Survey Results: Evolution Weak in Public Schools Despite Dover | The Institute for Creation Research
Survey Results: Evolution Weak in Public Schools Despite Dover

Pennsylvania State University political scientists recently published a report in the journal Science titled "Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom."

They cited the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, in which a federal court decided that intelligent design "was not science...but rather an effort to advance a religious view via public schools, a violation of the U.S. Constitution's Establishment Clause."1

"Many scientists cheered the decision....We suggest that the cheering was premature and the victory incomplete," they wrote.1

The researchers developed and conducted a survey—which they dubbed the "National Survey of High School Biology Teachers," despite not having official federal support—of 926 U.S. high school biology instructors between March and May in 2007. They found that only about 28 percent of the teachers surveyed advocated the teaching of evolutionary biology in classrooms, while 13 percent advocated creation science.

"The data reveal a pervasive reluctance of teachers to forthrightly explain evolutionary biology," they reported. "The data further expose a cycle of ignorance in which community antievolution attitudes are perpetuated by teaching that reinforces local community sentiment."1

Their summary quoted a Minnesota teacher's answer: "I don't teach the theory of evolution in my life science classes, nor do I teach the Big Bang Theory in my [E]arth [S]cience classes....We do not have time to do something that is at best poor science."1

Sixty percent of the teachers surveyed supported the position that neither evolution nor creation should be taught. "Our data show that these teachers understandably want to avoid controversy. Often they have not taken a course in evolution and they lack confidence in their ability to defend it."1

The study's authors also wrote:

[A] sizable number of teachers expose their students to all positions—scientific or not. Students should make up their own minds, explained a Pennsylvania teacher, 'based on their own beliefs and research. Not on what a textbook or on what a teacher says.' Many of these teachers might have great confidence in their students' ability to learn by exploration. But does a 15-year-old student really have enough information to reject thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers? This approach tells students that well-established concepts like common ancestry can be debated in the same way we debate personal opinions.1

In other words, unless students hold the same opinions on science as these researchers, they do not have "enough information" to draw their own conclusions from scientific evidence and grow into thinking adults.

The "problem" most likely is not that students and their teachers need to be taught more evolution, since this survey's results show over twice as many biology teachers advocating teaching evolution in their classrooms as those advocating creation science. A recent assessment of American students conducted by the Department of Education also reveals a significant emphasis on evolution in the classroom.2

But it seems that despite undermining the will of the people by going through the court systems, the supporters of evolution-only teaching can do little to mitigate how poorly the actual theory explains the raw scientific data.3 And as the Minnesota teacher mentioned, teaching "poor science" is a waste of time and resources in any classroom.

References

  1. Berkman, M. B. and E. Plutzer. 2011. Defeating Creationism in the Courtroom, But Not in the Classroom. Science. 331 (6016): 404-405.
  2. Dao, C. Test Scores Suggest American Students Struggle to Think Critically in Science. ICR News. Posted on icr.org March 2, 2011, accessed March 2, 2011. 
  3. The Institute for Creation Research's website contains many articles on the life sciences that analyze how a plethora of scientific discoveries refute the theory of evolution. See Evidence for Creation: The Life Sciences.

* Ms. Dao is Assistant Editor at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on March 7, 2011.

The Latest
NEWS
African Forest Evidence Fits Flood Ice-Age Model
Scientists have found genetic evidence suggesting that legume trees emerged from separate African tree populations during the Ice Age.1 This...

NEWS
Did the Earth Tilt During the Flood?
Evolutionary scientists from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing and several universities in the United States, Italy, and Japan have recently claimed...

NEWS
ICR's New In-Depth Science Book: Chimps and Humans
Evolutionists frequently claim that human and chimp DNA are over 98% similar. They need this percentage to support their hypothesis that humans and...

NEWS
Fossil Chromatin Looks Young
What are the odds that a buried animal would still have intact DNA after 125 million years? Researchers publishing in the journal Communications Biology...

NEWS
Inside October 2021 Acts & Facts
How is the Lord’s handiwork on display at John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park? Does the universe look old? What can we learn about science and...

NEWS
Two-Volume Series: Restoring the Truth about Origins
The subject of origins continues to attract interest from the public and the scientific establishment. Understanding our origins informs us of who we are...

ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Floods Form Fossils Fast
Christy Hardy and Susan Windsor* You’re never too young to be a creation scientist! Kids, discover fun facts about God’s creation with...

ACTS & FACTS
A Battle for Hearts
Since the ICR Discovery Center for Science & Earth History opened in fall of 2019, tens of thousands of people have walked through our doors. They...

APOLOGETICS
Eating Bugs Isn't Always So Simple
The Lord Jesus Christ deserves glory for why He made Earth’s diverse creatures, and He also deserves glory for the complicated details of how...

ACTS & FACTS
Does the Universe Look Old?
Since distant galaxies are billions of light-years away, some understandably assume that distant starlight must have taken billions of years to reach...