Creationism In US High Schools: 16 Percent Of US Science Teachers Are Creationists

ABC News reports on the findings of a study that concluded 16% of U.S. science teachers are Creationists, and that, disturbingly, one in eight are teaching creationism as a valid science:

Despite a court-ordered ban on the teaching of creationism in U.S. schools, about one in eight high-school biology teachers still teach it as valid science, a survey reveals. And, although almost all teachers also taught evolution, those with less training in science -- and especially evolutionary biology -- tend to devote less class time to Darwinian principles...

...The researchers polled a random sample of nearly 2,000 high-school science teachers across the U.S. in 2007. Of the 939 who responded, 2 percent said they did not cover evolution at all, with the majority spending between 3 and 10 classroom hours on the subject.

However, a quarter of the teachers also reported spending at least some time teaching about creationism or intelligent design. Of these, 48 percent -- about 12.5 percent of the total survey -- said they taught it as a "valid, scientific alternative to Darwinian explanations for the origin of species".

Related: Ben Stein: Front Man for Creationism's Manufactroversy

Comments

[monadock]

Creationism is science fantasy just as Civics class is political fantasy!

[Mort]

So again we get into the battle over who believes what and who is more stupid than the other.

None of this can be proved. There are lots of theories about the origins of the universe and the development of man. Science and religion both use observation as well as imagination. Both think they have the only answer. And it ends up being like the feud between physicians and naturopaths. Both have good ideas, and both are deluded for thinking they have the ONLY ideas that make sense.

I think the answer lies somewhere in between. The universe is built on natual laws. We're still infants in our understanding of them, but we're learning. If there is a God, and I believe there is, he would understand those laws a whole lot better than we do.

And I think we do a disservice to our children if we only teach them part of the whole picture. Like how we spend school days learning to fight in the rat race, but not how to solve problems, develop relationships and live balanced, healthy lives. Kids need exposure to all the variables. By all means teach science and evolution. Help them understand that these are changing and developing, not a be-all and end-all. And that there are other views and facets as well. Arming our kids with a broad spectrum of knowledge will help them be better thinkers and dreamers, and better able to cope in the world.

[primordialsoup]

That's why schools teach different disciplines. Anything dealing with the supernatural (God) is not science. It could be philosophy, though. Let them learn the ideas in the proper context. Contrary to what you say, religion, particularly miracles and divine intervention have no observable evidence. Religion is actually impossible to be science.

[Mort]

I don't mean that religion is the same as science, but they're not opposed to each other, except for the way people use them as tools for opposition. Yes, philosophy would be a good place for exposure to religion. I also think it should be mentioned as an alternative when discussing THEORIES like the big bang.

And as far as evidence, actually experiencing is pretty good evidence for the individuals involved. Just not for the others who weren't there or are skeptical. During a thunderstorm, a friend of mine saw a fireball of lightning come in one window, go through the room and out the other window. Most of the people he told thought he was nuts. Does that mean it didn't actually happen? A few who'd seen lightning do strang things were perfectly ok with his story. Could he prove it? Could he duplicate the experience? Does that make it any less real?

[TheBlackCat]

I find that "all sides should be presented so kids can make up their mind" argument very interesting. Because these fundamentalist Christian kids already ARE hearing both sides of the argument. They hear the religious side in church and from their parents and the science side in science class. If you then have to teach the religious side in science class, you would then have to teach evolution in church to be truly teaching "both sides" equally. But evolution has nothing to do with Christianity you might say...EXAC­TLY, and Christianity has nothing to do with science.

So then you may say, but what about non fundamental Christian kids, THEY are only getting the scientific side of this whole "debate." And that really is the whole point. The Christian far right wants non Christian kids exposed to Christian ideology because they cannot, legally, kidnap other people's children every Sunday and bring them to Church.

Why on Earth should kids in science class be taught a view which completely debunks science? That would be like having a Spanish class in which the teacher preceeds the class by saying "Now children, there are many in America who feel that English should be the only spoken language. They believe that it is wrong for you to learn Spanish because it makes us seem too accomodating to Mexican and other hispanic immigrants­."

[Lucas]

Creationism belongs in philosophy class, or mythology, or even literature­.... not science.

Creationism and science should never be associated.

[fredpferr]

Nice post. Although maybe not "somewhere in between," but possily "both." Evolution, even as accepted to the extent of the absolute origin of species, is not necessarily incompatible with "ID." It is as silly to argue against ID as it is to argue for it. If one could prove Darwin's theory on origin of species, it still does not explain the origin of "stuff," i.e., matter, energy, and the laws of physics - the things that make evolution possible.

