Creationism and Evolution taught in schools
Introduction:
The education of evolution and creationism in the public school system has been debatable. Charles Darwin published his conclusions of evolution in 1859. This altered the teaching of science in the public school system intensely (Armenta, 1). Several court cases have been filed against the teaching of evolution. Because of the religious conservative legislators a ban was placed on the teaching of evolution and the equal treatment of evolution and creationism or intelligent design (Armenta, 1). The court case that stirred the controversy was the Scope case of 1925 in Dayton, Tennessee. Multiple major court cases followed; Epperson, et al. v. Arkansas, McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, Edwards v. Aguillard, and Frailer v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education (Armenta, 1). In Louisiana and Tennessee a bill was approved that allowed teachers in the public school system to teach evolution alongside with creationism even if the principal and superintendence disagree. The author of the bill believes that it will help the students improve critical thinking skills and pupils will learn to be respectful towards other students’ beliefs (Jones, 1).
Evolution has always been controversy to teach in the public school systems, while creationism is too expensive to teach. This is because Texas is the largest producer of textbooks in the country (Jones, 2). This means that everything that is written in the public school system’s textbooks will be approved by Texas’s Centralized school board. A textbook is basically a curriculum for teachers to outline their classes. America is made up of fifty states that all have numerous and various different laws and bills pertaining to...
... middle of paper ...
...y 87.3
(2012):225-235. Academic Search Premier. Web. 28 Jan. 2014.
Reiss, Michael J. "How Should Creationism And Intelligent Design Be Dealt With In The
Classroom?" Journal Of Philosophy Of Education 45.3 (2011): 399-415. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
Stenmark, Michael. “Is There A human Nature.” Zygon: Journal Of Religion & Science 47.4
(2012): 890-902. Academic Search Premier. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
Stenger, Victor J. “The God Hypothesis”. New Scientist 213.2856 (2012):46-47. Academic
Search Premier. Web. 28 Jan. 2014.
Terry, Mark. "Intelligent Design" Wants God across All the Curriculum." Education Digest 70.6
(2005): 24-32. Academic Search Premier. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
White, Thomas. “Extreme Theology: Is There A God (Or Gods) For Skeptics?.” Cross Currents
63.4 (2013):473-491. Academic Search Premier. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.
Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron, “Teaching Theories: The Evolution-Creation Controversy,” The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 44, No. 7 (Oct…1982). This article, written by Robert Root-Bernstein and Donald L. McEachron sheds light on the controversy of evolution vs creationism in schools and the validity of each being called a scientific theory. The work was created to answer the questions, “Which of these theories is truly scientific and which is a religious belief? Which should be taught in schools?” The article concluded in favor of evolution as a valid scientific theory that should be taught rather than creationism, but also mentioned the worth of understanding the latter.
The 1982 court case McLean vs. Arkansas put in the public spotlight just how important drawing the distinction is. In what has become a landmark case in the creation/evolution legal debate, the Arkansas legislature passed without debate a bill mandating that the state redraw its science education standards so to include in the state's public high school curricula the body of ideas known as "creationism" - the notion that Earth and its inhabitant life forms were formed in the same forms as they are seen today - alongside evolution - the mainstream view of biologists holding that life developed and diversified gradually over millions of successive generations.
Scott points out that school districts have boards in place that have people who “...may or may not know much about the field of education” (Pg. 87-8). He goes on to say that these people, despite the state mandated curriculums that are supposed to be used to guide the districts, have the final say in what their educators can teach. There are parallels between the disorganization of our school system and the religious matters in that there are many sects of Christianity, from which most of the antievolution ideals stem. The Fundamentalist movement in the 20’s is one of the main culprits against evolution as it called for a strict interpretation of the Bible. This movement led to the push to eradicate the concept of evolution from the curriculum due to the fear that it will shake the faith of the youth. This push resulted in the Scopes trial which put the controversy in a new light. Despite the odds, Scopes won but even after that even less schools taught evolution. Much later on, schools began to teach concepts that were scientific alternatives to evolution as creationism was viewed as a religious view and was not allowed to be pushed
Evolution and Creationism are both fact and theory but the question is which one should be taught in schools? Only a few school distracts have approved the teaching of evolution because it has more senitific evidence than creationism to prove that it is true. According to a new Gallup poll, just 39% of Americans believe in evolution. The Gallup polls also show that those Americans with higher education believe in the theory of evolution as opposed to those with only high school diplomas. The polls found that 74% Americans with post-graduate degrees believe in evolution theory compared to 21% of Americans with only high school diplomas. The Gallup polls suggest that the belief in the theory of evolution is associated with education. Evolution should be taught in schools because it has more scientific evidence to support it than creationism does. Also, public schools should not teach things that have to do with God, such as creationism, because the Constitution requires the separation of church and state. Finally, if we do not allow schools to teach evolution it would be a form censo...
