(MintPress)— A new law in Tennessee is rekindling the debate over creationism, and whether it should be taught in public schools in the United States.
The bill (SB 893), which became law this week, aims to protect teachers who allow students to question and criticize « controversial » subjects, supporters say. It encourages teachers to present the « scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses » of « controversial » topics such as « biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning ».
But critics say it will make it difficult for science teachers to accurately teach their subject in the classroom. “The concern is that this sends a signal to teachers that certain subjects are controversial—subjects that are not scientifically controversial—things that are subject to political controversy, perhaps, but that in the science classroom are not controversial and shouldn’t be treated that way,” said Josh Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education.
The bill was originally approved by the Tennessee Senate in late March, then went to Republican Gov. Bill Haslam for final approval. Haslam had until Tuesday to veto it, sign it or allow it to pass without his signature. He declined to act, so the bill automatically became law this week.
Tennessee has long been considered part of the Bible Belt due to the influence of fundamentalist Protestant groups that believe in the literal accuracy of the Bible, and Evangelical Protestants still account for a majority of the state’s religious community. In 2000, the largest single religious group in the state was the Southern Baptist Convention, with over 1 million adherents.
It is unlikely that a veto would have prevented the bill from becoming law, as it was passed by large margins in both houses of the state legislature. Now Tennessee is the second state with such a bill. Louisiana passed a so-called “academic freedom” law in 2008, and Oklahoma has a bill similar to Louisiana’s currently under consideration. New Hampshire and Missouri have also considered such bills, while earlier this year, Indiana legislators took up a bill that would allow school districts to decide whether to include creationism alongside teachings of evolution in science curriculum.
The Debate
Advocates insist the bill will allow for “academic freedom”. They say it was designed to protect teachers wanting to promote « alternate » scientific theories, such as anti-evolutionists and climate change deniers, who will now be able to express their points of view in the science classroom.
Critics say that it is an anti-science backdoor measure which will allow the teaching of religion and incorrect scientific understanding in public schools.
Members of the National Academy of Science in Tennesseans say that the bill will lead to “unwarranted criticisms of evolution.”
The National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) sent a letter to Haslam which read, « We feel that the wording of this legislation clearly allows non-scientific explanations for topics such as biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning to be introduced into the science classroom, » adding, « Concepts like evolution and climate change should not be misrepresented as controversial or needing of special evaluation. Instead, they should be presented as scientific explanations for events and processes that are supported by experimentation, logical analysis, and evidence-based revision based on detectable and measurable data. »
Americans United for Separation of Church and State as well as the American Civil Liberties Union urged Haslam to reject the bill. They say it is unconstitutional and an unwise gateway for the teaching of creationism and intelligent design in American schools.
But Haslam has said that he believes the legislation doesn’t change the state’s current curriculum or scientific standards, and he doesn’t believe « it accomplishes anything that isn’t already acceptable in our schools. »
The letter from the NABT urged the state to reject the bill in favor of an “education that imparts to students an understanding of science based on the key components of the scientific method and content agreed upon by scientists and professional educators. As an organization dedicated to biology education, we are confident that students of your state are best served when curriculum reflects these issues appropriately and maintains scientific integrity in the science classroom. »
“The sponsors say that it’s meant to improve science education and do all sorts of wonderful things. I think they’d say that it cleans your floors too, if you asked them. The effect of the bill, regardless of what they might want to say that it does, would be to make it harder for parents and teachers and administrators to make sure that science was being taught accurately in science classes,” Rosneau said.
Tennessee vs Scopes
Some have dubbed the bill as the “monkey bill” — after the Scopes Monkey Trial, which also took place in Tennessee.
The 1925 bellwether American legal case involved high school science teacher, John Scopes, who was accused of violating Tennessee’s Butler Act which made it unlawful to teach evolution in any state-funded school.
Scopes was found guilty, but the verdict was later overturned on a technicality. However, the trial set off a heated debate between modernists, who said religion was consistent with evolution, and Christian fundamentalists who said the word of God as revealed in the Bible took priority over all human knowledge. The trial was a theological debate but also questioned the teaching of modern science in American public schools regarding the creation-evolution controversy.
The Creation-Evolution controversy originated in Europe and North America in the late eighteenth century, when discoveries in geology led to various theories of an ancient earth, and fossils showing past extinctions prompted early ideas of evolution.
British scientist Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859 which introduced the scientific theory that populations evolved over the course of generations through a process of natural selection. This gave rise to questions over the historical accuracy of literal interpretations of the Bible in both Europe and the United States.
The controversy over creationism became political when public schools in the United States at the beginning of the twentieth century began teaching that man evolved from earlier forms of life per Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection. In response, the State of Tennessee passed the Butler Act, which prohibited the teaching of any theory of the origins of humans that contradicted the teachings of the Bible. The Scopes Trial became a testing ground for this law.
Veteran Tennessee Educator Speaks Out
Republican Tennessee State Sen. Bo Watson, a sponsor of the bill, has said, “If this bill helps to improve critical thinking in students, then I think that’s a very positive thing. The people who are being so critical of this bill, particularly in the science community, have been guiding science education in Tennessee for the last 30 year, and in the last 30 years, the United States has fallen further and further behind the other countries.”
Watson says the bill will create “great teachable moments” for teachers. Watson holds a degree in biology, and calls himself a “science person”.
However many education professionals are saying that the bill will do nothing to improve students academic performance.
Wesley H. Roberts, M. Ed., a Tennessee biology teacher who has taught at the Hume Fogg Academic Magnet School, Tennessee’s top-performing high school for over two decades says, “However attractive it may sound to have discussions of nonscientific ideas in our science classrooms, it is not the souls of our students that are at stake here. What is at stake is how they will perform on standardized tests in which they will be compared to other students across the state, the nation, and the world.”
Roberts, who has been a reader of national Advanced Placement exams for the last seven years says that he can “ most assuredly state that there has not been, nor will there ever be, a question on an AP exams that asks the student to discuss a controversy in nonscientific terms,” adding that “ legislators responsible should explain to parents who have paid a hefty price for their child to take the AP exam that, in their attempts to protect students by inviting nonscience into the curriculum, time in science class was wasted on topics that are not part of the stated curriculum, and that students not subject to this bill outperformed their children.”