The problem with Richard Dawkins and the like is that they have ideals (and an agenda) that extend far beyond the science that they are contemplating. These ideals are as fanciful and arbitrary as the ones they would like to refute.

[Mort]

You're right. Science and religion can coexist nicely, as long as we stop using them as weapons against each other!

[CitizenFace]

Hogwash!

Evolution doesn't make any claim about the origin of matter in the universe, or of the universe itself. It's an explanation of how life has changed over time, not the origins of "stuff" like "matter, energy, and the laws of physics." All that falls under a completely different field of science.

Furthermore, to claim that "matter, energy, and the laws of physics" originated from a designer that was independent of these things isn't much of an explanation.

Lastly, who said anything about Dawkins? In the context of teaching science, among those you refer to when you say "Dawkins and the like" are the many scientists who understand evolution to be fact. What, exactly, do you suspect their agenda to be?

[GuyRC]

I guess this sounds reasonable to the general public but to experts in natural sciences it isn't reasonable. If you are telling kids that creationism is a science based theory you are lying to them. Call it Intelligent Design? Still a lie. There is no debate in the science community about this, only in politics and media is there confusion about the validity of ID as a science theory. It isn't about who is more or less stupid, it is about what is science and what is belief. If you teach biblical creation in a public school classroom it is state funded religous indoctrination.

[BlueOnBlue]

I agree about the need for a broader education.

You can start broadening your own by going back and learning what a theory actually is. There are not a lot of "theories about the origins of the universe." There are some ideas and beliefs about it, but only a very few scientific theories about it. The "big bang" theory is one of them and has so far been tested (by making predictions) and proven by showing that those predictions were accurate depictions of observable natural phenomenon.

Darwin's theory of evolution has likewise been proven over and over through predictions and observations.

None of the religious beliefs about the origin of the universe or the creation of life have standing as scientific theories because none of them offer predictions which can be proven by experiment or observation. They should therefore not be taught in a science class.

If, however, you want to teach that some people have such beliefs, that can properly be done in a class on comparative religion or philosophy.

[Mort]

The thing about theories is that they're based on observation and assumption, not proof. When you have proof, they cease being a theory. Some theories, like evolution, have a lot of data to back them up, so it's reasonable to assume them. And even when something is finally accepted as fact, we later learn new things and those "facts" change.

Whether we became living cells from inanimate matter over the course of eons all by ourselves, or were nudged along by someone who understands the principles, who can say with certainty? Scientists have yet to be able to create life in a test tube. But if they eventually do, isn't that a form of intelligent design? Someone using natural principles to cause life and bring change.

We don't have all the answers yet. Far from it. And to think we do is ludicrous.

[helonias]

Past creationist activities

This idea about the universe did not sit well with the Catholic Church. They lured Giordano Bruno to Rome with the promise of a job, where he was immediately turned over to the Inquisition and charged with heresy.
Giordano Bruno spent the next eight years in chains in the Castel Sant’Angelo, where he was routinely tortured and interrogated until his trial. Despite this, he remained unrepentant, stating to his Catholic Church judge, Jesuit Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, "I neither ought to recant, nor will I." Even a death sentence handed down by the Catholic Church did not change his attitude as he defiantly told his accusers, "In pronouncing my sentence, your fear is greater than mine in hearing it."
Immediately after the death sentence was handed down, Giordano Bruno’s jaw was clamped shut with an iron gag, his tongue was pierced with an iron spike and another iron spike was driven into his palate. On February 19, 1600, he was driven through the streets of Rome, stripped of his clothes and burned at the stake.

[livesimply]

They may be teachers, but they certainly aren't scientists.

[noamjunior]

looks like 16 % of science teachers are in violation of US Law
Do we really want these criminals teaching are children?

[Sciguy]

Absolutely EXCELLENT point!

[TocinoHumano]

You liberasls don't know anything! It has been PROVEN that humans and dinosaurs existed at the same time. Haven't you ever seen "The Flintstones"? They couldn't put it on TV if it wasn't true!

[Binea]

Um..You assume Noah was stupid.Wha­t if..back then..they had the technology we do today in biology or an even more advanced kind.What if..Noah took embryo's of each animal ? What if..the dinosaurs came after the flood ? What if..the dinosaurs had already died out before the flood ? There are alot of what if's ..that are perfectly reasonable. so,why mock the story,it could be true :)

[diboss]

LOL. That's true!

