Texas two-steps (backward)

The recent changes to Texas science standards is a clear example of the coming de-evolution of the future for U.S. K-12 education.

Last week, the Texas board of education deliberated and voted on new standards to apply to science education in elementary and secondary schools throughout the state, which included the ever-controversial debate between creationists (those who believe the earth and everything on it was created by God in a week, based on certain biblical passages), and the academic scientific community, (who nearly unanimously maintain that the theory of evolution is an all-but-indisputable fact).

Depending on who is reporting the outcome of the vote regarding the newly adopted science standards, the results may be seen as a victory for either side—but it seems clear that an insidious injection of intelligent design (a thinly disguised and more generally palatable version of creationism in the form of pseudo-science) has been introduced into the language of the Texas school system—and the results could eventually cause a significant backslide in early science education throughout the entire country.

Texas, as one of the largest states, has a huge influence over the publishing companies that provide textbooks—so, the language introduced in the new Texas science standards will very likely be the language in all textbooks for years to come.

And this language has been politically and ideologically manipulated to accommodate a small group of conservative Christians, who are motivated by their religious beliefs, rather than by any scientific expertise.

According to an article on the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) Web site, Don McLeroy, appointed chair of the Texas board of education, a dedicated advocate of teaching creationism in schools, had this to say: “Somebody’s got to stand up to experts!”

This was in light of the fact that more than 50 different scientific and educational groups—including the American Association for the Advancement of Science endorsed an NCSE statement which asked the board to reject any amendments to the proposed standards that would further the cause of teaching creationism in the classrooms of public schools.

But of course, Mr. McLeroy. Why should anyone listen to experts on the subject when, instead, they can have educational policy dictated to them by a small and fanatical group of religious conservatives who believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, and that fossils are an elaborate hoax?

After the board voted, there was one clear advantage gained by supporters of Darwin’s theory of evolution—the elimination of the language that discusses the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolutionary science, a phrase that has been used to cast doubts on the plausibility of the widely (and firmly) held scientific convictions that have been proven, empirically and repeatedly.

But amendments to the Texas science standards were made to placate creationist constituents—and the new language that was adopted is subtle, and dangerous—intended to allow science texts to represent uncertainty about evolution (and, in the process, toppling so many other branches of science) and also to introduce the idea that the premise of intelligent design is scientific.

The words “strengths and weaknesses” may be taken out of science textbooks, but there is abundant opportunity to include equally ambiguous wording, which will serve to re-create science as a theological, supernatural discipline.

Which of course, intelligent design is not. It is a compromised (for-easier-mass –consumption) version of creationism, an idea based in the literal translation of sections of the Bible as the “proof” by which to deny evolution, and with it—most of the accepted (and verified) ideas contained within the sciences of biology, genetics, astronomy, geology and archaeology. Creationism is not science by simple definition; it is not possible to test through empirical methods. It relies on faith as its proof.

Allowing any religious thought to dictate the teaching of science is as relevant as giving Atheists the power to dictate the terms and practices of religious worship to believers.

Under the amendments to the newly created Texas science standards, it might actually be prohibited to discuss how long human beings have been on earth, or how old the universe is in any Texas elementary or secondary school science class.

That means that this information won’t go into the textbooks, which will very likely be the same science textbooks that are adopted in other states, even those that don’t agree with the Texas science standards.

It might seem like this is no big deal. Some textbooks in Texas are getting changed to say that there may be some other plausible theories that explain life on Earth besides the theory of evolution. And I do really try to embrace a live-and-let live attitude, but I see some potential massive harm being done, and that makes me feel more anxious than tolerant.

I see a possible future where a minority of spiritual bullies dictates social and educational terms to the majority. I see a future where science becomes nothing more than phony justification for following the rather unclear directions provided by a religious text. I see the attempt to end the separation of church and state, and that’s a really terrible idea.