Teaching science policy approved

Instructors may offer alternatives

The Central Community School Board approved a policy Monday that supports its science teachers if they decide to wade into scientific controversies, including teaching students about alternatives to the theory of evolution.

“We believe this resolution will give teachers the academic freedom they deserve to teach the controversy where appropriate,” said Board member Jim Lloyd, who made the motion to approve the new policy.

Barbara Forrest, a founder of the Louisiana Coalition for Science and a philosophy professor who has written about clashes between religion and science, said the new policy is unnecessary and includes telling phrases such as a call to teach the “strengths and weaknesses of existing scientific theories.”

“It’s absolutely creationist code language that we’ve seen come up again and again in other states,” Forrest said.

She did not attend the meeting but was contacted for comment by The Advocate after it ended.

Lloyd and Board President Jim Gardner said they’ve been interested in having such a policy for a while. They noted Louisiana in 2008 approved the Science Education Act, which allows science teachers to address controversies such as alternatives to evolution.

They said they spoke with middle and high school science teachers this past summer and heard that teachers were reluctant to tackle such controversies without more guidance from the school system. The board members argued that high performing school districts like Central must tackle such controversies and not shy away from them.

The new policy received little discussion Monday and no one spoke against it. After the policy passed in a 6-0 vote, a handful of people in the audience indicated their approval with smiles and thumbs up gestures.

Willard Easley was the only board member not present.

Superintendent Michael Faulk said the policy has been on the school system’s website for the past two weeks and no one emailed in support or opposition of it. A copy of the policy can be found at this link: http://centralcss.org/files/2013/4694/1968/1948_001science_curric.pdf

It has a long title: “Teacher Academic Freedom in Science Education When Covering Controversial Scientific Subjects.”

The policy states, “The district shall … endeavor to assist teachers to find more effective ways to present the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies.”

Lloyd said he modeled the policy on a similar one adopted in Ouachita Parish in 2006 that he said has not been challenged in court.

The Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008 has generated its share of controversy.

The law allows teachers to use supplemental materials “that promote critical thinking skills, logical analysis and open and objective discussions of scientific theories being studied,” including evolution. The law specifically mentions “the origins of life, global warming and human cloning” among controversies that can be addressed.

Critics say the law opens the door to teaching creationism. Opponents have tried twice unsuccessfully in the past two years to repeal the law and persuaded 78 Nobel laureate scientists to support its repeal.

Forrest, who opposed the Science Education Act and has pushed for its repeal, said the language in Central’s policy and in the supporting documentation is commonly used by the Louisiana Family Forum, a social conservative advocacy group, and by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based think tank. The Discovery Institute is known for its prominent support of intelligent design, which critics describe as a sanitized version of creationism.

Forrest said policies like Central’s encourage the teaching of creationism.

“The only reason to do this is to give the teachers in Central some cover for teaching creationism,” she said.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (12)


1) Comment by potkcalb - 12/09/2012

Being_stufpid "intelligent design" is not a theory. It is a belief, the same belief that prevailed before the Age of Reason (the age we are supposed to be in). It was the belief that everything that could not be explained must be attributable to a miracle. See the scientific definition of a theory that I posted. Intelligent design, irreducible complexity, guided intervention, critical thinking and the like are hypocritical pseudo-scientific terms used to infuse religion, disguised as science, into science education.

2) Comment by potkcalb - 12/09/2012

Science is now and has always been open to controversy. No student is prevented from asking questions or expressing divergent opinions. The sole purpose of this ruling is to infuse religion into science education thereby making a mockery of both religion and science. Scientists are not opposed to theories in addition, to or in lieu, of evolution but they have to qualify as scientific theories. A scientific theory is a "well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment." The theory of evolution meets all of those criteria. No other proposed explanation meets any of them. Religious explanations of the origin of the universe or of life are not amenable to scientific investigation or analysis no matter how clothed in pseud-scientific jargon such as "creation science...irreducible complexity...critical thinking...intelligent design...or guided intervention" to make them sound science based.

3) Comment by julwood - 12/09/2012

School policy continues to evolve. Personally, I believe that God created evolution:)

4) Comment by zealer99 - 11/09/2012

I get tired of this argument. Most of the people who favor one model over the other does so either out of faith on the opinions of others or out of animosity of people who favor the other model. There just does not seem to be a lot of people who have read and/or studied enough to have formed their own opinion, I place myself in that category and I have a 4 year degree in biology, there is just too much information for the average person to have digested. From what I have seen, the only real barrier that separates the two models is the insistence by some people that the world is 6,000 years old based on a literal reading of Genesis and Numbers. The Creation Science / Intelligent Design believers have forced the Evolution Advocates to clean up their model and it is cleaner and neater than it was just a few years ago. But if you can accept the fact that the world is significantly more than 6,000 years old, you can credit God with having used the observed mechanisms and we can all sleep better.

5) Comment by Clay - 11/09/2012

They fail to mention that the person responsible for the battle to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008, and who is responsible for getting the 78 Nobel laureate scientists is Zack Kopplin. Zack began the effort as a senior project in High school is continuing the fight while a student at Rice University.

6) Comment by workinprogress - 11/09/2012

Bad job, Charles, for referring to this in your first paragraph as a 'scientific controversy' and not a POLITICAL one. There's a big difference, and you should have a grasp on it if you're going to cover these issues.

7) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 11/09/2012

Sorry, the last post was meant for a different article

8) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 11/09/2012

Phil, what part of "there will be not reduction in benefits to medicare recipeints due to the ACA" do you not comprehend? It's like talking to an obstinate child.

9) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 11/09/2012

Well, hopefully this action will finally cause some lawsuits to pop up. Not all residents of Central are bible thumpers, right? I keep waiting for the EBRSB to enact some sort of "teach the controversy" nonsense. That way I can be first in line for the ensuing lawsuit. It's time for the LSEA to be overturned. I wonder how much money the jindal admin will waste defending it?

10) Comment by DMJ - 11/09/2012

Gee...they're going to "teach the controversy" out in Central, are they? I'm shocked!

11) Comment by Being_Stupid - 11/09/2012

Somebody get on the red phone and call the Communist ACLU and the Atheist Cults and notify them immediately of this immediate threat to our children !!! God Forbid if these kids learn about intelligent design or any alternate theories and make up their own minds what they believe happened or did not happen 2 billion years ago.... eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee !!! This is scary !!! More scary than Halloween coming up next month... Where is the ACLU ??? Somebody please alert the ACLU and the Democrat Elites in the Democrat Socialist Party !!! Now! Before it is too late....

12) Comment by quirkmaguirk - 11/09/2012

Just another example of why we are the laughing stock of a scientific illiterate country.