their faith in God and look to the bible for moral and spiritual guidance. (myself included)

Conclusion continued...

Scientists, teachers, parents, and politicians should be active in maintaining quality science standards. Evolution, as a theory of how species came to be through natural selection, is the best scientific explanation we have. Therefore, evolution should be included in all public school standards. In addition, any theory that is not scientific or is fundamentally religion in disguise, should not be included in public school science standards.

Notes

If anyone would like references for any of the quotes or information, please let me know.

The following slide is the last paragraph of Darwin's “Origin of Species”

Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind, it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the creator that the production and extinction of the past and the present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes like those determining the birth and death of the individual. When I view all beings not as special creations but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long before the first bed of the Cambrian system was deposited, they seem to me to become numbered. Judging from the past, we may safely and further not one living species will transmit its unaltered likeness to a distinct futurity. And of the species now living, very few will transmit progeny of any kind to a far distant futurity, for the manner on which all organic beings are grouped shows that the greater number of species in each genus, and or the species in many genera, have left no descendants, but have become utterly extinct. We can so far take a prophetic glance into futurity as to [foretell] that it will be the common and widely spread species belonging to the larger and dominant groups within each class, which will ultimately prevail and procreate new and dominant species. As all the living forms of life are the lineal descendants of those which lived long before the Cambrian epoch, we may feel certain that the ordinary succession by generation has never once been broken and that no catechisms has desolated the whole world. Hence we may look with some confidence to a securer future at great length. And as natural selection works solely by and for the good of each being, all corporeal and mental endowments will tend to progress towards perfection. It is interesting to contemplate a tangled bank coded with many species of plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the trees, with various insects flitting about and with worms crawling through the damp earth and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other and dependent upon each other in sole complex of manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. These laws, taken in a larger sense, being growth with reproduction; inheritance [which is] almost implied by reproduction; variability from the indirect and direct action of the conditions of life, and from the use and disuse, a ratio of increase so high as to lead to a struggle for life and as a consequence to natural selection entailing divergence in character and the extinction of less improved forms. Thus from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life with its several powers having been originally breathed by the creator into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning, endless forms, most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.