berkman and plutzer - evolution, creationism and the battle to control America's classrooms Flashcards
intro
- Study of teaching of evolution and of creationism in public schools in the US [1]
- Scientists are puzzled as to why there is still a “war” over evolution and so many educated Americans support the creationist viewpoint, even candidates running for Presidency [1]
- Council of the Association for the Advancement of Science 1922 viewpoint: evolution is backed up by scientific evidence, and more evidence is coming to light even now [2]
- ‘Today, scientists ask this: How is it, then, 150 years after The Origin of Species, 100 years after the birth of modern genetics, and 50 years after scientists made a major effort to rework textbooks to their liking, that teaching evolution in public schools remains a controversial subject?’ [3]
- It is not just a matter of disagreement between science and religion but it is related to politics – to the American democracy specifically [3]
- Political scientists have to ask themselves who should decide what is put into the education curriculum and who should decide this [3-4]
chapter 1 - scopes trial
o Substantive debate – evidence for evolution
o Procedural debate – concerned democracy, should non-experts set curriculum
o Debate about autonomy of teachers
1 - political struggle
- The battle between creationism and evolution is a ‘political struggle over who decides, a question central to democratic politics. Experts seek influence in the political battle to write state level standards.’ (31)
1 - who has authority?
- Arguments for who has authority
o ‘the protection of civil liberties must always trump the majority’ (10)
o experts decide
o educators should decide
1 - history of the debate: Scopes
o Tennessee vs. Scopes and the first wave of the anti-evolution movement
♣ ‘Even though the passage of laws banning evolution was restricted to southern states, the introduction of anti-evolution legislation and mobilization of anti-evolution groups was a national phenomenon. William Jennings Bryan and others in the anti-evolution movement spoke at hundreds of venues during the 1920s in the north as well as the south, in cities as well as the countryside, on college campuses as well as in churches.’ (16)
♣ debate slowed during Great Depression
1 - history of the debate: Cold War
o The Cold War and the re-awakening of anti-evolutionism
♣ USSR launch Sputnik
♣ ‘One consequence of Sputnik was a 1958 National Science Foundation- sponsored review of the American biology curriculum. This led to the distribution of new teaching materials and the 1961 publication of new textbooks written by the nation’s leading scientists under the auspices of the Biological Science Curriculum Study (BSCS). The three BSCS textbooks were widely adopted and quickly captured half the textbook market (Larson 2003).’ (17)
1 - history of debate: US federal courts
o US Federal courts and the narrowing of the democratic space
♣ ‘In effect, the Court said that state governments are free to determine their science curricula and select their own textbooks, as long as they do not favor a particular religious viewpoint when they do so. Further, the majority concluded that efforts to ban evolu- tion entirely necessarily stemmed from just such a particular religious viewpoint. This was a major defeat for those opposed to evolution in the public schools. Just as evolution was spreading through the adoption of new textbooks, the Supreme Court invalidated laws that would ban evolution entirely.’ (19)
chapter 2 - survey, actual statistics
- Survey and Research Evaluation Laboratory at Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) 2005 vs. CCD 1987 o Creationism only ♣ VCU – 21% ♣ CCD – 11% o Combination ♣ VCU - 43% ♣ CCD - 68% o Evolution only ♣ VCU – 15% o CCD – 11%
chapter 2 - survey, conclusions
o ‘Taken as a whole, the trend data suggest that most Americans would like public schools to “teach the controversy” by providing both sides of the argument. However, the percentage of Americans endorsing this centrist position appears to have fallen sharply as the percentage supporting evolution-only has increased at least 50%, whereas the percentage supporting alternatives has more than doubled.’ (35)
chapter 2 - survey, favouring of creationism
- percentage favouring teaching of creationism and evolution 1998-2006
o ‘On average, about 38% of Americans seem prepared to replace scientific discussions of human origins with biblically inspired alternatives.’ (36)
chapter 2 - conclusions strengthened by the survey
- three important conclusions are strengthened by examining both sets of polls. During the 1999– 2005 period:
o ‘Over two-thirds of the public endorse teaching creationism (either along with or instead of evolution). Thus, a supermajority expresses opposition to Supreme Court decisions banning this practice.’
o ‘Every survey shows that anti-evolutionists outnumber pro-evolutionists.’
o ‘The highest recorded support for teaching evolution and only evolution is 35%, very far from a majority. Most polls show even lower support. We will show in Chapters 4 and 6 that all state standards endorse evolution, although with varying degrees of comprehensiveness and rigor. Therefore, no more than one-third of U.S. citizens endorse the policy that is actually in place in all fifty states.’ (39)
2 - what do the conclusions of the survey show us?
