The document discusses the concept of "teaching the controversy" regarding evolution education. It notes that while there are scientific controversies about evolutionary processes that can be taught, it is inappropriate to present the validity of evolution itself as controversial among scientists. The document examines arguments for teaching alternative views in the name of fairness but argues this could mislead students about the scientific consensus. It recommends teachers check scientific literature and consensus statements to understand what ideas have credible scientific support.
13. Opinion TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution Vol.18 No.10 October 2003 499
Evolution: what’s wrong with
‘teaching the controversy’
Eugenie C. Scott1 and Glenn Branch1
1
National Center for Science Education, PO Box 9477, Berkeley CA 94709-0477 USA
A new slogan in the fight against evolution education in biological evidence as they see why it matters to a big
the USA and elsewhere is ‘teach the controversy’. question’ [3]. The thought does not originate with the
Although there are scientific controversies about the ‘intelligent design’ movement, however. The Institute for
patterns and processes of evolution that are appropri- Creation Research (ICR), the oldest major antievolutionist
ate topics for the science classroom, and there is a con- organization in the USA, recommends that students and
tinuing social controversy in certain circles about the teachers be ‘encouraged to discuss the scientific infor-
validity of evolution, it is scientifically inappropriate mation that supports and questions evolution and its
and pedagogically irresponsible to teach that scientists underlying assumptions, to promote the development of
seriously debate the validity of evolution. critical thinking skills’ (emphasis in original) [4]. The
intent is not to have students investigate controversies
Antievolutionists swarmed out of the woodwork recently, about patterns and processes within evolutionary theory,
as Ohio prepared to adopt new statewide science education but to debate whether evolution occurred.
standards – guidelines that specify what scientific knowl- Presenting all sides of a controversial issue appeals to
edge and abilities students in the state’s public schools are popular values of fairness, openness and equality of
expected to acquire – that accorded a central place to opportunity. It thus plays well with the public. But it is
evolution. The situation in Ohio is not unusual for the important to examine any such appeal carefully, because it
USA. Although there is no serious dispute among
Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch,
is easy to abuse the public’s willingness to be swayed by
scientists about the scientific credentials of evolutionary such a call. Consider the following appeal: ‘students should
TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution 18(10):499-502
biology, a significant proportion of the American public be encouraged to investigate the […] controversy the same
15. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
16. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
Primarily scientific
17. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
Primarily scientific
Equal availability of information on all sides
18. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
Primarily scientific
Equal availability of information on all sides
Equal quality of materials on all sides
19. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
Primarily scientific
Equal availability of information on all sides
Equal quality of materials on all sides
Understandable by audience
20. When to
“teach the controversy”
Of interest to audience
Primarily scientific
Equal availability of information on all sides
Equal quality of materials on all sides
Understandable by audience
Scientific equivalency of all sides
21.
22.
23. 136 co-authors!
Plus 17 authors of
4 other letters,
all rebutting
Nowak et al. … 2 more pages!
38. Pubmed
Google Scholar
Check the literature!
Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
39. Pubmed Well-sourced
Google Scholar
Check the literature!
Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
40. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar
Check the literature!
Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
41. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
Check the literature!
Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
42. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
and the Talk page)
Check the literature!
Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
43. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
and the Talk page)
Check the literature!
Credible science blogs Consensus statements
from scientific bodies
44. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
and the Talk page)
Check the literature!
Credible science blogs Consensus statements
(Who do they link, and from scientific bodies
45. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
and the Talk page)
Check the literature!
Credible science blogs Consensus statements
(Who do they link, and from scientific bodies
what do people linking
46. Pubmed Well-sourced
Wikipedia entries
Google Scholar (Check the references
and the Talk page)
Check the literature!
Credible science blogs Consensus statements
(Who do they link, and from scientific bodies
what do people linking
to them say?)
47.
48. Scientific Organizations
Brief of Amici Curiae by 56 Scientific Organizations in Selman v. Cobb County
Alabama Academy of Science (1981)
Alabama Academy of Science (1994)
American Anthropological Association (1980)
American Anthropological Association (2000)
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1923)
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1972)
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1982)
American Association for the Advancement of Science (2002)
AAAS Commission on Science Education
American Association of Physical Anthropologists
American Astronomical Society (1982)
American Astronomical Society (2000)
American Astronomical Society (2005)
American Chemical Society (1981)
American Chemical Society (2005)
American Geological Institute
52. Federation of American Societies for
Experimental Biology
“While there may be some disagreement about
the details of evolution, it is not a controversial
theory among scientists. Rather, there is
overwhelming scientific consensus that
evolution is a valid explanation for the
development of species. Although students
should be encouraged to think critically about
all ideas, introducing false controversy
into science classes will ultimately
impair science education.”
There is a useful way to From physicist James Trefil : A consumer’s Guide to Pseudoscience\nWhere does evol fit in this? It’s a core idea\n-Useful to help students understand this principle by teaching evol as being composed of three parts\n
There is a useful way to From physicist James Trefil : A consumer’s Guide to Pseudoscience\nWhere does evol fit in this? It’s a core idea\n-Useful to help students understand this principle by teaching evol as being composed of three parts\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Singling out evolution \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
(routine)\n-as of Feb 07, DI claimed >700 scientists on list\n
(routine)\n-as of Feb 07, DI claimed >700 scientists on list\n
(routine)\n-as of Feb 07, DI claimed >700 scientists on list\n
(routine)\n-as of Feb 07, DI claimed >700 scientists on list\n
(routine)\n-as of Feb 07, DI claimed >700 scientists on list\n
\n
\n
Dobzhansky was clear about the fundamental importance of evolution, but looking at NCSE's Voices for Evolution, it's clear that he was not alone.  That book collects statements … from hundreds of societies, including the AAAS and many other scientific societies\n
from hundreds of societies, including the AAAS and many other scientific societies, but also societies of educators, civil libertarians, and religious leaders, emphasizing the importance of teaching evolution, and arguing against the teaching of religious attacks on evolution.  We always want more statements, so if your professional societies aren't represented in here, get cracking! … Further endorsement of Dobzhansky's maxim comes from a petition\n
from hundreds of societies, including the AAAS and many other scientific societies, but also societies of educators, civil libertarians, and religious leaders, emphasizing the importance of teaching evolution, and arguing against the teaching of religious attacks on evolution.  We always want more statements, so if your professional societies aren't represented in here, get cracking! … Further endorsement of Dobzhansky's maxim comes from a petition\n
