It was nearly 10 years ago that I testified in a federal courtroom as a witness in the Selman v. Cobb County Board of Education evolution sticker case. That case revolved around disclaimer stickers describing evolution as “a theory, not a fact.”
U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper ruled the stickers violated the First Amendment because they conveyed “a message of endorsement of religion” in public school textbooks.
The last few weeks have provided more good news for science education. In Texas, publishers of high school biology textbooks have resisted pressure to revise sections of textbooks dealing with evolution to include non-scientific alternatives. If the publishers had caved to the demands of the Texas state school board, it could have affected instruction for students across the country.
None of the 14 publishers succumbed to this pressure, a clear victory for science education.
Opponents of the teaching of evolution often cite their right to local control of school curricula, a theme at the heart of recent controversy over the Common Core State Standards for public schools. To the surprise of many, there has been enormous resistance to the Common Core among tea party conservatives, who mistakenly view it as a federal takeover.
While the Common Core has been adopted by 45 states, in part due to potential federal funding, the federal government has had no part the standards’ development. Nevertheless, the standards seem to have sparked a knee-jerk reaction against anything associated with the federal government or “business elites” who are demanding that our public school systems prepare the next generation with the skills needed in an increasingly knowledge-driven economy.
Other concerns about the Common Core relate to the expense of student testing, and whether teacher compensation will be linked to testing performance, leading teachers to “teach to the test” — the same problematic practice encouraged by No Child Left Behind.
These are more reasonable concerns and deserve attention and discussion about the most effective way to implement the Common Core. But the need for higher-quality public education in Georgia is clear. Nearly one-quarter of college freshmen in this state need to take remedial classes, according to the University System. Business leaders considering where to locate depend on an educated workforce and expect Georgia to provide the same high-quality education as other Common Core states.
The drumbeat for local control of education standards in some ways seems irrational, since all students need to be able to read, write, multiply and most importantly, think for themselves. Certainly, local control of curriculum is a widely supported value with a long history that is unlikely to change, and I am not advocating for a national curriculum.
But the Common Core does not affect how children are taught, only what they are expected to achieve. So why is there such resistance?
One possible explanation is fear that the Common Core could facilitate adoption of Next Generation Science Standards, with implications for the teaching of real biology.
The NGSS were designed to improve the dismal performance of American high school graduates, prepare students for careers of the future, and improve scientific literacy. These standards appropriately place evolution at the center of instruction in biology, which may not sit well with conservatives. A recent poll by Public Policy Polling indicated that 53 percent of Georgia voters believe more in creationism than evolution.
While I don’t expect to have to testify in another evolution trial, the victory for science education will not be complete until all students are expected to learn the real science that underlies our understanding of biology.
