http://www.avpress.com/n/23/0323_s3.hts Board OKs Darwin challenge By CHRISTOPHER AMICO Valley Press Staff Writer LANCASTER - The Lancaster School District board of trustees voted to implement a "philosophy" of science instruction that encourages students to question Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and that permits science teachers to insert critiques of the long-standing and accepted scientific theory into the curriculum.
The new statement, updated from an older document, does not include any alternative theories such as "intelligent design," which posits a master plan or master "designer" as an explanation of how the universe began. Outside groups quickly pounced on the move as a way of sneaking creationism - or a divine explanation - in the back door of the classroom. Alex Branning, a 22-year-old entrepreneur who owns a Web design and marketing firm based in Lancaster, first proposed the changes at a school board meeting two weeks ago. He told trustees it was "imperative" that the school district update its stand on the teaching of evolution as soon as possible. Teaching the theory of evolution enters California's curriculum in seventh grade. Victory came sooner than Branning expected. All five trustees voiced support for the amended statement, which members of the administration worked with Branning to revise. "We owe it to our students to give them a world-class science education that prepares them as scientifically literate citizens and members of the work force in the 21st century. Our proposed policy is designed to do just that," Branning said recently when he was pursuing adoption of the new standard. He said the policy adopted by the school board Tuesday night will give students the "thinking skills" needed to compete in today's economy. Trustee Mel Kleven said the new philosophy will bring "scientific reality to the classroom" and promote an "open environment." Critics, however, questioned the motives in Lancaster's approach to science instruction. "You don't do students a favor by pretending there are controversies in the scientific community where there are none," said Kevin Padian, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California, Berkeley. California Schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell said by telephone that schools should follow the state's standards on evolution. "We want information that's based upon accepted scientific theory. We need to have that info that's accepted by the mainstream scientific community," he said, adding that a discussion of beliefs may be more appropriate in a philosophy class rather than a science class. "If it's a back door attempt at promoting creationism or 'intelligent design' if that's being portrayed as gospel, that would be incorrect in a science class," O'Connell said. "That would not be helpful." Branning insists he is not anti-evolution and does not endorse teaching creationism or "intelligent design." He said the group he founded, called Integrity in Academics, includes others who, like himself, want the whole picture of the origins of life shown to students. Branning grew up in Quartz Hill and was home-schooled. He attended Antelope Valley College and has run his business, the Branning Group, for three years. He became interested in the controversy over evolution after conducting his own research, reading what he described as arguments for the theory, and challenges to it. The businessman said he makes no claim to possessing a formal scientific background. One problem with evolution, he said, is the Cambrian Explosion, a period he said has yet to be explained by modern biology or paleontology. During that early period of Earth's history - about half a billion years ago - the ancestors of most modern animal phyla first appeared. Questioners of evolution often describe this period as "sudden," but Padian of UC Berkeley said that scientists consider that view misleading. The period described actually took about 70 million years, he said. "It's usually misrepresented by anti-evolutionists," he said. "The notion that this stuff appeared all at once is completely wrong." Branning's push for a re-thinking of how to teach evolution locally comes at a moment of renewed debate over life's origins. The Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based advocacy organization, has pushed intelligent design as an alternative to Darwin's theory, and other groups have raised questions about supposed gaps in fossil records. Casey Luskin, an attorney with the institute, said Lancaster's new board-approved philosophy on teaching will open up debate on a subject that is usually one-sided. Various attempts to introduce intelligent design as a scientifically objective counter-theory to the theory of natural selection has been consistently rebuffed by courts. "Any time that you're permitting criticism, this is going to be good for students. We definitely support the school district bringing objectivity to science curriculum," he said. Luskin said Branning did not work directly with the Discovery Institute, but one of his associates, Larry Caldwell, has worked with the intelligent design group in the past. Caldwell tried unsuccessfully to get a policy similar to the one Branning proposed adopted in Roseville, near Sacramento. In a statement issued on Branning's Web site, Caldwell praised Lancaster and encouraged other districts to follow suit. "Unfortunately, there is a kind of 'Taliban' in the scientific establishment that seeks to suppress any criticism of Darwinism in the classroom," Caldwell added. "It is refreshing to see school officials willing to stand up against Darwinian fundamentalists to give their students a science education rather than a science indoctrination. After all, effective science education is all about teaching students to ask meaningful questions and follow the evidence wherever it leads." Howard Sundberg, Lancaster's assistant superintendent of educational services, said the philosophy fits into California's established framework for teaching science. "If you're dealing in science, you're not dealing in a belief system," he said. "Sure, kids can question things, but once you start crossing the line into beliefs or religion, that's not something that's appropriate for science." Still, he believes students will benefit from probing what some see as weaknesses in the theory. "Those questions could help a theory to be understood," said Sundberg, who crafted the final draft of the philosophy. "I just don't see any bad that can come out of it, as long as we stay within the domain of science." While Sundberg's background is not in science, he advised teachers faced with student questions to respect individual beliefs, but refer questions of a religious bent to be directed to a social studies class, or to parents or clergy. Still, evolution's defenders say the philosophy looks like a long-standing tactic aimed at "slinging mud" at Darwin's theory, long accepted as bedrock science. "It's a bad policy," said Glenn Branch, deputy director of the Oakland-based National Center for Science Education. "The point of it, of course, is to instill scientifically unwarranted doubts about evolution." "It's a fairly sophisticated approach because to most people it sounds pretty reasonable," added Rob Boston, a spokesman for Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. "Evolution is the only thing they single out. It's not real critical analysis. It's just an attack on evolution." Branning wouldn't discuss his religious beliefs, saying his faith was a private matter. He said he is on the fence about evolution and finds credible arguments on both sides. He is not, he insists, in favor of teaching creationism or intelligent design in a science class. "Those aren't scientific," he said. And Branning does not worry about his group being infiltrated by those who would promote alternatives to evolution. "We keep those people out," he said. "While we appreciate the encouraging words, we have different goals." Branning said his next stop is the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation's second largest school system. He expects a bigger fight there, but he remains confident he'll win. "Thomas Edison, when he was inventing the light bulb, was told that he couldn't do it," Branning said, "because that was the scientific evidence of the day." [EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
