The textbook committee of Alabama's state board of education has rejected proposed science texts because they reference evolutionary theory - as if any decent text on biology could avoid the issue without abandoning its credibility. These weren't even supposed to be primary science texts. They were just supplementary material.

The Montgomery Advertiser reports:

Each of the three elementary books rejected contained "controversial material at a grade level that is not developmentally ready for such controversial material," according to a series of Sept. 28 memos sent to school board members. The books also didn't meet the state's science guidelines and were not "appropriate for the maturity level of the age group" they were targeting, the memos said.

The book "Geologic Time" (Perfection Learning Company) was rejected for an illustrated diagram that shows humans evolving from apes. Similarly, "Reptiles" (Heinemann-Raintree Classroom), incorporates two pages on reptiles evolving from amphibians. "Orangutan" (Heinemann-Raintree Classroom) discusses natural selection -- a key part of the evolutionary theory.

Yes, very controversial material — in communities where science is rejected in favor of religion, at least.

The committee made its recommendations with the stipulation that high school biology textbooks would continue to carry a disclaimer which describes evolution as "a controversial theory" in the first paragraph and says in the second paragraph that any statement about the origin of life is "not fact."

The purpose of the disclaimer is to give room to teachers who want to discuss alternative theories, namely creationism.

Disclaimers about evolution have been repeatedly declared illegal by the courts, so the committee really should know better. If they don't, then they should be replaced by people who understand the law as well as their job. Their job, by the way, doesn't include giving room for teachers to promote creationism — science classes should be about teaching science, not about individual teachers promoting their personal religious beliefs.

[A]fter the meeting, school board member Betty Peters said she had hoped to see the textbooks discuss alternative theories of life, including creationism and intelligent design, in addition to evolution. She said that despite the disclaimer, many teachers are still afraid to teach about theories that are not included in textbooks.

I wonder how many of the school board members share this belief and whether it had much influence on the actions of the textbook committee? It would be a sign that the state's school board isn't competent to do it's job — creationism is no more a science than astrology and any school board which thinks that astrology should be discussed in science classes is incompetent. Why shouldn't the same conclusion be reached about school boards which support teaching creationism?

 

Quick Poll: Should school biology texts carry a disclaimer that evolution is 'just a theory'?

1. Yes: evolution is a theory, not a fact, and texts that don't make this explicit are misleading students.
2. Yes: but the same disclaimer should be added for every other scientific theory, like plate tectonics and relativity.
3. No: the term 'theory' is used differently in science than in vernacular and such disclaimers mislead students.
4. I don't know.
5. I don't care.

Click an option to vote, or View Current Poll Results

 

Read More:

• Evolution vs. Creationism
• What is Intelligent Design?
• What is Balanced Treatment?
• What is Science?