Kansas Puts Evolution Back Into Public Schools

[Guest guest]

"Kansas Puts Evolution Back Into Public Schools"

by John W. Fountain ("New York Times," Feb. 17, 2001)

 

TOPEKA, Kan., Feb. 14 — In the beginning, there was the theory

of evolution. That was until the Kansas State Board of Education

voted two years ago to remove it as the sole explanation of the

origin of man from the state's public school curriculum.

 

But in a 7-to-3 vote today, the board reversed that decision,

reinstating evolution with the adoption of new state science

standards and essentially mandating that evolution be taught in

public schools throughout the state.

 

Kansas' move back to evolution became apparent last August when

voters in a Republican primary defeated three conservative

members of the school board who had supported the earlier

decision, after public debate quickly spiraled into a movement to

vote out those responsible for the change and to vote in those

who promised to reverse it.

 

This morning's decision was greeted with applause from supporters

who attended the hearing in a crowded room at the state board of

education headquarters on a cold, drizzly day.

 

The move also dealt a blow to creationists and others who had

applauded the school board's decision in August 1999 to remove

evolution from the state's science curriculum. The standards are

guidelines for teaching and testing. The document adopted today

is a version of another first presented to the board two years

ago and will be used as a reference in developing statewide tests

for students this spring.

 

Adoption of the standards places evolution squarely back into the

state's science curriculum, but not without adding language that

may appease Christian conservatives and others who oppose the

teaching of evolution in public schools as the origin of man.

 

" `Understand' does not mandate `belief,' " the document the

board adopted says. "While students may be required to understand

some concepts that researchers use to conduct research and solve

practical problems, they may accept or reject the scientific

concepts presented. This applies particularly where students'

and/or parents' beliefs may be at odds with the current

scientific theories or concepts."

 

In a statement, Gov. Bill Graves praised the board's decision,

saying, "The students of Kansas will benefit from the broader and

more comprehensive science standards supported by the current

Board of Education."

 

A 27-member committee of science teachers and other experts

appointed by the board wrote the 100- page document. The booklet,

"Kansas Science Education Standards," refers to evolution as "a

broad, unifying theoretical framework in biology."

 

The document also states, on Page 5, under the heading "Teaching

With Tolerance and Respect":

 

"Teachers should not ridicule, belittle or embarrass a student

for expressing an alternative view or belief. If a student should

raise a question in a natural science class that the teacher

determines to be outside the domain of science, the teacher

should treat the question with respect. The teacher should

explain why the question is outside the domain of natural science

and encourage the student to discuss the question further with

his or her family and other appropriate sources."

 

In August 1999, the board, with conservative Republicans in the

majority, voted 6 to 4 to eliminate evolution. The decision did

not prohibit the teaching of evolution, but left the option to

local school districts. It did, however, remove evolution as the

sole explanation for the origin of man, including some references

to evolution, the Big Bang theory and the earth's age.

 

That meant that evolution would not be included in state

assessment tests that evaluate student performance. Critics of

that policy said it would discourage some teachers from devoting

any time to the subject. At the time, news of Kansas' decision

echoed across the country, particularly in states that had dealt

with the fight over creationism and evolution.

 

Steve Abrams, a member of the conservative minority who voted

today against reinstating evolution, was part of the conservative

majority in 1999. Before today's vote, Mr. Abrams, who was

re-elected to the board in November, expressed his continued

opposition to teaching evolution and argued against the notion

that the battle over the last two years could be boiled down to

the "religious right versus science."

 

"Every time religion is brought up, it's brought up by someone on

the opposition," Mr. Abrams told the board. "Not one time have I

talked about that, the fact that religion is an integral part of

this. I'm saying that we ought to be following what good science

is."

 

Mr. Abrams had unsuccessfully proposed an amendment to the

standards in favor of teaching "intelligent design," a theory

that asserts that man and the universe were the work of God.

 

"If it's the religious right, it may be the religious right

versus the religious left," Mr. Abrams said. "That's a

possibility. But certainly I don't espouse that. What I do

espouse is the idea that it's good science: what is observable,

measurable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable, good empirical

science. And this does not leave that with us."

 

In addressing Mr. Abrams's concerns today, another board member,

Janet Waugh, said: "We are not atheists on this board. I believe

the board members are all Christians, and we have no problem with

Christianity or any other religion being taught, but it cannot be

taught in a science class."

 

After the vote, board members as well as the state education

commissioner, Andy Tompkins, expressed relief that the evolution

debate, at least where the Kansas school board was concerned, was

finally over. Still, he does not expect the issue to disappear.

 

"I think there's some resolve right now," Mr. Tompkins said. "But

I think the issue, in terms of people talking about it, and

what's going to happen, is probably going to continue, not only

in our state, but probably in other states also."

(Text PAMHO:4014430) ------

 

------- End of Forwarded Message ------