creation vs. evolution

While looking at this case of Sandra Maxwell, you obviously see a lot of controversy. Everyone knows that evolution and creation have been butting heads for quite some time now, referring to the time spent debating school curriculums and what should and should not be taught. Many questions are raised on this whole ordeal. What is the appropriate action to take? What should we teach? How should we teach and present it? Is there a limit as to how in depth to go in teaching these things?

There are many different views to this. But something that would support Sandra with the position she was in is stated by Anti-Defamation League. It stated “May a public school science teacher's right to teach evolution be restricted? No. The United States Supreme Court has determined that it is unconstitutional to restrict an educator's right to teach evolution.“ She could go and try to fight things and make sure that what she believes in gets passed by a legislative body or something of the sort. She could use statistics or facts such as the one I have stated. There are many more facts and good information provided by the Anti-Defamation League that is good for this type of situation.
If I were to vote on the situation, I would have to vote to put creation into school. But my condition of the entire thing is that I feel that there should be a separate class for creationism. I do not feel that it should go in a science class. That isn’t the proper thing to do in my mind. It doesn’t fall in to “science” class. Elizabeth Flock states in an article, “A bill that allows Tennessee public school teachers to teach alternatives to mainstream scientific theories such as evolution will become law this month after the governor refused to sign or veto the measure, The Washington Post’s Valerie Strauss reports.” This is an example of how the creationism is being brought in to schools. There are many other schools that are starting to be implemented in to schools.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-04-11/national/35450644_1_monkey-bill-creationism-and-evolution-tennessee-bill

http://www.adl.org/religion_ps_2004/evolution.asp

Hunter, you made a good argument using the statement by the Anti-Defamation League. The Supreme Court has also ruled including creation in a school's curricula as unconstitutional. In the case of McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, the "balanced treatment" statute, requiring public schools to give balanced treatment to "creation-science" and "evolution-science", violated the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution (NCSE, 2008). This clause "prohibits the government from making any law 'respecting an establishment of religion' . . . and government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly favoring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion" ("Cornell University Law", 2010).

One other option that Ms. Maxwell could consider is teaching both creation and evolution in the classroom, secularly. While receiving their education, students are expected to learn and understand the explained processes, theories, etc., not compelled to accept or agree with their contents. Dr. Henry Morris, founder of the Institute for Creation Research, argues that "The only effective way to get creationism taught properly is to have it taught by teachers who are both willing to do it and adequately prepared to do it. Since most teachers now are neither willing nor able, they must first be both persuaded and instructed themselves" (Morris, 1975). Having educators inform their students on a topic of which they are biased or uninformed will hinder the students' ability to make informed, logical decisions that will affect their beliefs and opinions.






Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. (2010, August 19). Establishment Clause. Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause

Morris, H. (1975). Introducing creationism into public schools. Retrieved from http://www.icr.org/article/66/

National Center for Science Education. (2008, October 17). McLean v. Arkansas. Retrieved from http://ncse.com/creationism/legal/mclean-v-arkansas

Hunter, great job on your post. I really liked what you said about having a separate class. If students have the ability to choose, then there shouldn't be a problem. However here are few questions that I would like to ask of you.

1. At what age would the student be choosing this class?

According to this article "Because of the complexity of the evidence and the arguments that must be explained, a clear understanding of species evolution probably cannot be achieved earlier than high school. However, students in earlier grades (sixth through eighth) should have developed the evidence base for which the theory attempts to account (Advanced Science, Serving Society, 2013).

In this case the students would be able to make the choice. However I found another website that is using a special made program to teach children-in the fourth grade-evolution (The Concord Consortium, 2013). Here is how they do it. "By combining advances in educational technology with improved understanding of young children's cognitive development, the Evolution Readiness project is producing an empirically validate curriculum for introducing evolution in elementary grades (The Concord Consortium, 2013).

If this is the case, and the children are younger, should the parent be able to make the decision to allow their child to learn creationism or evolution? So in the end, whose choice is it, and is it given the student a choice at all? When we pick out our classes in the beginning of the year, our parents have to sign a paper approving it. So no matter what parents are going to have to approve or disprove. Which poses my next question.

2. Should a parent have to approve of this. Let's face it, if the child is our age, we know what we want to believe in and parents may not agree with it.

In my post, I did not think we should teach creationism, period. When I researched it I thought creationism was just for Christians, but that's not the case. Now that I read your post (and others), I would having a choice in school would be the best idea out there.

Resouces:
Advanced Science, Serving Society. (2013). The History of Evolutionary Theory.

Retrieved January 29, 2013, from AAAS Science Net Links : http://sciencenetlinks.com/lessons/the-history-of-evolutionary-theory/

Concord Consortium. (2013). Evolution Readiness.

Retrieved January 29, 2013, from Concord.org: http://concord.org/projects/evolution-readiness

Hunter you had some good points. For the most part i completly agreed with you. Creationism should be alowed in schools but as it is not a science it should not be taught in a science class. and if someone is that offended by it because they respect another religion let them teach it. But then again is that not what we have Churches, and mosks, and all of those other religious places. I say if it comes down to it i will not object from someone donating their time to teach about it but i believe that it does not absolutly need to be in schools. i do believe that evolution though falls into the same lines. It doesnt need to be taught but it is a science and students have their rights to choose their exposer to science just as they do with religion.