An alarming amount of children are going through the school system, only to be taught a shortsighted education.
Among the most shortsighted aspects is science. Recently, the National Research Council conducted a survey that found that nearly 60 percent of high school teachers fail to teach evolution adequately and in doing so give tacit credence to creationism. More alarmingly, 13 percent of public school biology teachers openly and deliberately promote creationism and denounce evolutionary theory.
This educational shortfall is a result of the contentious debate among educators over science versus faith. While the facts may lean toward evolution, faith still wins out because taking a hard stance against the majority isn’t always easy. Outside of the academic science community, the majority holds faith-based Christian beliefs.
Creationists are steadfastly opposed to evolution, one of the basic tenets of biological science. Evolution explains the origins and development of life at both the molecular and macroscopic level and is supported by a preponderance of evidence that includes fossil records.
Creationists are inherently against scientific discourse and suppress legitimate forms of thought and understanding. Despite this, teachers are reluctant to promote evolution out of fear of controversy.
As a scientific theory, evolution can only be challenged by another scientific theory. Since no other credible alternative exists, creationists have invented a fictive explanation based on religion in a poor attempt to explain how life exists today. It is centered on the notion that only a higher power can account for the formation of life and the diversity of species on Earth. Only through deception do creationists try to pass off their beliefs as evidence-based.
Schools must address this issue by dismissing those teachers that advocate religion over science, and ensuring that those remaining are adequately prepared to teach evolution. In addition, it would serve the students well if teachers derided creationism as being intellectually lazy, unscientific and detrimental to genuine learning.
Students should not be held hostage by Christian extremists simply out of reluctance to confront a blatant example of religious subterfuge.
At their worst, Christian extremists or creationists promote bigotry and ignorance, stifle intellectual development and advocate dogma over reason. However, we accommodate them at our own peril.
In order for the US to remain an intellectual leader in the world, such deference must end.
If we value our ability to think critically and form evidence-based beliefs, we must stand up to these religious ideologues and refute their unscientific doctrines. Otherwise, America risks becoming a fundamentalist state where facts are replaced with faith.
The data regarding teacher attitudes was published as "Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom" by Michael B. Berkman and Eric Plutzer (Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 404-405). Both men are at the University of Pennsylvania. Neither author was funded by the "National Research Council." You have become confused with The National Research Council's 1996 National Science Education Standards (NSES). Also read "Evolution and Creationism in America's Classrooms: A National Portrait" Berkman*, Pacheco, and Plutzer, May 2008 PLoS Biology.
Wholesale firing of teachers is not going to be a successful approach to the issue either. For a moment consider the contractual issues, which alone would block such an effort. What Berkman and Pultzer found was that in highly conservative school districts, up to 40% of science teachers promoted creationism, while in better educated, liberal districts they were rare. So, creationist teachers live and work in creationist communities. I doubt that creationist parents will complain their children are taught creationism.
The research did reveal that nearly 60% of teachers were unsure, and insecure about what evolutionary theory was, or how to teach it Few in this category had taken any coursework on evolution, and so avoided it in the curriculum, and their teaching plans.. Berkman and Pultzer recommended that these teachers should be the focus for intervention, and that Improving teacher education, and credentialing chould "salvage" the 60% majority.
I agree with Gary. We have a bigger problem than the the creationist "teachers" who teach creationist students: we have a large percentage of teachers and students willing to consider the science but still falling dramatically short of a basic scientific understanding of biological evolution.
You might want to get the facts right. The fact is that things have evolved. Things will continue to evolve. However there is no scientific proof that man evolved from anything. Show me the fossils that proves man evolved from apes. I have yet to see this. Sciense is about what one can prove and faith is about believing in something that can't be proven. So until I see the first monkey evolve into a man, I guess I will continue to have faith in the Lord and the Bible. You might want to consider this and dust your Bible off. The problem with your theory is just that, it is a theory. Since when do we teach opinions.
Let me get this straight: You'd like to see animals evolving before your very eyes. Is that right? You'd like evolution to occur in the span of minutes?
Marc, Christian extremists in America claim they want to "restore" America. The problem is that the America they want to restore never existed, and their goal is actually anti-American. The pending English, history, and social studies curriculum for Texas is a good example of how bad it can get. It is very interesting that Muslim creationists are nearly identical to Christian, or Jewish creationists.
Regardless, the notion that we can just fire any teacher who varies from the curriculum guidelines is a non-starter. I agree with Berkman and Pultzer that we can best improve science education by tightened credentialing requirements, and adding continuing education classes in evolutionary biology.
In response to the demand for primate fossils made by JTH, they exist by the ton. I suggest looking at:
Becoming Human http://www.becominghuman.org/
The Smithsonian Institution's "What Does It Mean to be Human?" http://humanorigins.si.edu/
and,
"The Time-Space Chart of Human Ancestors" (This site only starts with the Australopithecines ) https://www.msu.edu/~heslipst/contents/ANP440/ind…
But, for the last 20 years, the genetic studies of human, ape, and even extinct human ancestors has become far more rigorous confirming evidence of human evolution from ancient primate ancestors we share with other apes than even the fossils. In this regard, I recommend reading:
Johnson, Welkin E. John M. Coffin
1999 "Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences" Vol. 96, Issue 18, 10254-10260, August 31,
Lebedev, Y. B., Belonovitch, O. S., Zybrova, N. V, Khil, P. P., Kurdyukov, S. G., Vinogradova, T. V., Hunsmann, G., and Sverdlov, E. D. (2000) "Differences in HERV-K LTR insertions in orthologous loci of humans and great apes." Gene 247: 265-277
Jones, Martin
2002 The Molecule Hunt: archaeology and the search for Ancient DNA New York: Arcade Publishing
A very striking recent study is, "A New View Of the Birth of Homo sapiens," by Ann Gibbons (Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 392-394), that reviews some recent discoveries in human and fossil genetics.
