Evolution 101
On one level, the guidebook issued last week by the National Academy of Sciences is merely another manual for teachers: At this grade, here’s what students should know; here are sample lessons; here are commonly asked questions; and so on.
But the fact that the academy believed there was a need for such a guidebook was, in itself, significant. For more than seven decades after the Scopes trial--in which a Tennessee teacher was convicted of a crime for telling his students that man descended from the apes--the nation’s leading science advisory panel still worries that too many students have “little or no exposure to the theory of evolution, the most important concept in understanding biology.”
“The widespread misunderstandings about evolution are of great concern to the scientific community,” said Bruce M. Alberts, president of the nonprofit academy, which is chartered by Congress.
The 140-page publication, “Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science,” does not try to document the assertion that many schools shy away from the subject because it may anger religious groups. Instead, it seeks to guide teachers through the subject--and calm fears that teaching about evolution necessarily conflicts with religious beliefs.
The academy believes that even the youngest schoolchildren can be taught the concepts.
“During the elementary grades, children build understanding of biological concepts through direct experience with living things, their life cycles and their habitats. These experiences emerge from the sense of wonder and natural interests of children who ask questions such as: How do plants get food? How many different animals are there? Why do some animals eat other animals? What is the largest plant? Where did the dinosaurs go?
“An understanding of the characteristics of organisms, life cycles of organisms, and of the complex interactions among all components of the natural environment begins with questions such as these and an understanding of how individual organisms maintain and continue life.”
More excerpts:
Can a person believe in God and still accept evolution?
Many do. Most religions of the world do not have any direct conflict with the idea of evolution. Within the Judeo-Christian religions, many people believe that God works through the process of evolution. That is, God has created both a world that is ever-changing and a mechanism through which creatures can adapt to environmental change over time.
At the root of the apparent conflict between some religions and evolution is a misunderstanding of the critical difference between religious and scientific ways of knowing. Religions and science answer different questions about the world. Whether there is a purpose to the universe or a purpose for human existence are not questions for science.
Aren’t scientific beliefs based on faith as well?
Usually “faith” refers to beliefs that are accepted without empirical evidence. Most religions have tenets of faith. Science differs from religion because it is the nature of science to test and retest explanations against the natural world. Thus, scientific explanations are likely to be built on and modified with new information and new ways of looking at old information. This is quite different from most religious beliefs.
Therefore, “belief” is not really an appropriate term to use in science because testing is such an important part of this way of knowing. If there is a component of faith to science, it is the assumption that the universe operates according to regularities--for example, that the speed of light will not change tomorrow. Even the assumption of that regularity is often tested--and thus far has held up well. This “faith” is very different from religious faith.
Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral.
Why can’t we teach creation science in my school?
The courts have ruled that “creation science” is actually a religious view. Because public schools must be religiously neutral under the U.S. Constitution, the courts have held that it is unconstitutional to present creation science as legitimate scholarship.
In particular, in a trial in which supporters of creation science testified in support of their view, a district court declared that creation science does not meet the tenets of science as scientists use the term (McLean vs. Arkansas Board of Education). The Supreme Court has held that it is illegal to require that creation science be taught when evolution is taught (Edwards vs. Aguillard). In addition, district courts have decided that teachers cannot advocate creation science on their own (Peloza vs. San Juan Capistrano School District and Webster vs. New Lennox School District).
If evolution is taught in schools, shouldn’t creationism be given equal time?
Some religious groups deny that microorganisms cause disease, but the science curriculum should not therefore be altered to reflect this belief. Most people agree that students should be exposed to the best possible scholarship in each field. That scholarship is evaluated by professionals and educators in those fields. In science, scientists as well as educators have concluded that evolution--and only evolution--should be taught in science classes because it is the only scientific explanation for why the universe is the way it is today.
Many people say that they want their children to be exposed to creationism in school, but there are thousands of different ideas about creation among the world’s people. Comparative religions might comprise a worthwhile field of study, but not one appropriate for a science class. Furthermore, the U.S. Constitution states that schools must be religiously neutral, so legally a teacher cannot present any particular creationist view as being more “true” than others.
Why should teachers teach evolution when they already have so many things to teach and can cover biology without mentioning evolution?
Teachers face difficult choices in deciding what to teach in their limited time, but some ideas are of central importance in each discipline. In biology, evolution is such an idea. Biology is sometimes taught as a list of facts, but if evolution is introduced early in a class and in an uncomplicated manner, it can tie many disparate facts together. Most important, it offers a way to understand the astonishing complexity, diversity, and activity of the modern world. Why are there so many different types of organisms? What is the response of a species or community to a changing environment? Why is it so difficult to develop antibiotics and insecticides that are useful for more than a decade or two? All of these questions are easily discussed in terms of evolution but are difficult to answer otherwise.
Should students be given lower grades for not believing in evolution?
No. Children’s personal views should have no effect on their grades. Students are not under a compulsion to accept evolution. A grade reflects a teacher’s assessment of a student’s understanding. If a child does not understand the basic ideas of evolution, a grade could and should reflect that lack of understanding, because it is quite possible to comprehend things that are not believed.
