|
|||
|
|||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
EditorialSub-standard science standardsBy JAMES A. SMITH SR.
|
|
| For related coverage, click image. |
It’s an understatement to say much has been written about evolution since Charles Darwin articulated the theory in his groundbreaking 1859 book, The Origin of Species. Considerable controversy has ensued and in recent decades a compelling body of literature has arisen critiquing the theory, undermining central tenets to natural selection and enraging the overwhelming majority of scientists who continue to cling to Darwinian evolution with a religious-like devotion.
Nevertheless, students will learn nothing of this controversy if proposed new science standards become reality in Florida’s schools. Florida’s educational establishment is attempting to make evolution dogma the sole means of understanding the origins and development of biological life for students in the Sunshine State, and Florida Baptists — and other concerned citizens — should be participating in this debate.
In October, a 45-member committee appointed by the Florida Department of Education released proposed new standards for teaching science (and other subjects), requiring evolution and diversity knowledge as one of the “big ideas” for elementary students and “bodies of knowledge” for high school students. The standards, which can be viewed and commented upon online at www.flstandards.org, require doctrinaire acceptance of Darwin’s theory, without any acknowledgment of evidence to the contrary.
For example, standards for grades 9-12 require students learn that, “Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence. Organisms are classified based on their evolutionary history. Natural selection is the primary mechanism leading to evolutionary change.” One “benchmark” for those grades stipulates that students, “Explain how evolution is demonstrated by the fossil record, extinction, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, biogeography, molecular biology (crosscuts with earth/space), and observed evolutionary change.”
The absence of contradictory data is unnecessary as far as committee member Jonathan Smith is concerned. Smith told the Lakeland Ledger the new standards “closed the door on any ambiguity” concerning evolution. “There isn’t both sides. There is only one side as far as science is concerned.” How open-minded.
Interestingly, the Ledger reports Smith is a representative of the National Center for Science Education, an organization opposed to intelligent design (ID), an alternative theory on origins of life which asserts that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection,” according to the Discovery Institute, a major force behind the ID movement.
Smith knows better — there is indeed great controversy in the scientific academy over the tenets of natural selection, even if a large majority of scientists continue to hold to Darwinian evolution. The Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture sponsors a Web site, “Dissent from Darwin” (www.dissentfromdarwin.org), that boasts the affirmation of more than 700 highly credentialed scientists to the simple statement, “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
Not in Florida’s schools, if the new science standards become reality.
The Discovery Institute plainly states what’s at stake in this debate: “Since the controversy over microevolution and macroevolution is at the heart of Darwin’s theory, and since evolutionary theory is so influential in modern biology, it is a disservice to students for biology curricula to ignore the controversy entirely. Furthermore, since the scientific evidence needed to settle the controversy is still lacking, it is inaccurate to give students the impression that the controversy has been resolved and that all scientists have reached a consensus on the issue.”
At least one member of the State Board of Education (SBOE) is concerned about the new science standards. Donna Callaway, in an e-mail interview with me, explained why she will vote against the new standards, as currently written, when the matter is put to the seven-member board in January.
“I agree completely that evolution should be taught with all of the research and study that has occurred. However, I believe it should not be taught to the exclusion of other theories of origin of life,” Callaway told me.
Callaway, appointed by Gov. Jeb Bush to the Board in 2004, agrees that the science standards need updating. The veteran public school educator resigned from her middle school principal post to serve on the SBOE.
Evolution “is like no other subject we teach. Therefore, it is of supreme importance,” she said. “This has the possibility of confirming or denying for a child who he/she really is. This strikes to the meaning, the value, and the core of life itself. I firmly believe that a child can deal with the proof of science along with a personal belief in God as the Creator of the universe at the same time. The classroom should allow him, openly, that opportunity. Teachers should be allowed the leeway to acknowledge that there are other theories.”
Although Callaway does not believe intelligent design should be taught, it should be “acknowledged as a theory which many people accept along with others. Students need to have any proof, scientific evidence that is there. But the fact that there are other theories about certain parts, at least needs to be pointed out, footnoted. I believe this is true education.”
Indeed, it is. Unfortunately, the current science standards are sub-standard when it comes to educating our kids about evolution.
Callaway told me that the Department of Education is getting a growing amount of correspondence from parents, teachers, local school board members and other citizens who are concerned about the narrow, pro-evolution standards. Comments may be made through Dec. 14 at a special Web site for the standards (www.flstandards.org) and members of the State Board of Education should also be contacted. A list of the members and contact information is provided on its Web site (www.fldoe.org/board/default.asp).
Although she is not attempting to “arouse controversy,” Callaway told me she is concerned about what’s best for children. “I want an informed public so that when these and other similar decisions are made that affect all of us that they are reflective of how the people feel.”
A longtime, active member of First Baptist Church in Tallahassee, Callaway added, “My hope is that there will be times of prayer throughout Christian homes and churches directed toward this issue. As a SBOE member, I want those prayers. I want God to be part of this. Isn’t that ironic?”
Not at all, as far as I’m concerned. Indeed, Florida Baptists should pray for the State Board of Education — as well as let their opinions be heard on this vital matter.
Archive | About Us | Contact Us | Subscribe | Advertise
Front Page | This Week | Opinion | Florida | National | Features | Bible Study | Classifieds
Copyright � 2001-2008, Florida Baptist Witness,
All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.