Marc, Christian extremists in America claim they want to "restore" America. The problem is that the America they want to restore never existed, and their goal is actually anti-American. The pending English, history, and social studies curriculum for Texas is a good example of how bad it can get. It is very interesting that Muslim creationists are nearly identical to Christian, or Jewish creationists.
Regardless, the notion that we can just fire any teacher who varies from the curriculum guidelines is a non-starter. I agree with Berkman and Pultzer that we can best improve science education by tightened credentialing requirements, and adding continuing education classes in evolutionary biology.
In response to the demand for primate fossils made by JTH, they exist by the ton. I suggest looking at:
Becoming Human http://www.becominghuman.org/
The Smithsonian Institution's "What Does It Mean to be Human?" http://humanorigins.si.edu/
and,
"The Time-Space Chart of Human Ancestors" (This site only starts with the Australopithecines ) https://www.msu.edu/~heslipst/contents/ANP440/ind…
But, for the last 20 years, the genetic studies of human, ape, and even extinct human ancestors has become far more rigorous confirming evidence of human evolution from ancient primate ancestors we share with other apes than even the fossils. In this regard, I recommend reading:
Johnson, Welkin E. John M. Coffin
1999 "Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences" Vol. 96, Issue 18, 10254-10260, August 31,
Lebedev, Y. B., Belonovitch, O. S., Zybrova, N. V, Khil, P. P., Kurdyukov, S. G., Vinogradova, T. V., Hunsmann, G., and Sverdlov, E. D. (2000) "Differences in HERV-K LTR insertions in orthologous loci of humans and great apes." Gene 247: 265-277
Jones, Martin
2002 The Molecule Hunt: archaeology and the search for Ancient DNA New York: Arcade Publishing
A very striking recent study is, "A New View Of the Birth of Homo sapiens," by Ann Gibbons (Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 392-394), that reviews some recent discoveries in human and fossil genetics.
Marc, Christian extremists in America claim they want to "restore" America. The problem is that the America they want to restore never existed, and their goal is actually anti-American. The pending English, history, and social studies curriculum for Texas is a good example of how bad it can get. It is very interesting that Muslim creationists are nearly identical to Christian, or Jewish creationists.
Regardless, the notion that we can just fire any teacher who varies from the curriculum guidelines is a non-starter. I agree with Berkman and Pultzer that we can best improve science education by tightened credentialing requirements, and adding continuing education classes in evolutionary biology.
In response to the demand for primate fossils made by JTH, they exist by the ton. I suggest looking at:
Becoming Human http://www.becominghuman.org/
The Smithsonian Institution's "What Does It Mean to be Human?" http://humanorigins.si.edu/
and,
"The Time-Space Chart of Human Ancestors" (This site only starts with the Australopithecines ) https://www.msu.edu/~heslipst/contents/ANP440/ind…
But, for the last 20 years, the genetic studies of human, ape, and even extinct human ancestors has become far more rigorous confirming evidence of human evolution from ancient primate ancestors we share with other apes than even the fossils. In this regard, I recommend reading:
Johnson, Welkin E. John M. Coffin
1999 "Constructing primate phylogenies from ancient retrovirus sequences" Vol. 96, Issue 18, 10254-10260, August 31,
Lebedev, Y. B., Belonovitch, O. S., Zybrova, N. V, Khil, P. P., Kurdyukov, S. G., Vinogradova, T. V., Hunsmann, G., and Sverdlov, E. D. (2000) "Differences in HERV-K LTR insertions in orthologous loci of humans and great apes." Gene 247: 265-277
Jones, Martin
2002 The Molecule Hunt: archaeology and the search for Ancient DNA New York: Arcade Publishing
A very striking recent study is, "A New View Of the Birth of Homo sapiens," by Ann Gibbons (Science 28 January 2011: Vol. 331 no. 6016 pp. 392-394), that reviews some recent discoveries in human and fossil genetics.
Marc,
Should be "number of children," not "amount."
Mr. Grammar
Evolution occurred and is occurring. This needs to be taught in schools, not creationism, period.
My only objection with the evolution vs. creationism debacle is simply that there are many individuals essentially describing evolution as it if were a replacement to religion. This is incorrect and is irresponsible. Evolution is not a religion because it is not spiritual, in the same sense creationism isn't science because it is spiritual. When we use evolution in an attempt to devalue religion ANY further than the extent to which evolution explains the diversity of life and the vehicle for which life changes, we devalue evolution and do an injustice to science.
evolution is science, and we must not attempt to institute it as a pseudo religion, intentionally or unintentionally. That being said, creationism has no room in a science curriculum.
Hey JTH, man shares ancestry with apes. Its not like one day an ape gave birth to a human. You ask, "since when do we teach opinions". All of education is an opinion. It is the professors 'opinion' that what is being taught is correct and relevant.
This article is very dishonest. I have spoken with many science professors at UH and Rice who knock creationism / intelligent design. When I asked them in front of the class if they had ever read a book on the subject they said no. The class lost all respect for them at that moment. In fact, the students in the class told me that. The most bigoted people in the world are evolutionists not creationists.
your religion is ridiculous nonsense and you have wasted your life following it as if it means something.
u mad?
I see you have not changed a bit cakewalk. still hurling insults as opposed to actual facts
daniel tells a retarded made-up anecdote, i make fun of him, then you accuse ME of avoiding the facts.
i thought we were friends :((((