In support of intelligent design

In support of intelligent design
tampabay.com - 12/17/2007 - original
A majority of Pinellas County School Board members - including the immediate past president of the National School Boards Association - think that if Florida children are taught about evolution, they should learn other theories on the origin of life as well.

Board members Jane Gallucci, Carol Cook, Peggy O'Shea and Nancy Bostock (shown above, left to right) stopped short of saying that faith-based theories should be included in the state's proposed new science standards, which the state Board of Education likely will vote on in February. The new standards would include Darwin's theory of evolution and do not mention faith-based theories such as intelligent design or creationism.

But all four said such theories should be taught in public school classrooms.

"I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in," said Gallucci, the immediate past president of the National School Boards Association.

Bostock: "The entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. Intelligent design balances it out."

Cook: "To teach one as if nothing else existed, I think we're doing our students a disservice."

O'Shea suggested that parents who object to evolution being taught to their children might be able to opt them out of that day's lesson. "I'd probably ideally like to keep it all out of the classroom," she said. "If it's going to create this much controversy, how important is it?"

See the whole story in tomorrow's St. Petersburg Times and on tampabay.com. Also tomorrow, the Gradebook will provide more in-depth responses from all the Pinellas School Board members on the issue.

- Donna Winchester and Ron Matus

What they're saying in Pinellas
tampabay.com - 12/18/2007 - original
As we reported yesterday, a majority of the Pinellas School Board supports offering alternative theories of origin in schools. You can see today's story in the Times here.

We promised you more in-depth looks at all the board members' views. So here it is. Reporters Donna Winchester and Ron Matus conducted the interviews.

Jane Gallucci is the only one with just a single comment: "I think that students should be given the opportunity to view all theories on how man evolved and let their science background and their religious background take over as to which one they believe in. If you have a strong faith belief, then I think you would believe that god made us. If you want to think in a scientific way, then you believe we evolved. But I believe both theories should be presented to children. I think especially in a scientific world both theories should be presented to children."

Carol Cook: "I donít think we need to be afraid of any of it. Evolution is a popular belief out there. Many people will tell you itís science. Itís something that as a society and as a world we need to discuss. Itís worth talking about."

Linda Lerner: "I donít think there has to be a conflict. I think creationism is a philosophy. It should be taught in synagogues, in mosques, and in churches."

Mary Brown: "Iím not going to jump in the middle of that. Under Florida law . . . what we have been teaching has been called 'changes over time,' which really is the same thing in my mind as evolution. So therefore what has created the controversy is the word 'evolution.'"

Peggy O'Shea: "Iíd want to look at whatís being taught and how itís being taught. What are they saying about evolution? Are they posing it as a theory or as a fact? Iíd have to see how it would play out in the classroom."

Nancy Bostock: "I would agree with the folks that would say we need to teach the theory of evolution, that itís a big idea and that it has greatly shaped our world. Whether thatís a good thing or not is a whole other subject."

Janet Clark: "I stand on evolution. Iím glad itís in the standards."

The above links are Word document downloads. Sorry. For those who prefer to just click once, read on for the entirety of each board members' remarks.

NANCY BOSTOCK

Do we need to include creationism or intelligent design in the new science standards?


I would agree with the folks that would say we need to teach the theory of evolution, that itís a big idea and that it has greatly shaped our world. Whether thatís a good thing or not is a whole other subject. I would very much like to see, probably not at the Sunshine State Standard level, but at some level in our education system, for just the right folks to come together to put together some guidelines for our teachers . . . who are caught up in the culture wars.Ē

So you think teachers should teach intelligent design?

I think there is room there to teach intelligent design. We can call it a different name if that makes a difference to critics. I think the big idea is the clash of these two big ideas. I think itís good to put it in front of our kids.

I donít have a problem with (evolution) being in the Sunshine State Standards . . . I honestly donít know whatís going on in the classrooms. I think our teachers could use further guidance, not at the 30,000-foot level. Whichever way the science standards go, I think thereís room to go ahead and clarify more for our teachers.

I think the concept of a divine Creator is not a scientific theory. But it does, for some people, explain either an alternate theory for evolution . . . or it can explain some of the gaps or holes in the theory of evolution. There are people who reconcile both believing in a divine creator or all or most of the theory of evolution. I think itís important information to supplement the scientific theory of evolution or just to balance it out . . . the entire theory of evolution is not scientific fact. So intelligent design balances it out. I think thereís a lot of room to address both theories of the origin of life without necessarily offending the other camp.

PEGGY OíSHEA

What do you think about the fact that evolution is included in the new science standards?


Itís going to raise some concerns and I understand that. Any time something is taught in the classroom that might have a religious connotation, the parents have the ability to opt out of that discussion and the child wouldnít be tested on it.

So youíre saying that parents could opt out of their child being taught about evolution?

