[Proflist] message from Len Pietrafesa

[Susan Friberg]

Thought you should all see this....
Len Pietrafesa

Evolution Controversy in Our Schools
Via CSSP

A letter was sent by President Bruce Alberts to NAS on March 4, 2005 
which had many comments of special interest to all of us, and they are 
given below;


I write to alert you to efforts by the National Academies to confront 
the increasing challenges to the teaching of evolution in public 
schools; your help may be needed in your state soon.  On February 7, 
2005, Michael Behe, a founder and leading proponent of the Intelligent 
Design (ID) movement, published a long Op-Ed in the New York Times in 
response to an editorial that the Times had released the previous week. 
In that letter, Dr. Behe claimed that some words I wrote support his 
view that scientific explanations for the evolution of life on the Earth 
need to be modified to insert the work of an "intelligent designer". In 
my response to the Times (see 
<http://www.nas.edu/nas/feb05times-evolution> 
http://www.nas.edu/nas/feb05times-evolution), I pointed out that, while 
my words are reflected correctly in Behe's column, he completely 
misrepresents the intent of my statement. This is a common tactic among 
those who are attempting to introduce religious views of the origins of 
life into the public schools -- or who are trying to undermine the 
teaching of evolution because of purported "weaknesses" in the theory.

I write to you now because of a growing threat to the teaching of 
science through the inclusion of non-scientifically based "alternatives" 
in science courses throughout the country. A recent article in the 
Washington Post pointed out that there are challenges to the teaching of 
evolution in 40 states or local school districts around the country 
today (for more details, visit the website of the National Center for 
Science Education, <http://ncseweb.org> http://ncseweb.org). Major 
newspapers, magazines, and other media (e.g., Time, Newsweek, MSNBC, 
National Geographic) have featured major stories about the controversy 
during the past six months.

Recent tactics to cast doubt on the veracity or robustness of the theory 
of evolution have included placing disclaimer stickers in the front of 
high school biology textbooks (Cobb County, GA and Alabama; proposal 
before the Missouri House of Representatives), mandating or recommending 
the inclusion of Intelligent Design in high school biology courses 
(e.g., Dover, PA; Cecil County, MD, respectively); development of 
statewide lesson plans that encourage students to examine "weaknesses" 
in the theory of evolution (Ohio), and plans to revisit parts of state 
science standards that focus on evolution (Kansas State Board of 
Education). If these challenges have not yet reached where you live or 
work, they are likely to do so in time.  A federal judge recently ruled 
the Cobb County stickers to be unconstitutional and has ordered them 
removed from all textbooks; an appeal is pending. The courts will soon 
hear a lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of parents in Dover County, 
PA about whether ID also is tantamount to promoting religion (for 
additional information about the various forms of "scientific 
creationism" and ID, see <http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=8> 
http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=8 ). However, these 
challenges continue unabated across our nation, and the New York Times 
and Education Week report that even where the controversy is not overt, 
teachers are quietly being urged to avoid teaching about evolution -- or 
have decided not to do so because it engenders so much rancor from a 
subgroup of students, parents, and members of the school board or local 
community. As a result, one of the foundations of modern science is 
being neglected or banished outright from science classrooms in many 
parts of the United States.

If your discipline is not the life sciences, you may be wondering why I 
have chosen to write to all members of the National Academy of Sciences. 
Although the controversy focuses primarily on biology, some who 
challenge the teaching of evolution in our nation's schools have also 
focused their sights on the earth and physical sciences. For example, 
when the Kansas Board of Education first removed portions of biological 
evolution from their science standards in 1998, they also eliminated 
statements mandating that Kansas students learn about the Big Bang, that 
there is overwhelming evidence that the earth is much older than 10,000 
years, and the theory of plate tectonics. All of these items were 
returned to the Kansas standards following extensive pressure from many 
organizations, including a joint letter signed by me and the Presidents 
of AAAS and the National Science Teachers Association (see 
<http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/s09231999?OpenDocument> 
http://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/s09231999?OpenDocument ) 
and the removal of several Board members during a subsequent election. 
But, as noted earlier, the Kansas Board of Education plans to re-examine 
their science standards because the 2004 election has again resulted in 
a majority who favor the inclusion of "alternatives to evolution" in the 
state's science curriculum.

The National Academies have been involved for many years in helping 
scientific colleagues, teachers, and concerned citizens in individual 
states and school districts respond. While these challenges have 
national implications for science and science education, they are 
typically viewed as local issues, and "meddling" from organizations in 
Washington, DC is often viewed with skepticism. As a result, when asked 
to assist, I have contacted NAS members who live in the state where a 
specific challenge is presented, enlisting their assistance through the 
writing of op-ed pieces, speaking at school board meetings and related 
activities. The NAS also has published three reports, two of which are 
specifically directed to science teachers to help them understand both 
evolutionary theory and the social controversies that surround its 
teaching. Descriptions of these reports and our efforts to confront 
challenges to the teaching of evolution are summarized in a recent 
article published in Cell Biology Education (see 
<http://cellbioed.org/articles/vol3no2/article.cfm?articleID=98> 
http://cellbioed.org/articles/vol3no2/article.cfm?articleID=98).

We stand ready to help others in addressing the increasingly strident 
attempts to limit the teaching of evolution or to introduce 
non-scientific "alternatives" into science courses and curricula. If 
this controversy arrives at your doorstep, I hope that you will both 
alert us to the specific issues in your state or school district and be 
willing to use your position and prestige in helping us to work locally.

I have asked Dr. Jay Labov, Senior Advisor for Education and 
Communications in the NRC and a former professor of biology, to oversee 
the Academies' efforts in this realm. Please address all of your 
comments, ideas, and requests for assistance directly to him 
(jlabov at nas.edu; Telephone: 202-334-1458).

-- 
Dr. Len Pietrafesa
Director
Office of External Affairs
College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences
North Carolina State University

Phone: 919-515-7777     Fax:  919-515-7855
Email: len_pietrafesa at ncsu.edu
Mail:  Box 8201
       116 Cox Hall
       Stinson Drive
       Raleigh, N.C. 27695-8201

-- 
Susan Friberg
UCAR Office of Corporate Affairs
Tel. 303.497.1658
Fax  303.497.1654