Justice Felix Frankfurter stated in his opinion in McCollum v. Board of Education, "We have staked the very existence of our country on the faith that complete separation between the state and religion is best for the state and best for religion. If nowhere else, in the relation between Church and State, good fences make good neighbors." (Moore 1) For the last century in America and ideological war has been fought in our legislatures, courts, and schools. Some parts of the fundamentalist Christian movement have tried repeatedly to prevent the teaching of the Darwinian theory of evolution in public schools because they see it as a threat to their religious beliefs. Darwin's theory posits that species evolve over eons of time, changing in ancestor-descendant relationships from one species to another. This is often perceived as standing in direct conflict with the Bible account of the creation of the world as told in Genesis, which states that the world is only a few millennia old and that god created man and all of the species of animals in a single epoch. The latest battle in this conflict is over the theory of Intelligent Design (ID). Robert Weitzel states that "IDers maintain that life is too complex to have developed solely by evolutionary mechanisms. They believe this complexity could only have been engineered by an intelligent designer. Strategically, they refrain from identifying the nature of the designer. This tactic is designed to give their notion of creation a patina of scientific credibility and protection from First Amendment challenges" (1). Intelligent Design advocates have pushed forward on many fronts to try and introduce it into school curricula all over the country and they are meeting with a measure of success and a good deal of popular support. While the ID movement enjoys wide support from the populace, especially in traditionally conservative areas, it is imperative that the teaching of Intelligent Design is kept out of public school curricula because of the separation that must be maintained between religion and state.
happen? If not, then why should science teachers teach that life evolved over billions of
One way to address the question is whether or not creationism, in itself, is a valid idea to be taught in public schools. The answer to this can be yes. Not only should a student in American public schools learn and acquire knowledge in empirical sciences, and other tangible facts both in history and other courses, but he should also learn how to think and make decisions for himself. Unfortunately, as it turns out, creationism is in direct conflict with the biological theory of evolution. Many fundamentalist propose that creationism should replace, or at least be offered as an alternative to Darwin’s theory of evolution.
The fact that Abiogenesis is a separate field of study than Evolution should incline creationists to be more amenable to having evolution taught in schools. In fact, this was one of the main arguments of the plaintiffs in the aforementioned Kansas Board of Education hearings used in order to justify the teaching of evolution in the science curriculum. Mr. Irigonegaray stated in his closing statement, “Draft 2 accurately represents science as neutral in respect to the nature of spiritual reality.” (7) This means that science is not on a mission...
A hotly debated topic these past few years centers on the origin of life. Now more than ever, science and religion are butting heads trying to come up with a conclusion, and one that public schools would teach to their students. Alex Rainert, meanwhile, reasons that both “science and religion are engaged in the same project, to discover the origin of life” (141). In short, one could better describe the debate as a crusade between evolutionists and creationists. Both sides have their well-founded arguments, but when one looks at the decisions of the courts, clearly only one side may win the battle when deciding biology curriculum in schools. Despite the overwhelming number of people in favor of teaching creationism in public schools, it may be better to leave science classes free from matters of religious belief.
Since the Scopes Trials came to a close, the Supreme Court enforced the teaching no of evolution in all public schools across the US in 1987. The interesting part was that most people believe that the Supreme Court had banned the teachings of creationism, but the decision stated that creation is no more than how life began (“Teaching Creation,” 2010). The case that made the decision, Edwards vs. Aguillard, actually allow public schools to teach either creation or evolution, as long as the teacher does not mention God in the picture. This fact can depict one’s belief in God and how humans came to the form that humanity is in today. The belief of creationism is correct, rather than evolution, because the belief proves the existence of God.
Since the time that teaching evolution in public schools was banned as heresy and taboo for contradicting the Bible, most public school systems today take an opposite approach in which creationism is seldom ta...
...ical. Next the McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education had a law that enforced public schools to give both creation-science and evolution equal treatment. It was said that “Creation-Science” is not actually a science, but strictly religious.
In the uncertainty that the modern world is, there is one law that stays petrified in stone no matter what happens: “Things change with age.” No matter if it is in history, science, or even Pokémon, things change as time passes by and this process is called evolution. The theory formulated by Charles Darwin is the belief that all organisms have come from earliest creatures because of external factors (“NSTA…”). School boards everywhere have accepted the theory of Evolution as fact making it essential to be in the curriculums of science classrooms. However, over the years, controversy has arisen as the fact that is evolution is still only a theory with flaws and setbacks, efficiently making other theories (i.e. intelligent design) a viable alternate in the classroom. The law, on the other hand, had a different idea about these other theories with numerous bans them from schools, claiming them to be against the second amendment. Despite the bitter debate of rather or not it is valid and right for teaching (primarily alone) the theory of evolution lies as being the most reliable and accurate way to teach how the modern world came to be.
Moore, Randy and Jay Hatch and Murray Jensen. “Twenty Questions: What Have the Courts Said about the Teaching of Evolution and Creationism in Public Schools?” Bioscience August 2003: EBSCOhost, Seaside High School Lib., Seaside, OR 29 September 2004
Ever since the idea of evolution came about there have been all kinds of debates, including trials, over the subject. When Charles Darwin first thought of his theories he did not know what would come of it. Evolution contradicts religious beliefs, which makes teaching it a touchy subject for some students. However, students can take it if the subject is approached in the right way. Students must learn the sound science behind evolution and realize that religion is different than science. Overwhelming evidence shows that evolution is real and should be taught in all schools.