Science

Retooled Texas Standards Raise Unease Among Science Groups

By Sean Cavanagh — April 07, 2009 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Some scientific organizations remain uneasy about Texas’ new science standards, given their potential influence, even though long-standing language that says students should learn about the “strengths and weaknesses” of evolution has been stripped from the document.

Scientists, on the one hand, were heartened by the state school board’s decision late last month to remove that language.

For years, they had argued that the wording falsely suggested that scientific support for evolution is shaky—when in fact it is one of most heavily vetted theories in all of science. They also said it encouraged the insertion of religious beliefs into public school science lessons.

The previous version of the Texas science standards had been in place since 1998. The new document, given final approval March 27, is expected to guide curriculum and instruction for the next decade.

The document’s reach, moreover, will likely extend far beyond Texas. The state’s academic standards guide textbook content, and publishers tend to write textbooks for other states to conform with Texas’ expectations, because of that state’s large share of the market.

Instead of keeping the old language, the 15-member board voted 13-2 to insert phrasing that says students should:

“In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of the scientific evidence of those scientific explanations so as to encourage critical thinking by the student.”

Free-Speech Argument

Board member Cynthia N. Dunbar said she was “ecstatic” about the new wording. She said it will not allow religion to be brought into discussions of evolution, but rather give teachers and students “academic freedom” to approach the topic critically. Similar free-speech arguments have been made in other states recently. (“Academic Freedom’ Used as Basis Of Bills to Question Evolution,” May 14, 2008.)

“We want pure science in the classroom,” Ms. Dunbar said in an interview, “but we do not want censorship in the classroom, and this document does not allow that.”

But Steven Newton, a public information project director at of the National Center for Science Education, an Oakland, Calif.-based organization that supports teaching evolution in public school science classes, said the document’s call for students to examine “all sides of scientific evidence” is problematic.

Supporters of “intelligent design,” he noted, have claimed that scientific evidence supports their view—an assertion rejected by the vast majority of scientists.

Intelligent design holds that some features of living things show signs of having been shaped by an unnamed force or creator.

The Texas board narrowly rejected two controversial amendments, which had called for students to weigh the “sufficiency or insufficiency” of natural selection and common ancestry.

Those proposals were staunchly opposed by scientists, who pointed out that natural selection and common ancestry are widely supported, and crucial, pieces of evolutionary theory and central to students’ understanding.

However, one of the alternative phrases approved by the board—that students should “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning the complexity of the cell"—also disappointed some science advocates.

To Mr. Newton, that phrasing sounds as if it could encourage discussions of intelligent design. Supporters of design have suggested that the complex features of the cell show signs of having been crafted intelligently, rather than having come about through evolution.

“That’s a very worrisome thing,” Mr. Newton said of the language.

But Ms. Dunbar, the state board member, disputed that assertion. The phrasing is simply meant to emphasize the importance of cellular biology and to foster a “scientific” exploration of the subject, she said.

Misleading Language?

Another amendment approved by the board requires students to “analyze and evaluate a variety of fossil types, such as transitional fossils, proposed transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits with regard to their appearance, completeness, and alignment with scientific explanations in light of this fossil data.”

Francis Q. Eberle, the executive director of the National Science Teachers Association, a professional organization based in Arlington, Va., said that language, particularly the wording about “proposed” fossils, is unscientific and misleading.

It is “an attempt to interject subjectivity and belief systems into a major unifying theme of science by isolating the concept out of context of the other evidence,” Mr. Eberle said in an e-mail. “Hence, this is no longer science, but something else.”

Texas officials are expected to consider new textbooks for adoption in 2011. Ms. Dunbar said she would expect publishers to follow the newly revised standards.

“We gave a very clear direction,” the Texas board member said.

Mr. Eberle, whose organization represents 55,000 teachers, said he would like publishers to be given enough leeway to avoid language that could lead educators astray.

“My hope would be that textbooks would publish science and not wander into other areas,” Mr. Eberle said in an interview.

The academic standards have the potential to be confusing, he added, and if texts mimic the standards language, “it’s a real setback for students.”

Related Tags:

A version of this article appeared in the April 08, 2009 edition of Education Week as Retooled Texas Standards Raise Unease Among Science Groups

Events

Classroom Technology Webinar How Pandemic Tech Is (and Is Not) Transforming K-12 Schools
The COVID-19 pandemic—and the resulting rise in virtual learning and big investments in digital learning tools— helped educators propel their technology skills to the next level. Teachers have become more adept at using learning management
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Accelerate Learning with Project-Based Learning
Earlier this year, the George Lucas Educational Foundation released four new studies highlighting how project-based learning (PBL) helps accelerate student learning—across age groups, multiple disciplines, and different socio-economic statuses. With this year’s emphasis on unfinished
Content provided by SmartLab Learning
School & District Management Live Online Discussion Principal Overload: How to Manage Anxiety, Stress, and Tough Decisions
According to recent surveys, more than 40 percent of principals are considering leaving their jobs. With the pandemic, running a school building has become even more complicated, and principals' workloads continue to grow. f we

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Science There Aren't Enough Computer Science Classes for All the Kids Who Want to Take Them
Black and Hispanic students, and those from low-income families, are less likely to have access to computer science courses.
3 min read
In this 2015 photo, third grader Iyana Simmons works on a coding exercise at Michael Anderson School in Avondale, Ariz.
A new Gallup survey shows that Black girls are more likely than white girls to express an interest in computer science.
Nick Cote for Education Week
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Science Whitepaper
Growing STEM in American Education
Across America, many K12 school districts still lack the necessary resources to prioritize STEM curriculums, especially in underserved co...
Content provided by HP
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Science Whitepaper
The Benefits of Engineering for K–5 Students
Having engineering embedded in your K–5 science curriculum helps build collaboration and communication skills and gives students an oppor...
Content provided by Carolina Biological
Science Opinion Q&A Collections: Science Instruction
Eighty science educators answer 10 years' worth of questions about science instruction.
4 min read
Images shows colorful speech bubbles that say "Q," "&," and "A."
iStock/Getty