• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Science teachers wary

Posted on: Tuesday, 16 March 2004, 06:00 CST

Many Greater Cincinnati science teachers who warily watched the state debate a controversial lesson plan for evolution say they cringe at the thought of encouraging theories that are based more on religion than science.

The Ohio Board of Education included the hotly debated 10th- grade lesson critiquing evolution this week as part of a 547-page science lesson plan for all grades. School districts can use the model lesson plans to teach concepts that will be on state achievement tests.

But they are not required to use the plan, though the state may put the critique of evolution on the test as a concept.

Several district administrators and science teachers said they likely won't change what they have been teaching or planned to teach.

"We'll probably teach it (evolution) as we always have, as a scientific theory," said Steve Collier, superintendent at Norwood City Schools. "I don't think we'll change what we're doing -- teaching it as a theory of evolution -- I just hope we can continue to do what we've done in the past and that is to be very cautious about how we present the material -- to let students know that there are other theories, but we don't go into those other theories."

Cincinnati Public School employees said the district already has solid courses and lesson plans that address what the state expects students to know about science. The state adopted new science standards in 2002, which specified evolution as the only life concept that would be covered on the tests.

"After the new standards came out, teachers were charged with developing lesson examples that could be used to address those standards and indicators," said Kevin Stinson, district science curriculum manager. "Those lessons are research-based, tried and true, and fleshed out. The standards themselves haven't changed. In terms of what is taught and tested, that's evolution."

When the state standards were approved, the state school board included wording that required students to critically analyze British naturalist Charles Darwin's theory that life evolved by natural processes.

The new lesson plan will serve to help students analyze the theory of evolution, supporters say. Critics -- including the Ohio Academy of Science, the National Academy of Sciences and the faculty senate of Case Western Reserve University -- said the lesson plan includes elements of intelligent design, a theory that life is so complex that a higher being must have created it. The lesson plan refers students to printed materials and Web sites on the intelligent design concept.

Many science teachers, like Constance Brandon, are uncomfortable with the thought of leading discussions on theories they believe have no place in a science classroom.

"I've been teaching 32 years, and in all those years we have pretty much taken the stance that the kids have to understand there is more than one theory, but we are qualified, because of our training in the scientific method, to teach scientific theories," said Brandon, a biology teacher and department chairwoman at Norwood High School. "If they want to know about non-scientific theories, I advise them to go to their rabbi, their minister or their priest.

"I've never been trained in creationism and intelligent design. I always thought (those ideas) would be better taught in world religion class or social studies -- Science is experiment-and research-based. When trying to teach something faith-based, I'm out of my field. I can do it, but it doesn't make me comfortable."

Rebecca Heckman, a biology teacher and department chairwoman at Princeton High School in Sharonville, said she feared the inclusion of the controversial lesson plan would lead to broader instruction on alternative theories.

"As a biology teacher and as a scientist, I would not be incorporating intelligent design instruction into my classroom," she said. "We do critically analyze. We have laws and theories that are up for debate, using experimentation and testing with the scientific method. Intelligent design does not allow for that. It is a religious view. It's church doctrine, church dogma. It cannot be tested with experimentation or scientific inquiry standards."

Heckman allows her students an opportunity to offer their opinions on the theory of evolution. "I'll let them discuss it," she said. "If someone brings up other theories, students will ask how scientific is it. Often they'll be getting into an argument about: Is it testable and what is faith -- . We talk about the merits."

She believes the new evolution lesson is the result of politics more than good teaching.

"I graduated from Roger Bacon High School," she said. "I never had creationism crammed down my throat. I learned about natural selection at a Catholic school here in Cincinnati 20 years ago. -- I feel like we're going backward."

John Rowe, a science teacher at Clark Montessori School and member of Cincinnati Public's Science/Health Curriculum Council, said teachers already offer critical assessments of scientific theories, whether the topic is evolution or plate tectonics.

"That's true in any scientific theory," he said. "Science is about taking that current best information and trying to interpret it.

"We tend to get these lightning rods in the public eye, evolution being one, and we draw fire. We lose sight of the fact that this is just a minute piece of what we're teaching in science courses. What we should be focusing on is raising our children to be competent adults."

More News in this Category