Badin vs. Versailles
Law Enforcement Memorial Day
-3.JPG)
American Idol 2012 finale
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2005 > October > 03 > Entry
Is Ohio an “Island of Ignorance?”
A pro-evolution group called “Defend the Constitution” has ranked Ohio No. 5 on its list of the top 10 “islands of ignorance” in America because of the Ohio State Board of Education’s decision to require science teachers to provide a “critical analysis” of evolution to their students.
Here’s an excerpt from their report on Ohio:
“The 547-page model curriculum, including the “Critical Analysis of Evolution” lesson plan, was passed by a 13-5 vote.
Plans for these lessons include “spurious critiques of evolution that scientific experts have rejected and that were explicitly opposed by the National Academy of Sciences.” The National Academy of Sciences sent a letter to the governor of Ohio saying that the curriculum was defective and had no place in the science classroom.”
We rank behind Dover, Penn., Cobb County, Ga., and Shelby County, Tenn., three school districts that require students to read or hear disclaimers warning kids that evolution is just a theory. We rank behind one other state, Kansas, where a creationist majority on the school board have also added curriculum on intelligent design.
So should Ohio be embarrassed or proud of this ranking?
Permalink | Comments (5) | Categories: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design
Comments
By Sal
October 11, 2005 7:50 PM | Link to this
Evolution is a fact, proven by scholars in many branches of science. Evolution has stood the test of scientific inquiry, the same scientific process that gave you computers to post with, and cars to drive to church. Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection is one possible explanation for the development of the tree of life. Other theories attempting to explain the mechanism of evolution have been presented in scientific writings. I recommend that people who are curious about evolution take a course in paleontology or evolutionary biology, or at least read a book on the subject. Intelligent design is a more politically acceptable form of creationism. There is no real evidence for intelligent design. Intelligent design could perhaps be taught in a comparative religion course, next to the creation theories of the vast number of other faiths that are practiced by billions of humans. Bottom line: Intelligent design should not be taught as an alternative to evolution. Intelligent design is a trojan horse to teach a creation myth as dogma.By Sylvie
October 3, 2005 10:48 PM | Link to this
If the natural selection/evolution theories are correct, then it should be able to stand up to any critical questioning. However, right now evolution is a theory. We can’t prove that it happened. Nor can we prove intelligent design/creationism. There is evidence out there to support these theories. There is nothing wrong with teaching students about the evidence, from both sides. It is when you state theory as fact that problems arise.By Karen
October 3, 2005 9:18 PM | Link to this
Rick, I think high school students can understand the difference between a theory and a proven point of science. And the theory of evolution is too important in the history of both science and religion in the last two centuries for students not to be introduced to the basic concept. It is a matter of cultural literacy (as E.D. Hirsch would say.) And as long as students are unfamiliar with both the concepts of evolution and creationism and the history of the debate between the two, they are more easily manipulated by the extremists on both sides of the current cultural divide. The theory of evolution does not disprove the existence of God as some hold. And the idea of an “Intelligent Designer” does not rule out the possibility of evolution. But one can find both these ideas in wide circulation. So let’s get to work on some real critical analysis — exercise those brains!By Rick
October 3, 2005 6:15 PM | Link to this
It is inappropriate intellectually to teach evolution in a science course in high school because: a) student fall severely short of the education they would nee d to even begin to understand it, and b) it has become a “religous” conviction of secularists. Let’s concentrate on my first point. What course would a student need to take to understand the theory of evolution? Physics, chemistry, lots of math, astrophyics, biology, microbiology, geology, maybe meterology. Without such a vigorous background students will be unable to understand or disagree with the theory, in general or in particulars. BTW, I am not hostile to theory, but I do believe that secularists push it as a matter of their deeply held philosophical beliefs and the desire to inculcate those beliefs on students.By Karen
October 3, 2005 7:09 AM | Link to this
What’s wrong with critical analysis? Isn’t that what prods science to continue its search for the truth? And isn’t evolution indeed a theory until someone has provided observable proof that something has evolved from one kind of organism to another? Natural selection is not a theory because it can be observed. But natural selection is not the same thing as evolution. So some future scientist from Ohio who might otherwise have been inspired by the questions that a little critical analysis would have raised will not embark on the quest to prove the theory of evolution because he or she is not aware that the question is still up for grabs. The ranking is ridiculous. As is curriculum on intelligent design, but that’s a rant for another day.