An Evolving Debate?

As Gob put it on this week's Arrested Development, "I heard the jury's still out on science." I know they film the episodes far in advance, but you couldn't ask for a timelier joke.

It was a mixed week for Darwin. In neighboring Kansas, the State Board of Education redefined science and approved new standards that cast doubt on evolution. I remember my second year at Oxford, when I told some Brits I had accepted a job teaching high school. They asked curiously, "Are you going to be in a state that doesn't believe in ee-volution?" It amazed them that people in such an "advanced" country could still doubt evolution. I assured them that North Carolina included evolution in the Standard Course of Study, and I'd be teaching English anyway. (Although I did have a discussion with my 11th graders about Darwinism in The Great Gatsby....) Now, however, I'm just one state over from Kansas. What happens if whatever is the matter with Kansas is catching? I might have to run for school board.

In better news for Darwin, in my home state of Pennsylvania, all the members of the Dover school board who supported Intelligent Design were voted out and replaced by Democrats in favor of evolution.

I have it easy in that I don't believe that the world was literally created in a week, so I don't have to reconcile evolution with my religious beliefs. (Yes, I'm about due for another religious exploration column--but that will be later.) It must be quite a struggle for people who do.

I find the evolution/intelligent design debate interesting. It seems clear to me that science provides overwhelming support for evolution. I acknowledge that I took exactly one biology class in college, so I'm not exactly an expert--I am taking some of it on faith. I also acknowledge that scientific beliefs change over time; the scientific process is designed to keep testing and revising those theories, evolution included. But I see no reason to dismiss the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence in support of evolution, nor do I suspect our nation's scientists of being part of a vast evolutionary conspiracy to keep God out of our schools.

Studies are always showing that most Americans can't identify a single Supreme Court Justice, or find this or that country on the map. For the most part, though, this ignorance doesn't influence educational policy; people are content to let teachers and specialists design, for example, the math curriculum, so it doesn't really matter whether most American adults can define an integer.

But here we have a case that pits the majority of Americans against the vast majority of biological scientists. Who gets to decide what is taught in our schools? The majority? The specialists? In Kansas, the state has revised their standards three times recently. The first time, the board removed most references to evolution. When a new board was voted in, evolution was put back. Now, doubts are being cast on evolution. What the heck kind of way is this to set standards? What Kansans are taught in biology class will vary year to year, and could easily change again. But at the same time, I'm grateful for the local model of education, because it keeps Kansas craziness in Kansas.

I have seen nothing to convince me intelligent design should be taught in schools. But then, I'm a college-educated liberal, so that makes me likely to think that. Sure, cover the conflict in civics classes as a current event. But let's keep science in science class.