Access Research NetworkThe MN legislature is poised to pass new science standards that exclude the scientific controversy surrounding evolution. However, the public overwhelmingly agrees that students should be provided the scientific evidence both for and against Darwin's theory of evolution.
A Zogby poll, released last week, revealed overwhelming support for science standards that teach Darwin's theory of evolution AND the scientific evidence against it. Nearly three in four (72%) Minnesota voters believe that the legislature should adopt such science standards. (See http://www.edwatch.org/pdfs/Zogby.pdf)
A sizeable majority in each sub-group agree that the evidence for and against evolution should be the new standard approved by the legislature. For example, 80% of voters under age 30, 81% of Republicans and 67% of Democrats agree that the scientific controversy should be taught.
More than four in five (82%) voters agree that when Darwin's theory of evolution is taught in school, students should also learn that scientists continue to study aspects of his theory. Only 12% disagree, and 6% are not sure.
The overwhelming majority in all sub-groups agree that students should learn about how scientists continue to study the theory of evolution.
NEXT WEEK the MN House will formally take up the adoption of the new standards when they hear the bill HF 2558..
The citizens' committee on science standards included a "minority report" that it is urging the legislature to adopt. The "minority report" includes the teaching of the scientific controversy on evolution. To see the "minority report," go to: http://education.state.mn.us/content/059704.pdf
The letter attached to the "minority report" states:
...we remain deeply concerned that the proposed [science] standards fail to require students to learn enough information about evolution to be able to understand the theory's weaknesses as well as its strengths. Unfortunately, this completely one-sided approach to evolution lowers the quality of science education and is more likely to polarize Minnesotans than unify them.
The polarization will get even worse once the public sees the way in which stakeholder input on the evolution issue was largely disregarded during the development of the standards. Contrary to state law, the final draft standards ignore the vast majority of citizen input about evolution submitted during extensive public hearings. The standards also ignore the recommendations of one of the official outside science reviewers who evaluated the first draft of the standards. Finally, they ignore guidance from the U.S. Congress in the No Child Left Behind Act Conference Report, which urged schools to teach "the full range of scientific views that exist" about controversial topics "such as biological evolution." Because of these problems of both process and content, we urge the legislature to adopt the following improvements in two of the existing benchmarks:
Grades: 9-12 Life Science, Biological Populations Change Over Time, benchmark 4: "Students will understand that species change over time and be able to distinguish how the term biological evolution is used to describe changes within existing species (microevolution) as well as the emergence of new species and changes above the species level (macroevolution)."
Grades 9-12 IV. Life Science, Biological Populations Change Over Time, benchmark 5: "Students will use biological evolution to explain the diversity of species, and will be able to describe how scientists continue to critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory."
Incorporating these changes will bring Minnesota's standards up to at many scientists acknowledge, that a robust debate about the mechanisms of evolution is currently under way within biology. Far from breaking new ground, similar language has already been adopted unanimously by the Ohio State Board of Education, which has required Ohio students to know "how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory.
Adopting these improvements will help teach students of science the skills of analysis and critical deliberation that are central to a quality education and the practice of democratic citizenship. In summary, these changes will allow teachers to cover evolution in an intellectually honest and scientifically accurate manner. Students need to know about the theory of evolution in order to be scientifically literate, but they need to learn about it in a way that promotes continuing inquiry and analysis, not dogmatism.
The newly released Zogby poll supports the "minority report" in the new MN science standards.
File Date: 2.27.04
This data file may be reproduced in its entirety
for non-commercial use.
A return link to the Access Research Network web site would be
appreciated.
Documents on this site which have been reproduced from a previous publication are copyrighted through the individual publication. See the body of the above document for specific copyright information.