From the National Academies: Ongoing Challenges to Evolution Education: Resources and Activities of the National Academies

Abstract

As I sat down to write this column, I noticed in my e-mail inbox today's daily Lexis/Nexis search that I have requested for articles on challenges to the teaching of evolution or attempts to introduce “alternative views” such as intelligent design into science courses. Today's entry included 25 articles, op-eds, letters to editors, transcripts of network and cable news shows, and a note that an additional 24 articles were not displayed. All in all, a slow news day on this topic compared with searches that have yielded at least twice that number of hits per day in the past week or two. One piece of good news that these issues are finally receiving much needed, serious, and long overdue attention from a much broader spectrum of the scientific community. Scientists, both individually and collectively, and professional organizations from across the scientific disciplines are also recognizing these challenges to evolution as symptomatic of assaults on science and science education writ large. After all, Gallup and other polls have shown repeatedly that, for at least the past four decades during which this information has been collected, the percentage of people in the United States who indicate that creationism (now subsumed by the broader intelligent design movement) should be taught alongside with or instead of evolution in public school science classes has not changed (e.g., Newport, 2004 ; CBS News Polls, 2004 ; Pew Research Center, 2005 ). A growing body of education research also suggests that students at all grade levels (K–12 and postsecondary) come to science courses with misconceptions about evolution that are very difficult to correct or dislodge (e.g., Bishop and Anderson, 1990 ; Greene, 1990 ; Settlage, 1994 ; Anderson et al., 2002 ; Tanner and Allen, 2005 ). The problem of misconceptions about science is not unique to evolution, of course, but in the case of evolution, the problem is compounded because many students have been told that their personal belief systems will be challenged or undermined by engaging in learning about this subject. This concern underlies the angst and anger that some parents, members of school boards, and state legislators express when students are not exposed to purported “controversies” or “weaknesses” in the theory of evolution that are being touted by the Discovery Institute (the leading organization promoting intelligent design). In response to this worry, they are taking a variety of actions in increasing numbers of school districts and states to change the ways that evolution is taught (see Coyne, 2005 ; Orr, 2005 ; and the Web site of the National Center for Science Education — http://ncseweb.org1 — for overviews and resources). Currently there is little consensus within the scientific community about how to confront these challenges effectively. Responses by scientific societies and others are typically reactive to the latest provocation rather than proactive. Individual scientists and professional societies publish a litany of position papers decrying every new challenge,2 but rarely are there collective, coordinated statements from scientific organizations.3 In contrast, messages from proponents of intelligent design present a unified front, are clear and simple to remember (for example, “Teach the Controversy”), and resonate with a large number of people (e.g., Wilgoren, 2005 ). However, the situation is beginning to change as scientific organizations realize that providing the public with easy-to-understand information and direct messages is critically important. The remainder of this column describes the steps we at the National Academies have taken since our last article to address this issue (Alberts and Labov, 2004 ) and what we are planning for the future, both as an organization and in collaboration with other scientific organizations.