Perhaps. Iíd want to look at whatís being taught and how itís being taught. What are they saying about evolution? Are they posing it as a theory or as a fact? Iíd have to see how it would play out in the classroom. Itís similar to the health curriculum. There are pieces in there that a lot of people donít agree with. Maybe this should be something that can be taught, but it could be an opt out.

But if evolution becomes part of the Sunshine State Standards, students will be tested on it. Wonít districts have to teach it?

If the state mandates it, weíll do it, but we want the local community to understand weíll do it within the regulation of the law but with their interests in mind. If the state comes down with the standards, kids are going to be tested on it. Certainly weíll have to teach it, but weíll have to see to what degree and in what capacity we have to teach it.

Just from a personal view, and Iím not saying itís right or wrong, we talked at home about it because I wanted my children to understand both issues. But we canít assume thatís what happens in every household. We have to be very sensitive and look at all the ramifications. If it would be taught in the classroom, we would have to look at how it would be taught and what would be said. I would want to know at what grade levels itís being taught. Itís one thing to do it in a high school classroom. It would be different in an elementary classroom. In general, I would say we need to be very careful and look into this really carefully. If the state is going to do this, we need to hear what theyíre going to do and then give them input.

So youíre saying that you would want more details on how evolution would be taught?

Yes, itís going to depend on where itís taught and to what age group. It could be confusing to kids who are taught creationism at home. This is a theory that doesnít always fit in with religious beliefs. I would want to know to what age group are we teaching this. I think it would be very confusing to younger children. It needs a lot of thought. Would we be teaching it as a theory or as a fact? I would have a lot of questions about how itís going to be taught before I could make a decision.

It sounds like youíre not convinced that evolution is a sound theory.

Evolution is a theory that opposes the different religious theories. How do we teach that without offending the child?

And what about creationism?

How scientific is it? Iím not in a position to judge that. But it does open up an area that public schools try to stay out of. I would want to know, does every religion believe the same thing? I donít mind doing both, but if weíre teaching creationism, it has various interpretations. Youíre getting into some areas that I donít know belong in the curriculum per se. And Iím not so sure the schoolteacher is the one to be presenting religious ideas. My question would be, are we better off not teaching any of it at all? We need to hear from the public on that.

Iím not saying it belongs in the schools. But if weíre teaching one thing, donít we have the obligation to teach the other side? What is the obligation we have to the community? I donít think religion per se belongs in the schools, but each of us have beliefs that are part of who we are. You canít totally separate that because itís part of who we are. Iíd probably ideally like to keep it ALL out of the classroom. If itís going to create this much controversy, how important is it?

MARY BROWN

Do you think intelligent design or creationism should be included in the new science standards?


Iím not going to jump in the middle of that. Under Florida law . . . what we have been teaching has been called ďchanges over time,Ē which really is the same thing in my mind as evolution. So therefore what has created the controversy is the word ďevolution.Ē From my standpoint, we have to go with what the state requires. Iím not going to interject my personal opinion as to what we should or what we should not do. Whatever my personal opinion is, itís not one that takes precedence here.

I have not seen the standards. Since I have not seen them, I donít think it would be fair of me (to comment). Iím not going to interject my personal opinion.

Iím sure it will be an issue. There are people who have very strong opinions on the subject.

Has the Pinellas School Board discussed the issue of the new science standards and the inclusion of evolution?

The discussion has not come before the Pinellas County School Board. Usually we do look at (the standards). The standards . . . obviously needed to be changed. I want to see the standards. I want to see why they changed it. I donít know why they changed it. I have to presume that what we were teaching was not good enough. The way our world is going, our children have to be more up-to-date on science and facts and so forth. If we are going to compete . . . they must assume they were not up to par. I have to assume that.

So you canít say whether the change to include evolution in the new standards is good or bad when it excludes intelligent design or creationism?

Itís not that I canít, itís that I wonít. I want to see the standards.

CAROL COOK

It looks as if the controversy over evolution being taught in public school classrooms is heating up. I was wondering what you think about the inclusion of evolution in the proposed science standards?


I donít think we need to be afraid of any of it. Evolution is a popular belief out there. Many people will tell you itís science. Itís something that as a society and as a world we need to discuss. Itís worth talking about.

Let me start by saying a whole lot of where Iím going to go with that has to do with how the curriculum is designed. When people wanted to have prayer or Bible study, as long as weíre not trying to convert anyone to a particular religion or a particular belief, Iím willing to have some discussion about it.

Iím not one who would want to protect our students from knowing those thoughts are out there. I think they should also know that creationism is out there. As a Christian, I wonít go so far as to say that God didnít create the world through evolution. Itís never been such a huge topic for me that it has to be one or the other. I know there are a lot of people who teach the Bible is the only way.

At the same time, as a Christian, Iím not sure I want someone who doesnít believe in creationism being the one to teach my children about it.

