ID교육개편

Are you a parent or a school board member interested in improving the teaching of evolution in your local schools? Below are resources you will find helpful as you try to do this, including materials you can print out and submit to your school board.

These materials describe why teaching "the full range of scientific views" about evolution is important; document current peer-reviewed scientific controversies over evolution; explain how to teach the controversy over evolution legally; and provide responses to attacks you may receive from those opposed to teaching evolution fully and fairly.

As a general approach, Discovery Institute favors teaching students more about evolution, not less. We think students deserve to know not only about the strengths of modern evolutionary theory, but also about some of the theory's weaknesses and unresolved issues. In other words, students should be taught that evolutionary theory, like any scientific theory, continues to be open to analysis and critical scrutiny. According to opinion polls, this approach is favored by the overwhelming majority of the American public, and it has also been endorsed by the U.S. Congress in report language attached to the No Child Left Behind Act Conference Report.

OVERVIEW OF ISSUES RELATING TO THE TEACHING OF EVOLUTION

The following resources explain why it is important to teach students about the full range of scientific views on evolution as part of a good science education.

Questions about Science Education Policy

Teach the Controversy, by Stephen C. Meyer

Incorporate Controversy into the Curriculum by Stephen Meyer and John Angus Campbell

How Should Schools Teach about Evolution? by Bruce Chapman

Textbook Debate: It's All About the Evidence, by Stephen C. Meyer

Darwin in the Classroom: Ohio Allows Alternative by John G. West

Santorum Language in the No Child Left Behind Act Conference Report

RESOURCES SUMMARIZING THE SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIES OVER EVOLUTION

The following resources document some of the important scientific issues regarding the modern theory of evolution known as neo-Darwinism. These are excellent materials to circulate among parents, school board members, and teachers.

Fact Sheet: Micro-evolution v. Macroevolution (PDF file)

Fact Sheet: The Cambrian Explosion (PDF file)

Over 400 Scientists Skeptical of Neo-Darwinism

Survival of the Fakest by Jonathan Wells

Icons of Evolution
Icons of Evolution book
Icons of Evolution documentary
Icons of Evolution website

RESOURCES SUMMARIZING THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR TEACHING ABOUT EVOLUTION

It is sometimes claimed that teaching about scientific controversies over evolution is unconstitutional. This claim is false. It is plainly constitutional to teach about scientific criticisms of any scientific theory, including the theory of evolution. As the controlling Supreme Court case of Edwards v. Aguillard makes clear, "scientific critiques of prevailing scientific theories" can be an appropriate part of science education. The following resources explain how to teach about evolution within existing legal precedents:

How to Teach the Controversy Legally (Click here for more information and to view the video)

Key Law Review articles

RESOURCES FOR RESPONDING TO THOSE OPPOSED TO TEACHING EVOLUTION FULLY

Misinformation and mischaracterization are rampant in the media coverage of the debate over evolution. Because Discovery Institute’s views and positions recently have been inaccurately reported, and because Discovery Fellows have been maligned in the media in the past, we have published two new Truth Sheets to set the record straight.

We have gathered all the Truth Sheets here to make it easy for the public to learn the truth about the Institute, its Fellow and the work it supports.

NEW: Six Myths About the Evolution Debate.
Overview: Across the United States the debate over how to teach evolution is reaching a fevered pitch. Newspapers are daily reporting on one aspect or another of whether to teach evolution, whether to teach criticisms of evolution or even whether to teach alternatives such as the emerging theory of intelligent design. In the midst of all this reporting several misconceptions seemed to have caught on and continue to be repeated with little regard for truth or accuracy. Here are five of the most popular myths debunked.

NEW: Discovery Institute and "Theocracy".
Overview: Periodically certain Darwinists make false and unsubstantiated claims that Discovery Institute advocates “theocracy” or is part of the “radical Christian right” or supposedly supports something called “Christian reconstructionism.” These charges are little more than smears, and they show the bankruptcy of the Darwinists’ own position. Rather than argue about the substance of the scientific debate over neo-Darwinism, all Darwinists can do is engage in baseless ad hominem attacks.

The “Wedge Document”: How Darwinist Paranoia Fueled an Urban Legend.
Overview: In 1999 someone posted on the internet an early fundraising proposal for Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture. Dubbed the “Wedge Document,” this proposal soon took on a life of its own, popping up in all sorts of places and eventually spawning what can only be called a giant urban legend. Among true-believers on the Darwinist fringe the document came to be viewed as evidence for a secret conspiracy to fuse religion with science and impose a theocracy. These claims were so outlandish that for a long time we simply ignored them. But because some credulous Darwinists seem willing to believe almost anything, we decided we should set the record straight. For a more detailed response please read "The Wedge Document: So What?".

Discussions about how evolution should be covered in school curricula should focus on science and evidence, not on personal attacks. Unfortunately, when you try to improve the teaching of evolution in your school district, groups opposed to teaching any criticisms of evolutionary theory may attack your motives, your sources, and your honesty. They may also seek to smear the personal characters of leading scientists who are skeptical of neo-Darwinism. This has happened to Dr. Jonathan Wells repeatedly. Here are some resources for responding to some of most common attacks you may encounter:

The Real Truth about Jonathan Wells: Responding to Smears against the Author of Icons of Evolution.
Overview: Since the publication of Icons of Evolution (2000), biologist Jonathan Wells has been subjected to a smear campaign by Darwin-only lobbyists, who have attacked everything from Dr. Wells’s integrity as a scholar to his personal religious beliefs. This fact sheet rebuts some of the most outrageous smears.

Alan Gishlick and National Center for Science Education (NCSE) Misrepresent Jonathan Wells’s Science Credentials.
Overview: In 2002, NCSE Officials Kevin Padian and Alan Gishlick misrepresented Jonathan Wells’s science credentials, and they still refuse to correct the record. In The Quarterly Review of Biology (March, 2002), National Center for Science Education (NCSE) officials Kevin Padian and Alan Gishlick published false and defamatory information about Jonathan Wells’s science credentials. Although Padian and Gishlick have been presented with documentation about their false claims, they still refuse to correct the record.

The NCSE Uses a “Push Poll” to Discredit Discovery Institute’s Bibliography.
Overview: In 2002, Discovery Institute prepared for the Ohio State Board of Education a bibliography of 44 peer-reviewed science journal articles written by evolutionists that discussed unresolved questions about various aspects of neo-Darwinism. In response, the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) surveyed the authors of the articles and purported to show that Discovery Institute had misrepresented the articles. In fact, the NCSE was the one engaging in misrepresentation. Its so-called “survey” completely mischaracterized the Institute’s bibliography, and it failed to substantiate the charge that the bibliography was inaccurate.

How the NCSE Uses False Charges of “Misquotation” to Stifle Scientific Debate.
Overview: Like the boy that cried “Wolf!,” the National Center for Science Education (NSCE) and its supporters repeatedly charge that scientists affiliated with Discovery Institute misquote or otherwise misrepresent the research of evolutionary biologists. On closer inspection, however, these charges turn out to be groundless. They are an intimidation tactic employed by the NCSE to stifle legitimate scientific debate over neo-Darwinism. If the NCSE wants to be taken seriously, it should stop inventing false charges of misquotation and start answering the arguments offered by Darwin’s scientific critics.

For daily coverage of how the media reports on the debate over evolution please visit our blog, Evolution News & Views at www.evolutionnews.org.