[Annette]

Snicker !! Don't forget there was a TV show in the 70s about cavemen and dinosaurs living together. Sure sounds like scientific proof to me.

Based on that we probably should reconstitute Bruno and torture and kill him all over again.

[helonias]

I wonder what the Phd students of Chinese and Indian think of this, as they pass by our floundering education system on the way to the future.

[GuyRC]

They probably thank whichever mythological deity their culture worships that they were born in a progressive family that knows rational education is the path to enlightenment (and riches).

[guntotinganglion]

For anyone hungering for a more thorough understanding of evolution, I'd highly recommend Neil Shubin's amazing book "Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billio­n-Year History of the Human Body". I needed no convincing, so this book was just an incredible reveal for how ALL life on this planet is directly related. That is to say, if you don't like the idea of being related to monkeys, you may be upset to find that we are very closely related to fish as well, and bacteria. I realize that empiricism is not high on the educational agenda of "creationists" (aka Easter Bunny scientists), but when you look without bias at the geological record, which in fossils includes the biological record, you find physical characteristics shared by all living things.

So...just a heads up on a great book. Shubin is a very good writer, and quite a funny guy too. Well worth a read for anyone who's mind is open to empirical thought. For everyone else...jus­t read your bible.

[Annette]

Bill Bryson's " A short History of Almost everything" is an easy read for the layman,as well as being quite well researched.

[thisoldbroad]

I look forward to reading both of these recommendations.

Thanks

[DXM]

"Despite a court-ordered ban on the teaching of creationism in U.S. schools, about one in eight high-school biology teachers still teach it as valid science"

And with this sort of "pseudo-science" being taught as "valid science" in our schools, we wonder why this nation's students are falling behind the rest of the world in science?

[RaraAvis17]

I found the truth, and the truth shall set you free...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEdUZNzf-vo

[VOTER]

Very funny! Thanks.

[Sciguy]

ROFLMAO! That has to be the best (not to mention funniest) explanation of creationism I've ever seen. Thank you for posting it!

I have a t-shirt that shows dinosaurs being ridden by stick-figure cavepeople. The caption reads: Kansas Museum of Science. :-)

[CommonSensePlease]

Another reason why American schoos are going down with respect to other countries. Creationism is not part of any science just like mythology is not part of science either. READ THE HEBREW BIBLE A FEW TIMES AND THE BEW TESTAMENT AND YOU WILL SEE!
Strongly recommend Bart Ehrman's books. Bart Ehrman is a distiguished professor of theology at North Carolina University and a very remarkable author/historian.

[jpperry]

Creationism is mythology and should be taught (not just the Christian mythology, but all the world's mythology), in a mythology class.

[SpoxLogic]

GOD IS OMNI EVERYTHING­..let's start there

Why would God create us to begin with?

Some sort of narcissistic desire? That would make GOD OMNI-NARCI­SSITIC..a bad thing

Does he need people worshipping him always? That would make him OMNI-SHALLOW or even OMNI-VANE.­..both bad things

Or maybe he likes making things and then destroying them? That would make him OMNI-SICK.­.very, very bad

[BlueAsh]

In the Sycamore School District of Cincinnati, Ohio, they don't even mention evolution till the 7th grade! They talk about mold, plants, animal life, and sometimes dinosaurs, but no mention of evolution.

Apparently, that's in accordance to the State's guidelines.

I'm not gonna apologize for Ohio--at least the Creation Museum (?!) is on the other side of the river in Kentucky.

[Sciguy]

And some of us who live in KY would really, really like to apologize for it. Just what we need - to continue to show the rest of the world that we're ignorant.

[BlueAsh]

:-) We feel for you!

[VOTER]

According to the New Testament, Adam and Eve first had two sons, Cain and Abel.

Cain killed his brother, Abel.

Adam and Eve, also, lived for hundreds of years and had many, many more children.

So was the world's population produced through incest?

OR

Was Cain banished from the family and when alone in the wilderness came upon a creature
similar to man and fathered a family?

INCEST OR BESTIALITY?

What is the answer from those who take the writings of the Old Testament literally?

[SpoxLogic]

Heh! Heh! Great minds do think alike. Well met, Brother/Sister.

[astein1]

I'm sorry to disappoint you but Genesis is the first book of the Hebrew Bible, the first of five books of Moses, the Torah, or the Old Testament for you gentiles. Stop trying to take credit for being the source of pseudo-science being taught in high school biology classrooms.

[diboss]

According to what some members of the Seventh Day Adventist church used to believe, black people are the result of Cain's mating with animals.