What I would be looking for in the curriculum would be a balance between the trains of thought. Here is evolution. What is its impact? And here is another belief. While both are valid, this is something you need to wrestle with in your life.

So youíre saying both evolution and creationism should be taught in the public schools?

We should expose them to it. I wouldnít necessarily say teach them. They need to know both things are out there Ė both trains of thought, both theories. To teach one as if nothing else existed, I think weíre doing our students a disservice.

So you wouldnít consider the teaching of creationism as a conflict of church and state?

I see no conflict with the separation of church and state. That rule was designed so the state could not tell you which religion you could teach. My concern is the way these ideas would be taught. I donít want students being forced to believe in creationism any more than I want them to be forced to believe in evolution. I want them to be able to gather the facts and gain the skills to make their own decisions.

To what extent would you consider teaching evolution and intelligent design?

I think our students who are living in this society need to know that both theories, both facts, both trains of thought are out there. They need to know that. Weíre constantly trying to teach them critical thinking skills. We as educators should be teaching children how to get information and decide what is real and what isnít. They need find out if this is fact or if this is someoneís opinion, whether itís evolution or creationism. They need to get the facts and with their critical thinking, determine what their belief will be.

They need to be exposed to both. They need to know both are out there. I donít want to cram one down their throats. I also donít want to get into spending one six weeks on this and one six weeks on that. This is something theyíre going to be exposed to Iím assuming much of their lives unless someone can prove somewhere along the line that one is definitely right and one is definitely wrong.

I donít think we need to get into this at the kindergarten level.

In my faith, itís not a deal breaker one way or the other. I believe in the Bible. How do I know thatís not how God chose to create man? Does it make any difference? Thatís where I stand back and ask, Why are we wasting so much time discussing something we may never have the answer to?

You should be constantly gathering more and more information to determine where youíre going to land with this.

LINDA LERNER

What do you think of the inclusion of evolution in the new science standards?


I think itís a good thing because evolution is about science.

What do you think about the controversy that has arisen recently over evolution and creationism?

I donít think there has to be a conflict. I think creationism is a philosophy. It should be taught in synagogues, in mosques, and in churches. Thatís where I was taught and thatís where my children were taught. Evolution should be taught in science class because itís based on scientific evidence.

Can both evolution and creationism be taught in school?

No, because I believe in the separation of church and state. I belong to a temple and thatís where I get my religion. In school, itís science, not theology we should be teaching. I know there are courses in history where you can learn about religion. But creationism is theology and religious doctrine. One (theory) is science and one is theology and both can exist. But not in a public school science class.

JANET CLARK



What do you think about the controversy thatís developing over the inclusion of evolution in the new proposed science standards?

The standards came out a while back. Itís been absolutely quiet. Then this last week it just exploded when the board of education person made her comments. Up until then, I hadnít heard a peep out of anybody.

What are your views on the subject?

I stand on evolution. Iím glad itís in the standards. There was a poll sited that said only 42 percent of the population believes in evolution. Part of it is that people donít know what evolution is. There are people who think we evolved from apes. Thatís absolutely wrong. Thatís not part of the theory of evolution at all. But thatís the idea people have. If we donít teach evolution in schools, where are people going to learn it? Itís like sex education. All we teach is abstinence. Meanwhile, pregnancy rates are going up for teenage girls. Where are they going to get their information when we teach them abstinence only?

What would you say to those who think kids should be taught both evolution and creationism both?

The creation story in the Bible is a creation myth. Every race, every culture, has a creation myth. There are different stories of how the world came into being. When youíre talking about a classroom with 15 different ethnicities, someone will be offended. Iíd be hard pressed to say, ďWeíll teach this religionís creation story and not that one.Ē

Science is progressing all the time. Evolution is the current thought on how life came into being and how things change. I donít see us going off on another course. Theyíre not going to do any scientific research on creationism. Any progress in science is going to be based on evolution.

You taught middle school science. Did kids ask you about evolution and creationism?

It did come up. I always prefaced my answers by saying, ďThis is what some people believe,Ē just to let them know there are differences. You donít go into what your personal beliefs are. But not to talk about evolution at all is ridiculous.

I think part of the problem is that people are afraid. kids tune in and out in class. when youíre teaching, they may not be listening to one part of what you say but they listen to another part. then they go home and say, ďMr. so-and-so said blah, blah, blah about Christianity. Thatís when that whole ball of wax starts with parents getting upset and teachers getting investigated.

Do you think the new standards will be helpful to teachers when it comes to this subject?

I definitely think it will be helpful. The standards give them guidelines on what they are to teach.

So youíre pleased that evolution is included in the standards?

I think itís a step forward. Itís a step into the 21st century. A study that came out just last week showed that American children lag behind children in so many other countries when it comes to science. Letís start teaching the Bible as science and then see how our students compete against the rest of the world.

December 18, 2007 in Pinellas County, Science standards