OpEd Contributor

[Print]  [Email]        

As Texas goes, so goes the nation on textbooks

By: Dr. Charles Garner and David Klinghoffer, OpEd Contributors
-
April 8, 2009

Texas last week was the scene of a stirring illustration of democracy at work as the State Board of Education (SBOE) set itself the task of revising standards for science education, debating fundamental controversies in biology, paleontology and chemistry. The radioactive topic of evolution was the center of attention.

When the dust settled, the resulting vote left Texas with the most advanced science standards on evolution of any state in the country. As you can imagine, many “experts” and activists on the Darwinian side are outraged. The citizens had failed to listen obediently! They had dared to think for themselves.
Lobbyists for strict enforcement of Darwinian theory as sacred dogma fought hard. In testimony given before the vote, scientists in favor of strengthening the requirement of critical analysis kept their remarks focused on the relevant scientific issues.
Darwinian activists, however, sought to scare everyone with hysterical warnings about Biblical literalist “creationism” run amok—a grossly dishonest red herring, often waved about in the Darwin debate, and one that the SBOE saw through and dismissed. The new science standards are about science, not religion.
Students and educators won, and the ramifications of the victory are enormous.
For months beforehand, journalists, proponents of Darwinian evolution, and Darwin doubters alike all called for the SBOE to adopt language that either discouraged or encouraged teachers to familiarize students with the scientific debate about Darwinian theory. The SBOE, including parents and educators, conscientiously debated the matter and heard testimony on both sides.
The newly adopted standards call on students, “in all fields of science, [to] analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”
In addition, high school students are specifically required to “analyze and evaluate” evidence on evolution-related topics including the fossil record, natural selection as an evolutionary mechanism, the complexity of the cell, and the common ancestry of humans and animals.
Texas is now one of seven states with such educational requirements. Previously, state science standards there called on students to examine the “strengths and weaknesses” of scientific theories, including the theory of Darwinian evolution through natural selection.
The new standards improve on the old by their greater clarity and specificity, detailing, for the first time, the main headings under which Darwinian theory most urgently needs critical scientific attention.
It is not a revolution but a solid, sober, and welcome reworking of the standards. What’s even more important is the impact this development will have far beyond Texas and its broad borders.
It’s sometimes said by revelers and gamblers that what happens in Las Vegas, stays in Las Vegas. That’s not true of Texas. As one of the country’s major consumers of textbooks, Texas powerfully influences the way educational texts for high school and other students are written. The same critical thinking on science that is being encouraged in that state will also influence students elsewhere in America.
Legislators outside the state are also taking careful note. On the very same day that the final vote was held by the SBOE, news came from Florida of legislation being considered there that would require “a thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution.”
Clearly, a fire has been lit, small for now, but one that as it spreads, the Darwin lobby will have difficulty smothering entirely.
Charles Garner is a professor of chemistry living in Waco, TX and is an expert reviewer on state science standards for the Texas State Board of Education. David Klinghoffer is a Senior Fellow at Discovery Institute and a columnist for the Jewish Forward.
 



beltway confidential

From the National Law Journal: ABA will cut dues for many lawyers not at big firms The American Bar Association announced this week that it's cutting the cost of dues for solo...

A new poll shows Republicans making solid gains, and President Obama losing ground, in public opinion on the most important issues facing the country. The survey, by the...

In response to the attention we gave him for his old column on how Washington has "anemic winters" because of global warming, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tells NRO's Robert...

By a vote of 52 to 33, the Obama administration nominee to the National Labor Relations Board, Craig Becker, just failed to get the 60 votes needed for his nomination to proceed...






To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

the debate continues

Apr 8, 2009

What if God created the big bang and let things "evolve" from there?

 

Edd Doerr

Apr 8, 2009

Garner and Klinghoffer mischaracterize what has been going on in Texas, which is that the line-up in the school controversy is the overwhelming majority of scientists versus a powerful fundamentalist religious lobby that pits a primitive biblical literalism against the consensus of scientists. The sad fact is that if the Texas fundamentalists succeed in watering down the teaching of science the effects could be felt in scbools throughout the country. Klinghoffer's so-called Discovery Institute is nothing more than an anti-science lobby group that even Texas wom't allow to issue degrees for science teachers. Concerned readers should get the facts from the Texas Freedom Network on the net at www.tfn.org

 

Chris

Apr 8, 2009

I've never met an opponent of Darwin's basic theory of evolution who wasn't vehemently opposed to it before he or she ever really studied the topic. Sign up for a class on Darwin's Evolutionary concepts, see the evidence, attempt to understand why, from a scientific perspective, Darwin's conclusions make sense. Most who are certain Evolution is bogus either refuse to examine it honestly or pass it off as a hoax that isn't worth the time.

