Re: teaching evolution & creation science in public schools...

Stephanie,

These are excellent questions about a very important issue. Thank you for
asking them!

I teach several courses about science and religion at a Christian college,
and used to teach a few of the same things at a Christian high school in
Philadelphia many years ago. I've never been a YEC (not even when I taught
at the high school), and I have no *scientific* sympathy for YECism. I do
have some cultural and spiritual sympathy for individual YECs, some of whom
are genuinely open to other ideas and also have high standards of honesty in
conversation with those who disagree with them. I only wish that were more
generally true, that there were no "party line" to be defended at all cost
in front of the loyal host.

Personally I am an agnostic about some aspects of mainstream evolution (I
just shocked the pants off of many of my friends on this list). That is, I
do not believe that anyone has really demonstrated whether classical
Darwinian evolution really does account for the kinds of things that Behe
and company describe as "irreducibly complex," and I'm even more agnostic
about various theories of the origin of life--there is no real science of
that as yet, IMO. But being agnostic about certain aspects of the standard
scenario, while sufficient to get me barred from being elected to the NAS
(not that this would ever happen anyway), does not make me agnostic about
most aspects of the standard picture of the history of life and everything
else--aspects that YECs simply cannot accept. For example, I am convinced
that the universe and the earth are billions of years old, that the "big
bang" happened, that the heavier elements out of which living things are
made were produced in stars, that humans and other animals are probably
related historically through common descent, and that natural selection has
a lot to do with this. I list those propositions roughly in order of
decreasing confidence on my part. I've believed the earlier parts as long
as I can remember thinking about them, and the later parts for about two
decades. Thus, YEC was never really an option for me to consider--it simply
flies in the face of too many things that I believe are actually true.

So, how do I handle teaching evolution? Well, I don't teach evolution--that
is, I'm not a biologist, I haven't studied biology formally since 10th grade
(although I have formally studied the history of biology and natural history
more broadly). I do teach students *about* evolution, that is, I take a
mainly historical approach to ideas such as I mentioned above, in keeping
with my professional expertise as an historian of science.
Especially I focus on how the developing ideas interacted (and to some
extent, interact in the present tense) with Christian understandings of
these issues. Note please that I used a plural noun--"understandings,"
since there have been and still are multiple Christian understandings of
these things. That is, I take a "multiple models" approach to teaching
about origins. My goal is not to clone myself--it would be arrogant and
educationally unproductive to do that. I simply want my students to
*understand* the issues better and to show evidence of independent thought.
If they come in as YECs and leave as YECs (as quite a few of them do), I can
accept that; I have some very bright, highly informed friends who are YECs,
I can't do their reasoning and evaluating for them. But I do my best to
disabuse my students of the many "mythologies" that come with this
issue--and they come from all sides.

Having never taught in a public high school, it's hard for me to say what
should be taught. But I can say this much. If we have to live with the
present understanding of the First Amendment (as requiring a Jeffersonian,
extra-consitutional "wall of separation between church and state" rather
than a Madisonina, constitutional "disestablishment of religion"), there is
not all that much helpful that we can do. Serious limits are placed on
serious conversation--on geniunely pluralistic conversation. But there is
some hope to be able to discuss these issues seriously, even in this overly
restrictive view. Last month I heard an ACLU attorney say, flat-out, that
ID could be discussed in a public high school philosophy class, since it
related to philosophy of science; but that it is not science and could not
be discussed in science classes. He's right, incidentally, that ID is
mainly a philosophical critique of science--it's no accident that several of
the leading ID people (Meyer, Nelson, Dembski, for starters) have graduate
degrees in philosophy or philosophy of science. But he's wrong about where
it can be taught. In Pennsylvania, for example, the science standards call
explicity for instruction in science classses about "nature of science,"
which is educational jargon for philosophy of science. Hence, IMO, some ID
concepts/claims *can* legitimately be discussed in public high school
science classes. That is, to some limited extent, one can "teach the
controversy" as the ID folks would put it. In science classes, not in
social studies or philosophy or somewhere else. But this is a very long way
from teaching creationism, at least from teaching garden-variety creationism
according to which the earth and the universe are a few thousand years old
and millions of organisms (esp including humans) were separately and
specially created.

To teach those ideas in public schools, IMO, would require a new definition
of what counts as public education--that is, a new definition of what types
of schools could receive tax dollars either directly (as present public
schools do) or indirectly (through large vouchers that would in effect pay
most or all of the cost of instruction). I'd like to see that, b/c I
believe it is genuinely constitutional while genuinely respectful of
religious beliefs (instead of the sometimes pretended neutrality of public
schools); on the other hand, it would probably only increase the
proliferation of YEC, which I would view as a very unfortunate result.
Judging from most of the curriculum materials that I have seen from
Christian schools, the average Christian family would not be well served by
improving our interpretation of the Constitution--that is, on this one
specific issue if not also on some others. Most fundamentalist Christians,
for example, don't really want the kind of pluralistic conversation that is
needed for good education on this issue; just as most public school
administrators presently won't allow it either. So I hope against hope.

Let me answer these questions more directly:
Is there a way to present creationism in a non-biased, non-partisan way
which
will not be misinterpreted by public school administration as forcing
certain
religious views upon students?

Ted: Yes. Teach the history of creationism--that can be done factually and
IMO without inappropriate bias, although to be frank most YECs would say
that my version of a factual history of creationism is loaded with bias. In
other words, I don't share their high view of YEC, so I can't teach about it
fairly. This would be analogous to teaching factually and fairly about the
role of religion (including Christianity) in American history--but many
religious parents don't want their children taught some of that, either.
Facts often get in the way of beliefs. (I am pointing out a great irony in
all of this: while some secular parents want all religious references kept
out of public schools, b/c they find all such references offensive an
opposed to intellectual nourishment, some religious parents want all
favorable references to religions other than their own left out of the
schools they send their children to. Nevertheless, I think that both types
of parents need to have the same right--to pick schools that are more or
less close to their beliefs on this and lots of other, non-religious issues
such as educational philosophy and pedagogy, curriculum content (classical
vs technical vs other special emphases). It's tyranny all around, for the
state to dictate the nature of what counts as public education, and for the
state then to deny parents the right to use their own tax dollars at schools
that fail to meet the state's secular expecations.

Is it a violation of the First Amendment to teach creationism in
governmentally funded public schools? Do you view this as an issue of the
"separation of church and state?"

Ted: See above. If we mean, teach YEC as a legitimate scientific
alternative to mainstream evolution, my answer is an unqualified "YES," it
would violate the First Amendment. YEC is so clearly and obviously
motivated solely by a particular religious belief (a fundamentalist
interpretation of Genesis) that it has to be considered religion and not
science. No argument with the courts on that one, unless we alter what
counts as a publicly funded school (which I favor), in which case one can
teach Hindu creation stories as alternatives to mainstream science if one
wants to.

In short, I want students to *think* and to be *well informed.* Talking
about creationism can help achieve that, whereas teaching it often does not
(with a few exceptions). Most "creationists" in my experience simply want a
science that agrees with a very specific interpretation of the Bible,
whether or not the facts support that "science." That's not a good
educational attitude in any context, IMO.

ted
Received on Thu Mar 17 09:21:08 2005