Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Teach, don’t preach, in the classroom

Guest Columnist

Published: Sunday, February 13, 2011

Updated: Sunday, February 13, 2011 13:02

It has recently come to my attention that most high school biology teachers don't endorse evolution. What!? I find this completely absurd.

In light of the whole "evolution v. creationism" argument that will no doubt plague our public school system for many years to come, the Washington Post ran an article that stated "the central theory of biology is evolution, yet a new study shows that most high school biology teachers are reluctant to endorse it in class."

How can an educator, someone who dedicates their lives to developing the minds of our youth, not endorse evolution!?

This just further solidifies the already horrific stereotype that K-12 teachers are 20-something-year-old, single, church-going prudes.

According to the Washington Post these teachers are trying avoid controversy.

There seems to be a fine line between avoiding controversy and impeding the education of children you have been previously deemed fit to educate.

I am an education minor and am currently taking a class which deals with teaching ethics.

My take on this issue is, once again, to leave the church out of the schools. It should be a parent's/ religious organization's responsibility to teach children their ideas about how the earth was made.

It is the job of our teachers to stick to what they know and what they have been trained to do. Teach the facts.

 Some people argue that evolution is simply a scientific theory and has yet to be proven. It's more than a theory, but not quite a fact either.

Evolution runs directly counter to most major world religions, which teach that a god created the world in some form or another. Teachers have lost their jobs for teaching only creationism, rather than teaching both theories.

 I understand this point of view. However, evolution is the best explanation we have of where our species came from and how it got to this point.

With the negligence of our teachers comes the ignorance of our students. According to the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress, only 34 percent of fourth-graders and 30 percent of eighth-graders were deemed proficient or better in science.

Denying our students the right to learn what is necessary is hindering them as a whole. For a lot of students, biology is the only science class they'll take while they're in high school.

What happens when they get to college? They're supposed to know about evolution by the time they get to where we are. If they don't, they fall behind, get discouraged and do poorly on exams.

It all boils down to teachers doing what they're supposed to do. Teach, don't preach.

 If I had been in a science class in which my teacher started saying something to the tune of "... and on the seventh day," I would have walked out.

I've never been a very religious person, maybe because my parents weren't.

But the fact remains, if a teacher is going to teach biology in a public school, they should teach biology. They shouldn't go off on tangents that have nothing to do with the science they're presenting. Be scientific, not religious. It's their job to leave that at home and do it on their own time.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

11 comments

Brand
Thu Feb 17 2011 12:26
More important than either "theory" being taught is that students are taught the skills necessary for thinking critically. Maybe if we focused more critical thinking and less on buzz words, our school system wouldn't have produced dimwits like Debra.
Anonymous
Tue Feb 15 2011 13:52
This is ridiculous. We could sit here arguing about evolution forever and still never persuade or dissuade the other side. What I'm more interested in is why the CFF even allowed such horrible journalism to go to print. Did anyone even review this article? Although I know the facts and I certainly know that evolution must be taught, this writer has presented the worst explanations as to why evolution is necessary.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 18:09
It is sad to see that the author and many of the other people posting don't know the difference between a scientific hypothesis and a scientific theory. A hypothesis is a claim that may be observable, but it lacks sufficient observational and experimental support to be considered true. For example, a hypothesis from evolution is that all life evolved from a cosmic soup from which the simplest biological life forms originally emerged. This is a hypothesis because it has not been directly observed, but it seems to "fit" with the general theory of evolution. Fortunately, the entire theory of evolution does not rest on this hypothesis. A theory is considered true based on the observations, experiments, and confirmed predictions supporting the hypotheses used to build the theory. Gravity is a scientific theory, heliocentric orbits of the 9 planets are a scientific theory, and evolution is a scientific theory. It is not a guess, it is not a hypothesis or collection of hypotheses. Evolution is a valid scientific theory.

One of the most controversial predictions of evolution is that of the common ancestor for related species. In Darwin's time, this was supported by morphological similarities between organisms and fossil evidence. In the 20th century, with the introduction of molecular genetics, common ancestry was confirmed for many related species, including the great apes, of which man is one.

There is no belief or faith or religion about evolution. In fact, evolution neither proves nor disproves any religious beliefs *except* for creating doubt with respect to a literal interpretation of creation stories.

Modern biology is called evolutionary biology. It is the unifying theory of modern biology and should be called out as such. Here is a course description for Biological Sciences 110 from a big ten university:

"Biological diversity and organismal biology. Principles of evolution, population biology, and community structure."

The next course is:

"Macromolecular synthesis; energy metabolism; molecular aspects of development; principles of genetics."

Without a firm background in evolution and genetics, incoming freshman in college are at a disadvantage. Some teachers are doing their jobs, and some are not. It is time to make sure they all do their job, including building a proper understanding of the differences between a scientific hypothesis and a scientific theory.

Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 17:29
There are so many variations of the same species because of the process of microevolution. Microevolution, which can produce different breeds within the same species, is directly observable and thus can be regarded as a fact. New breeds of dog have been created by mankind, but dogs always remain dogs. Macroevolution, by which one species becomes another species entirely, has never been directly observed and is theoretical supposition; not a fact. That isn't to say that at some point in the future it could possibly be directly observed and proven a fact, but as of now, it is not. Furthermore, the existence of similarities between species doesn't prove a common ancestor any more than it proves a common creator.
Duh
Mon Feb 14 2011 16:05
If evolution isn't a fact, than why are there so many variations of the same species? How do Creationists explain the existence of tigers and kittens? Did God run out of ideas of what to make different animals?
Justin Pickeral
Mon Feb 14 2011 15:41
"It has come to my attention that most high school biology teachers don't endorse evolution." Okay, first, show me where you're getting this information from, and second, who cares if they don't "endorse" it. All teachers are still required to teach it and in all of my Biology classes, they always have. The fact that they don't endorse the theory of evolution just means that they don't agree with it. Atheists scream and shout for freedom of religion but are more than willing to crush that same freedom for public educators?? Umm, no. That's not how it works.

"With the negligence of our teachers comes the ignorance of our students. According to the 2009 National Assessment of Education Progress, only 34% of 4th-graders and 30% of 8th-graders were deemed proficient in science." Okay, but America's educational system has been getting steadily worse for 60 years. What does this have to do with evolution? You're acting as if evolution is the basis for all of scientific understanding, like students can't understand physics or chemistry without knowing and believing in evolution. Sorry honey, but evolution is not the scientific equivalent of "2 + 2."

This one was the funniest line of them all: "For a lot of students, biology is the only science class they'll take while they're in high school." ...WHAT?! Where in the name of Darwin did YOU go to high school? I guess they let you completely miss Physical Sciences, Chemistry, and Physics. Are you even remotely aware that high schools are generally FOUR year institutions?? Did you take biology four years in a row? What happened?

"If I had ever been in a science class in which my teacher started saying something to the tune of '... and on the seventh day,' I would have walked out." I went through all of my high school science classes, took Physics 1 & 2, Chemistry 1 & 2, Biology 1 and Microbiology in college, and NEVER heard anything come from the Bible, Quran, or whatever else. To my knowledge, the only college classes that even discuss those books are Philosophy and Religious Studies. Throughout my fours years in high school, not a single teacher even mentioned those subjects.

Debra, your ignorance and lack of critical thought agitate me. Please never write another article again.

Sincerely, Me.

Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 14:45
"How can an educator, someone who dedicates their lives to developing the minds of our youth, not endorse evolution!? This just further solidifies the already horrific stereotype that K-12 teachers are 20-something-year-old, single, church-going prudes."

Please do your homework before writing another article. In most Florida schools those of us who teach biology are NOT ALLOWED to discuss evolution without also "teaching" creationism. It doesnt mean we agree with anything or with nothing--it means we do what we are required to do by our school systems. Both Orange and Seminole counties require teaching both "theories".

Please refrain fom trying to make us into your ignorant stereotype because you are too young or too dumb to understand the laws and personnel issues we deal with in public educaiton. If you don't like what we must teach quit voting into office right-wing Republicans who are ultra-religious nut cases. We DO NOT get to teach whatever we like or take personal stands on issues--unless we wish to be unemployed. Do your homework; then speak or write.

Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 12:19
Come now friend, you can make a more cogent argument than that! Nitrogen can be observed with the appropriate equipment and it can be observed in chemical reactions. Furthermore there were millions of witnesses who did directly observe World War II (I didn't say YOU personally had to observe it.) Science values objectivity but it has been taken over by partisans who decry any with opposing views with ad hominem attacks such as "dumb" or "ignorant." A true scientist should keep an open mind and calmly explain his ideas, not insult those who have the audacity to question him.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 11:47
Uh.. something doesn't need to be directly observable to be a fact. I can't see gaseous nitrogen, and I'm not calling it a theory.

World War II happened. I wasn't around for it, but it's not a theory.

Evolution is a fact and yall are dumb if you think otherwise. I like how every religious tard on the internet thinks they can discredit some of the most genius scientists of our time by brushing aside their evidence as "Specious."

Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 11:10
Actually evolution is not a fact. Gravity is a fact because it is directly observable while the mechanisms behind it are theoretical. With evolution, not only are its mechanisms a theory (subject to very frequent change) but the actual process is speculation based on myriad assumptions and specious evidence. Evolution is not an established fact. It may be one day, but as of now, it is not.
Anonymous
Mon Feb 14 2011 07:01
Debra wrote: "Some people argue that evolution is simply a scientific theory and has yet to be proven. It's more than a theory, but not quite a fact either."

Actually Debra, evolution is a fact. That life evolved is not in question. It's how evolution took place which makes up the theory of evolution. We also refer to the theory of gravity. There's no question that gravity exists, the theory of gravity is our best explanation of HOW it works.

Scientific theory is different from the word "theory" used in common day language. A scientific theory is the result of creating a hypothesis (educated guess), and then testing that hypothesis to verify that it's predictions are true. Once a hypothesis has passed enough tests, and has not been proven false (yet), it's called a theory. A theory is always open to change.

So, yes, evolution is a fact.

Thanks for the nice article.





log out