 

Monica

Apr 8, 2009

Why don't they just teach Mother Goose instead of chemistry? Makes about as much sense.

 

Apr 9, 2009

Hi , Dr. Charles Garner and David Klinghoffer . Glad to meet you both again and thank you for adding me to a most interesting E mail list whose purpose , thesis and numerous papers were altogether unknown to me . When on an impulse I wrote to you about the Jerusalem Post article : The Israel Test , I had no knowledge that this article was only a thread in a philosophical quilt and that I will be introduced into a whole ,on line, profound topic which is on debate for centuries. The Texas University discussions present a rich material which takes us through tortuous roads of arguments for a too rapid interpretation by a novice like me. Promise to pay attention from now on and thank you again for the opportunity.

 

Sandra Martin

Apr 9, 2009

Critical thinking must be poison to the Darwin dreamers. I've never known anyone who knew they were so right to fight so hard to stop people from finding out how right they are all by themselves. Logic tells us if Darwin dreaming is so right and indisputable, the Darwin dreamers would be leading the charge demanding critical thinking. After all, critical thinking can only lead others to their camp, right? People secure in their knowledge do not have to shut out all other ideas.

 

Lou G.

Apr 10, 2009

It is almost poignant: the darwinists hold themselves out as rational and objective, yet rely on the basic logical fallacy of the argumentum ad hominem. Critical thinking about evolution is bad, they say, because of who it is that advocates critical thinking about evolution. Silly, isn't it?

 

DK

Apr 10, 2009

The "Discovery Institute" is the very antithesis of scientific research, but are instead at the forefront of religious fundamentalism. They're trying to spin the TBOE decision when actually they lost their butts 'cause they wanted the strengths and weaknesses to be maintained. The TBOE president, a fundamentalist himself with a degree in the equivalent of "Toothology," blabbed on about how evolution was not acceptable science, but the board was able to defeat his call to install more stringent religious fundamentalist views in the science curriculum. The DI lost, but they make it look like they won. Both Garner & Klinghoffer themselves are fundamentalist religious right-wingers who hate science and evolution.

 

Victor

Apr 12, 2009

Prof. Garner is giving a slanted report here, it seems to me, as he puts down all evolutionists by calling us 'Darwinists'. I think its pretty clear now that a combination of things are going on. Evolution wasn't a slow process, specie mutations occurred in spurts. All evolutionists aren't "Darwinists" any more than all religious people aren't 'superstitious." It is clear to me that a unified concious force is in play and evolution in seven eras (days) did take place.

 

SteveJS

Apr 28, 2009

If Darwinism teaches "survival of the fittest," Darwinists should have nothing to fear by letting students look at both its strengths and its weaknesses. By fighting against such academic freedom, they show that they don't believe Darwinism can stand up to scrutiny.

 

kim bruning

Jun 5, 2009

I was very confused by this article at first. Of course critical thinking is an important skill, as is critical observation. But somehow the text seems to twist that concept in upon itself in new and innovative ways to try to distract from something else. At first I wasn't sure what that was. That is, until I saw that this text was co-authored by a Fellow of the Discovery institute. The discovery institute is an organisation known for re-branding creationism as "intelligent design", in an attempt to do an end-run around the establishment clause. So knowing that this is the discover institute, I'm going to assume that the hidden message is that they actually managed to insert creationism into the Texas science curriculum, or some action to that effect. If I hadn't known that the Discovery Institute had been involved, I might have wondered what was going on.

 

Jan 11, 2010

ses ışık

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Your Name:

Comment:




Local

Another snowball fight planned for Dupont Circle

The Official Dupont Circle Snowball Fight facebook fanpage has over 6,000 fans now, and it looks as if snowed in DC'ers will return for another battle. Full story

Politics

GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists

Even as the administration defends its decision to grant accused Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, the president himself is hinting that things might be done differently in the future. Full story

Local

D.C. region braces for up to 20 more inches of snow

The National Weather Service has the entire D.C. metro area, from Prince William County north, under a winter storm warning for 10 to 20 inches of snow. Forecasters have had their eyes on this storm for days, but the projected snow totals were bumped up late Monday. Full story