A Pennsylvania judge ruled today that the Dover Area School Board violated the Constitution when it required 9th grade biology courses introduce Intelligent Design theory as an alternative to Neo-Darwinian evolution theory. While the board did not require the outright teaching of ID, they required the following statement to be read before 9th grade biology classes:
The Pennsylvania Academic Standards require students to learn about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution and eventually to take a standardized test of which evolution is a part.
Because Darwin’s Theory is a theory, it continues to be tested as new evidence is discovered. The Theory is not a fact. Gaps in the Theory exist for which there is no evidence. A theory is defined as a well-tested explanation that unifies a broad range of observations.
Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view. The reference book, Of Pandas and People, is available for students who might be interested in gaining an understanding of what Intelligent Design actually involves.
With respect to any theory, students are encouraged to keep an open mind. The school leaves the discussion of the Origins of Life to individual students and their families. As a Standards-driven district, class instruction focuses upon preparing students to achieve proficiency on Standards-based assessments.
At first glance, this statement seems rather inocuous. In fact, I agree that students should be encouraged to filter any theory through a skeptic lense. Upon reflection, however, I can find two major problems.
First, is the notion that evolutionary theory is an “origins of life” theory - it simply isn’t. It’s a way of understanding the diversity of life on this planet, the biological processes of variation and adaptation, and the surprising number of characteristics we share with other organisms. That ID proponents confuse any cosmological claims made in a science class with the theory of evolution indicates a complete misunderstanding of either of the fields of inquiry.
Second, is the fact that ID is the only alternative theory offered. This has the effect of placing ID in favored light over other cosmological ideas. Coupled with the blatently religious nature of ID, this really is a thinly veiled attempt at erecting a government sanctioned religious ideology.
I, for one, am very pleased with the ruling. The underlying problem still remains, however, and I find myself somewhat confused. In my view, the ID debate is part of the larger debate over who gets to decide what children learn and the proper role of government in the education process.
As a Libertarian, you’d probably assume that I think the government has no role. I am actually torn on the subject and the ID discussion is a perfect example of why. This single issue simultaneously brings to light both the failure of the public education system and the need for one. I say failure becuase that’s the only thing I can call it when so many Americans believe that evolution states that humans “came from” monkeys. I say we need public education becuase without it, children will continue to be force-fed idiotic folk tales about the universe by undereducated morons in their living rooms.
In the end, I don’t know which road to take. All I can say for today is, hooray for the Constitution.
