Luke Baker
Published: 01-21-09
“The right to search for the truth implies also a duty” - Albert Einstein
A debate carries on today in Austin TX one with a decade’s worth of consequences for Texas’ younger generation. At issue is a proposed update to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) document.
The current TEKS language reads that the “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories must be taught in the classroom. This language was first included in Texas curriculum standards in the 1980s. Over the years “strengths and weaknesses” has become a culture war buzz word.
Many scientists and evolution proponents view this clause as a backdoor route for social conservatives to introduce Creationism and Intelligent Design into public schools.
A panel of scientists and teachers across the state of Texas which was created by the Texas School Board of Education (SBOE) has proposed that the current “strengths and weaknesses” clause be removed. In its place they propose to add language saying that students should “analyze and evaluate strengths and limitations” of scientific theories.
Today the SBOE heard testimonies from over one-hundred individuals many focusing on the impact this new clause would have on the teaching of evolution in Texas public schools. Arguments were heard for both sides some claiming that Texas would become a pariah of the scientific community if this language was not removed. Others surmised that keeping the “strengths and weaknesses” language would put Texas on the forefront of scientific discovery.
Of the many witnesses testifying about their experiences and opinions a few stood out with their testimonies.
High School Senior Chris Mittal related his experience of attending a science conference where professors were offered a seminar that provided them with tips to shake students’ faith in non-evolutionary theories. A disenchanted Mittal believed the seminar went against the classroom principle that “questioning is science.” He further testified that for himself and his peers macro-evolutionary theories in the classroom were “handled pretty straight forward for the most part as a fact.”
Dr. Royal Smith a licensed pyschologist who earned his PhD from North Texas came down harshly against the teaching of evolution. Smith painted the two viewpoints as “one for dogmatic censorship vs. one for intelligent inquiry” implying that evolutionists were censoring fruitful debate. He further claimed that “dogmatic evolutionists are selling a fiction” and they “camouflage the evidence breakdown that Darwin himself described.” But his most memorable one-liner of the morning was in response to a question about some possible truths to evolutionary theory. Smith acknowledged that the genes between groups of species might be similar but chided that even though “90 of the genes are represented I don’t think that would get you child support.”
During the morning break I had a chance to speak with Clare Wuellner Executive Director of Austin’s Center for Inquiry a group advocating for teaching 21st Century Science and Evolution in Texas Classrooms.
I asked Clare for her thoughts on the meeting up to that point. Clare laid out to me the following:
“It is very clear that no matter what the board says this is a religious issue. It doesn’t matter how you frame it. Religion doesn’t belong in a science classroom. Every single argument for strengths and weaknesses language makes some reference to religion. Religion and evolution can get along just fine but not in the classroom. Every question asked by the Board shows an extreme ignorance of science.”
I asked if it should be expected that the board was ignorant on these issues.
“They better be listening to the experts and they’re not”
My last question was in regards to a witness named Angela Weissgarber a parent who testified that her children felt afraid and intimidated to ask questions in class when they were taught about evolution.
Clare conceded that the “teacher may have been hostile to religion” but added that “if Ms. Weissgarber’s daughter feels deprived she needs to go to Sunday School”
Clearly this is an emotional debate for many people. Texas students must have a comprehensive knowledge of today’s scientific theories while at the same time having the tools and freedom to think critically and question what they are taught. Whatever your stance on the issue and we would love to read your comments on the matter parents scientists and interested parties nationwide are anxiously waiting to see a resolution of this debate.