- ‘These three conclusions are critical to understanding evolution politics and policy in the United States. More fundamentally, they describe a situation in which the people appear at first glance to be largely irrelevant to the policy-making process. Across the whole country, we see a mismatch between public opinion and policy. Of course, education is a state and local responsibility.’ (40)
2 - potential limits to the poll
- why should the polls that show that 15-20% of the public wants only evolution be taken with a pinch of salt?
o ‘First, it might be argued that all of these polls are subject to bias stemming from the way the questions were worded or from other cues provided in the survey interview. Second, it is possible that the public is so poorly informed about the topic that most individuals are answering the question in a thoughtless manner that makes the results something less than “public opinion.” Both of these arguments are advanced by George Bishop in his Illusion of Public Opinion (2004), and the latter argument is made by David W. Moore in The Opinion Makers (2008).’ (40)
2 - the issue of bias
o need to put polls in their context – what was the overall theme of the poll and how does this impact their views on evolution?
o Split ballot polls – deliberately written to induce bias
2 - pew 2005 survey re. preferences for teaching
scientists agree that humans evolved
- 32% teach creationism only
- 39% of those who teach both
- 20% of those who say evolution only
scientists do not agree that humans evolved
- 49% of creationism only
- 25% of combination
- 14% of evolution only
2 - why would a Biblical literalist endorse teaching evolution
- church-state relations and civil liberties
- ‘The ACLU and other civil libertarians have consistently argued that there is nothing wrong with believing in the teachings of the Bible, so long as those beliefs are not implicitly or explicitly endorsed by government institutions such as schools. Fundamentalist Christians who find this argument persuasive might logically believe that God created Adam and Eve roughly 6,000 years ago but not wish to have that story taught in high school science classes. On the other side of the spectrum, citizens who accept evolution but are not concerned about the introduction of religion in public schools might find proposals for “equal time” to be quite reasonable.’
2 - 2000 survey, Daniel Yankelovich Group for the liberal advocacy group PFAW
PFAW 2000
- 29% of public want creationism taught in science as a ‘scientific theory’
- 20% support teaching evolution
- 46% support teaching of creationism as a ‘belief’
but suggests minority support currently policies, 30% support creationism as science
2 - conclusions
o ‘we found considerable evidence that respondents have logical reasons for the answers that they give. Respondents who believe in a fairly literal interpretation of the Bible tend to be skeptical of evolution and endorse the introduction of creationism into America’s classrooms. But among this group, their policy preferences are tempered if they show support for the separation of church and state on other issues.’ (62)
o ‘On the other hand, there is mixed evidence for whether scientific understanding plays a major role in forging individuals’ policy attitudes. There is some evidence that citizens who are better informed about what “evolution” means – that humans and apes share a com- mon ancestry and not that humans evolved from apes – are more supportive of evolution in the classroom. Yet, most creationists under- stand that there is a scientific consensus regarding evolution, and they nevertheless reject its inclusion in the curriculum.’ (62)
3 - eschatological beliefs reinforcing division
- in general, anti-evolutionism was most common amongst fundamentalists
- Origin of Species = still controversial
- Eschatological beliefs reinforced divisions
o Different interpretations of revelation – postmillenialists vs. premillenialists - Postmillenialists
o 1000 year period of heaven on earth – defeat of anti-Christ will soon be fulfilled
o we can help this through good works
o supported evolution – it brings progress - premillenialists
o JC will return before 1000 year reign after battle with evil - Against evolution – Bible is inerrant
3 - support for creationism and evolution
90% of doctrinally conservative pros
58% of mainline prot
57%of RCC
38% of atheists
(UNC)
3 - stats on evolution by education
definitely false 38% - less than high school 42% high school 27% college 18% graduate degree
definitely true 9% less than high school 10% HS college - 26% grad - 28%
(GSS)
3 - link between views and environment, conclusions
- ‘In this chapter, we have shown that pro-evolution support is most prevalent among those who are not deeply involved in organized religion, among those with graduate degrees, and among those who live in urban and suburban communities. Highly urbanized states with many professionals and with few conservative Protestants – Massachusetts, for example – show the greatest support for teach- ing evolution, and only evolution, in the nation’s classrooms. The less metropolitan states in which doctrinally conservative churches are prevalent tend also to have fewer highly educated citizens. Public opinion in these states, such as Alabama and Mississippi, generally supports the introduction of creationism into the public school curriculum.’ (90)
4 - Ohio, indiana, kansas
• Ohio Department of Education ‘did not think it necessary that its public-school students learn about biological evolution’ [93]
o ‘Ohio treats evolution, wrote Lerner, “as if it were not proper conversation in polite company” (2000b, 16).’ (94)
• Kansas students have the lowest form of education on this matter due to political movements affecting the education curriculum
• Indiana by contrast, has one of the most straight forward educations on evolution, but Gross warns this may be challenged by prominent political moves [94] – it has come to be that it no longer recommends the study of evolution
4 - science as an institution
- ‘Creation science and especially intelligent design are essentially modifications by opponents of evolution in response to changes in the legal environment (Scott 1994).’ [98]
- Normally the public is not opposed to expert opinion but in the case of scientists discussing evolution and the public, this is not the case [98]
- Scientists ‘see the evolution debate more broadly in terms of its implications for the prestige, power, and autonomy of science as a social institution.’ [100]
