Download Textbooks Are Biased in Favor of Evolution

Textbooks Are Biased in Favor of Evolution
Are Textbooks Biased?, 2012
Casey Luskin is a staff member at the Discovery Institute and a co-founder of the
Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) center.
Darwinian evolution is a controversial theory with which many scientists disagree. But
Darwin proponents refuse to allow evidence against evolution to be included in
textbooks. They claim that all opposition to evolution is tied to religious creationism, and
that teaching opposition would therefore violate the First Amendment separation of
church and state principle. These concerns are used as a cover for censorship. Students
are harmed when textbooks fail to present the full debate over evolution.
Critical inquiry and freedom for credible dissent are vital to good science. Sadly, when it
comes to biology textbooks, American high school students are learning that stubborn
groupthink can suppress responsible debate.
Teach the Debate
In recent weeks [December, 2010], the media have been buzzing over a decision by the
Louisiana State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to adopt biology
textbooks. A Fox News summary read "Louisiana committee rejects calls to include
debate over creationism in state-approved biology textbooks...." There was one problem
with the story. Leading critics of evolution in Louisiana were not asking that public
schools debate creationism, or even that they teach intelligent design. Rather, they
wanted schools to simply teach the scientific debate over Darwinian evolution.
The controversy began because the biology textbooks up for adoption in Louisiana teach
the neo-Darwinian model as settled fact, giving students no opportunity to weigh the pros
and cons and consider evidence on both sides.
One textbook under review (Biology: Concepts and Connections) offers this faux critical
thinking exercise: "Write a paragraph briefly describing the kinds of evidence for
evolution." No questions ask students to identify evidence that counters evolutionary
biology, because no such evidence is presented in the text. If the modern version of
Charles Darwin's theory is as solid as most scientists say, textbooks shouldn't be afraid to
teach countervailing evidence as part of a comprehensive approach. Yet students hear
only the prevailing view.
Is this the best way to teach science? Earlier this year a paper in the journal Science tried
to answer that question, and found that students learn science best when they are asked
"to discriminate between evidence that supports ... or does not support" a given scientific
concept. Unfortunately, the Darwin camp ignores these pedagogical findings and singles
out evolution as the only topic where dissenting scientific viewpoints are not allowed.
Courts have uniformly found that creationism is a religious viewpoint and thus illegal to
teach in public school science classes. By branding scientific views they dislike as
"religion" or "creationism," the Darwin lobby scares educators from presenting contrary
evidence or posing critical questions—a subtle but effective form of censorship.
The media fall prey to this tactic, resulting in articles that confuse those asking for
scientific debate with those asking for the teaching of religion. And Darwin's defenders
come off looking like heroes, not censors.
End Censorship
Those who love the First Amendment should be outraged. In essence, the Darwin lobby
is taking the separation of church and state—a good thing—and abusing it to promote
censorship. But one can be a critic of neo-Darwinism without advocating creationism.
Eugene Koonin is a senior research scientist at the National Institutes of Health and no
friend of creationism or intelligent design. Last year, he stated in the journal Trends in
Genetics that breakdowns in core neo-Darwinian tenets such as the "traditional concept
of the tree of life" or "natural selection is the main driving force of evolution" indicate
that the modern synthesis of evolution "has crumbled, apparently, beyond repair."
Likewise, the late Phil Skell, a member of the US National Academy of Sciences,
considered himself a skeptic of both intelligent design and neo-Darwinian evolution. He
took issue with those who claim that "nothing in biology makes sense except in the light
of evolution" because, according to Dr. Skell, in most biology research, "Darwin's theory
had provided no discernible guidance, but was brought in, after the breakthroughs, as an
interesting narrative gloss."
Students are the real losers here, because they are not taught the critical thinking skills
they need to evaluate questions about evolution and become good scientists.
In a 2005 letter to an education committee in South Carolina, Skell wrote: "Evolution is
an important theory and students need to know about it. But scientific journals now
document many scientific problems and criticisms of evolutionary theory and students
need to know about these as well."
Skell was right, and polls show that more than 75 percent of Americans agree with him.
The Louisiana textbook debate reflects the public's gross dissatisfaction with the quality
of evolution instruction in biology textbooks. The Louisiana Board should be applauded
for rejecting censorship and adopting the disputed textbooks despite their biased coverage
of evolution. Students need to learn about the evidence supporting the evolutionary
viewpoint, and the textbooks present that side of this debate. But the books themselves
should not be praised because they censor from students valid scientific questions about
neo-Darwinian concepts—concepts that are instead taught as unquestioned scientific fact.
Students are the real losers here, because they are not taught the critical thinking skills
they need to evaluate questions about evolution and become good scientists. When we
start using the First Amendment as it was intended—as a tool to increase freedom of
inquiry and promote access to scientific information—then perhaps these divisive
controversies will finally go away.
Luskin, Casey. "Textbooks Are Biased in Favor of Evolution." Are Textbooks Biased?
Ed. Noah Berlatsky. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Religion
Doesn't Belong in Public Schools, But Debate Over Darwinian Evolution Does."
Christian Science Monitor (16 Dec. 2010). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 21
Apr. 2014.