|
 |
On evolution, minority rules in state BOE
|
| By: Mary Hufford, Contributing writer |
April 20, 2005 |
|
When it comes to teaching evolution, minority rules in the Kansas State
Board of Education. While 17 scientists and science educators have
revised and updated Kansas science education standards, the conservative
majority seated on the Board would prefer to approve the Minority
Report submitted by eight proponents of Intelligent Design Theory.
"We are not going to give up until the standards say what we want them
to say," said Kathy Martin, District 6 Board member. "Some naturalistic
[evolutionary] opinion is correct, but not all of it is."
George Griffith, Program Consultant for Science at the Kansas State
Department of Education, said that when the Board is revising any set of
education standards, they first gather a group of professionals and
educators from the university level to form an education standards
writing committee. The committee reviews the standards and reaches a
consensus about what needs to be changed. The committee then sends their
recommendations back to the Board for approval. Approval is dictated by
majority vote.
The Board appears to be making an exception in the case of science
standards. A standards writing committee has been assembled, but rather
than reaching a consensus, the group has submitted two distinctly
different reports. In a committee comprised of 25 scientists, eight
members are Intelligent Design (ID) proponents. Those eight members
prepared a separate set of recommendations, known as the "Minority
Report," in addition to the standards changes already prepared by the
seventeen in favor of teaching evolution as defined by the scientific
community at large.
Martin said, "Evolution has been proven false. ID is science-based and
strong in facts."
While Martin was unable to provide examples of scientific facts that
back up Intelligent Design Theory, she did explain that ID believes in
"microevolution," but not "macroevolution."
"Microevolution is change within the species: there are adaptations that
make it easier for the species to live. Macroevolution is change between
the classes: reptiles turning into birds, for example. Man has changed
and evolved, but we are not going to change back into monkeys," said Martin.
Kathy Martin maintains that the Board does not intend that ID or
creationism be taught in Kansas science classrooms. Rather, Martin said,
"We want to allow evolution to be critically analyzed and challenged."
However, the Minority Report opens the school floor to discuss
alternative theories to evolution, such as Intelligent Design (ID).
"It should be up to the student to find an alternative to evolution
theory," said Martin. "Permitting discussion about ID would allow
students to form unbiased opinions. We would be allowing challenges to
evolution that are not allowed now."
According to the Intelligent Design Network, the theory of intelligent
design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living
things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an
undirected process such as natural selection. ID proponents believe
science should be conducted objectively, even if the findings imply that
there is a "Master Designer" behind the design.
And there is the controversy: Intelligent Design theory unavoidably
impacts religion and religious philosophy.
Martin said, "ID has theological implications. ID is not strictly
Christian, but it is theistic."
Some scientists claim that ID is thinly disguised creationism with a
hidden Christian agenda at its root. Martin agrees that the agenda is
not well disguised.
"Of course this is a Christian agenda. We are a Christian Nation," said
Martin. "Our country is made up of Christian conservatives. We don't
often speak up but we need to stand up and let our voices be heard,"
said Martin.
While introducing ID into the evolution cirriculum might blur the lines
between theology, philosophy, and science, Martin sees no difficulty in
teaching morals or ethics in the science classroom.
"Why shouldn't theology be taught in the classroom? Morality ought to be
taught in every class. Prayer ought to be allowed. Whenever a child
wanted to pray in class, I prayed with them," said Martin. "All children
believe in God. Even little children whose parents don't take them to
church believe in God."
Martin said these are philosophical differences that will become a
non-issue if discussion is allowed.
"Most high school students don't care where they came from. They are
more worried about where they are going on Saturday night," said Martin.
"There are some who say that Kansas won't have a good educational system
if we change the standards. That is just scare tactics. My children's
education didn't suffer under the old standards."
|
|
©Clay Center Dispatch 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
S M |
Nov, 05 2008 |
| |
Intelligent Design or creationism is NOT a theory. It is a hypothesis based off of the writings originally found on ancient scrolls that were written by...? There is no scientific evidence that supports intelligent design.
If you want theology taught in the classroom that is fine, so long as it is not in science class and you hire a teacher who actually knows theology.
|
|
|
|
Rob Willis |
Oct, 13 2007 |
| |
For an award winning educator, Ms. Martin sure does sound uneducated. First of all, she needs to learn what science is, and what science is not. She might be fit to teach Bible classes, but she hasn't got a clue about science. If you think that the universe was intellegently designed, then why does that rule out evolution anymore than gravity or anything else? If species evolve, then that's the way God made things work. If you don't believe in God, fine. If you do, then why resist the reality that God gave us when a lot of it can be revealed through objective scientific investigation?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
