One of the most basic questions that children ask
is, ''Where did we come from?'' In science education policy,
however, the more relevant question is, how do we best prepare our
teachers to answer the student who inquires about our origins and
the origin of other living things? The answer is at the heart of a
contentious debate regarding the teaching of evolution in the
science classroom.
Why is there such a controversy as to how
science education policy should require students to learn about
evolution? For one, biological evolution, the theory that all living
things are modified descendants of a common ancestor, relies heavily
on the sensitive philosophical belief that evolutionary change can
give rise to new species, and can explain the origin of all living
things. Furthermore, evolution is a theory that deals with ancient
and unrepeatable events. This should warn us to teach Darwinian
evolution or any theory of origins with proper modesty and humility,
since we'll never really be certain about the cause of many events
in the history of life.
Charles Darwin wrote about his theory
of evolution at a time when evidence was weak. In recent years,
evidence of the complex circuits, miniature machines, sophisticated
feedback loops, and digital information inside the cell has enabled
scientists to poke holes in the principle evidence used to support
evolution and therefore, more and more respected biologists are
entering the debate as to the plausibility of evolution.
For
these reasons, Darwin's theory of evolution should not be taught as
absolute fact in the science classroom. Instead, it should be taught
as the leading and dominant scientific theory explaining the origin
of species, but also as a theory subject to significant limitations,
failed predictions and important criticisms. We should encourage
schools to teach better science and to teach more about evolution,
including the gaps and controversies surrounding evolution. We
should not be afraid to teach children what we know and what we have
not yet discovered in science, and we should certainly not deny our
children the truth about controversies surrounding science. By
teaching the controversy, we remain true to science and yet
sensitive to the ideas and interests of parents and
children.
How have we equipped our teachers to discuss the
controversy in biology without straying from the scientific issues
into religion or philosophy? In 2001, I offered an amendment to the
No Child Left Behind Act concerning science education. The amendment
expressed the sense of the Senate ''that good science education
should prepare students to distinguish the data or testable theories
of science from philosophical or religious claims that are made in
the name of science. Where biological evolution is taught, the
curriculum should help students to understand why this subject
generates so much continuing controversy, and prepare them to be
informed participants in public discussions.''
My amendment
serves as a guide for those implementing education policy. It does
not force schools to teach a certain curriculum. In the science
classroom, public schools should not teach intelligent design and
they should certainly not teach biblical creationism. Rather, my
amendment encourages educators to help students distinguish theory
from fact.
On June 13, 2001, the Senate approved my amendment
by an overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 91-8 and the amendment was
included in the conference report accompanying the No Child Left
Behind Act.
It is not the role of the federal government to
dictate the content of local school curriculum, but there are many
disturbing aspects of our understanding of ''science'' in our
schools, culture, and academic community today. Not even Democratic
Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia could resist talking about it:
''It is important that students be exposed not only to the theory of
evolution, but also to the context in which it is viewed by many in
our society. I think, too often, we limit the best of our educators
by directing them to avoid controversy and to try to remain
politically correct. If students cannot learn to debate different
viewpoints and to explore a range of theories in the classroom, what
hope have we for civil discourse beyond the schoolhouse
doors?''
Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts also endorsed my
amendment on the Senate floor stating, ''We want children to be able
to speak and examine various scientific theories on the basis of all
of the information that is available to them.'' In short, the
conviction that students should be taught alternate scientific
points of view, no matter how controversial, is not a conservative
or liberal position; rather it is a pro-education, pro-learning
position that champions excellence in the classroom. On that day in
the Senate, we voted in support of academic freedom in the science
classroom.
The public supports this position, as well. For
instance, national opinion surveys show that Americans
overwhelmingly desire to have students learn the scientific
arguments against, as well as for, Darwin's theory. A 2001 Zogby
poll shows that 71 percent of Americans believe that ''biology
teachers should teach Darwin's theory of evolution, but also the
scientific evidence against it.'' A 2004 Steinberg Poll showed 73
percent of California voters believe that biology teachers in public
schools should teach the scientific evidence for and against
Darwin's theory.
Recently, the Dover Area School District in
York County, updated its biology curriculum in an attempt to create
a more balanced approach to teaching evolution. A statement
regarding the status of evolutionary theory and the existence of
alternative theories will be read to all students when evolution is
studied in high school biology. Additionally, students will be able
to voluntarily view reference books in the library that present a
variety of cutting-edge scientific views both supporting and
opposing Darwinian theory. The Dover Area School District has taken
a step in the right direction by attempting to teach the controversy
of evolution.
At the end of the day, we should let the
scientific evidence lead where it leads, allowing students to decide
what they believe based on the evidence presented. Our children
deserve the best education possible; this includes being taught to
distinguish and compare competing scientific theories. The debate
about the scientific truth of Darwinism should not be taken lightly,
and our educational system should treat it with the importance it
deserves.
[2005/01/23] A Balanced Approach to Teach Evolution
