Who+decides+what+should+be+taught?

Reiss, Michael J. (2008, Feb) Creationism, Darwinism and ID: What are Biology Teachers Supposed to do?, Biologist; Vol. 55 Issue 1, p.28-32, 5p

 This talks about what a creationist is and what a evolutionist is. It talks about their differences and how they cope between each other when faced against one another. Even though it talks mainly about the eduction in the United Kingdom, it still happens almost everywhere where there is eduction, especially in the United States. It discusses how the different aspects of the science department with creationism by saying that religion has no epistemological ground but yet it could be connected to science by using critical thinking. The only good way to incorporate religion and science is that it could help students have a better understanding on science. It discusses the controversies that come with both ideas, such as how organic materials were created by inorganic materials. In conclusion the author discusses his idea that science teachers should teach both to help students understand science better.  I do agree with the author that teachers should decide on what should be taught. If they should teach the creationist idea, the evolutionist idea, or even both. I felt the author did make a good point by pointing out the different discrepancies with both ideas because it shows how each one has a different flaw to make the other seem correct, when in fact both can be taught to help understand the other even better. There is another idea in the world that combine both God and evolution. It states that God created the Big Bang and that is what created our past. That would be an easy way to start off a science class about the theory of evolution by combining both creationism and evolutionism.

Davis, Derek H. (1999) Kansas Schools Challenge Darwinism: The History And Future Of The Creationism-Evolution Controversy In American Public Education, Journal of Church & State; Vol. 41 Issue 4, p661, 16p

 It starts off by stating the facts about the this controversial matter first started. It started in Kansas on August 11, 1991. The board of education began this conflict. David Adkins and Linda Holloway were the first to argue with one another about the different issues. One side arguing that their side was the best to be taught and the other side criticizing them and saying that their ideas are better. The board decided that the subfield of evolution, macroevolution which best describes that one species evolves from another, should not be taught in the text books to students; they also dropped the discussion of the Big Bang Theory. This article then discusses how Darwinism started and how it has been a controversial matter with creationism. After Darwin created his book, Origins of Species, teachers began to teach the evolutionary theory. People argued that Darwin was trying to overthrow God and that he was the devil. There were many ways of creationist ideas to counter the evolution theory in the American education. Creationists attempted to make bylaws against evolutionism, making it illegal to teach Darwin's theory, and the first state to pass one of these laws was Tennessee. New laws and judicial matters started to begin during the 1900s and are still going till today. Many legal matters have been argued about these two topics and whether or not they should be taught in public schools. This article made me realize that the teachers do not have a say on what they teach. The curriculum is decided on the education board of that area and/or state. The education board, however, does not think to combine the two ideas together to help students learn a greater amount of science and intellectual design. The fact that the judicial board is getting involved and making rules against the teaching is ridiculous. The state should not be involved on what is being taught at what school. The teacher or the education board should decide on what should be taught in our school in America.

Dewolf, D. K., Prof., & Cooper, S. L. (2006). Center for Science and Culture. Retrieved November 24, 2010 from Discovery Institute, TEACHING ABOUT EVOLUTION IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS: A SHORT SUMMARY OF THE LAW: http://www.discovery.org/​a/2543.

For a while now, the judicial branch has been using standards of constitutionality. This article talks about how teachers should teach the controversy, which is the idea to use scientific disagreements over evolution to help students learn more about evolution, and about how science deals with controversy. It goes on saying that the constitution says that we are entitled to teach both creationism and evolutionism. The constitution denies the censoring of scientific ideas that are taught or being spoken about. During a case between Epperson vs. Arkansas, Epperson argues that it is against the first amendment to rule out a theory because it goes against a more popular religion or anti religion. In the Child Not Left Behind act, it states that children should be able to understand the full scientific views that exist. I have learned that the judicial branch cannot stop science teachers from teaching what they believe in. They are unable to create laws forbidding schools from teaching a different curriculum they feel is inadequate or unpleasant with a highly popular religious group. The first amendment is about freedom of speech and also says there should be a separation of church and state. This means the church should have no say in the government about laws regarding education and what should be taught in American schools.

Wiles, Jason. Branch, Glenn (2008, Jan) Teachers Who Won't, Don't, or Can't Teach Evolution Properly: A Burning Issue, American Biology Teacher; Vol. 70 Issue 1, p6-7, 2p, 1 Color Photograph

This talks about how teachers are inadequate in teaching evolution in their classroom. It says that they, the teachers, are creationists themselves, are pressured by their communities, or are unable to teach the subject because of their lacking of understanding such a concept of evolution. The article goes on to show statistics of teachers in Oklahoma in their experiences of teaching evolution. 12% of the teachers omit the theory of evolution, 30% felt pressured to omit the theory and because of such pressure by their community they did, 31% said they felt pressured to include nonscientific approaches for the understanding of evolution, and over half, 52%, said they felt they were unable to teach effectively. Teachers should have to be up to a satisfactory education in order to teach students the full aspect of evolution. If a teacher is being pressured, they should get a group or committee to help stop this pressure that is being pressed onto them. Teachers are able to teach what they want, whether it be creationism or darwinism. The NAS even says that the theory of evolution is a vital part of a students education. This page made me realize that it is not just the teacher who is having a problem teaching the criteria, it is cause of three major problems they face. They face the fact they are unable to teach the lesson due to un-educational backgrounds, they are being pressured to teach or not teach evolutionism or creationism, or they just feel one or the other is completely wrong. I do agree that the teacher should decide on what is being taught but they should not just shake their head no to the other ideas that come with their personal beliefs. Teachers should attempt to incorporate all theories and ideas that come with evolution so that the students can get a grasp of the a great amount of these scientific theories.

Hewlett, Martinez, Peters, Ted (2006) Evolution in Our Schools: What Should We Teach?, Dialog: A Journal of Theology; Vol. 45 Issue 1, p106-109, 4p

This starts the reader off by giving them a list of six points that they go into detail. The first point is that no matter what a child's background of religion is they should still get a great education in the field of science. It is the schools main job to give a student the highest quality of education it can give. The second point states that no creationist or evolutionist can state that they represent the best science. This is because the author measures his ideas off of fertility, which to him is the scientific theory to generate research projects which could potentially lead into new discoveries. In this, the author hopes for a better understanding of the natural world. The third point states that the author has full commitment by every kind of school, public or catholic, should teach the theory of evolution. The fourth point says that people should not base our faith on what we are taught but what we feel about God and instead should be accompanied by the teaching people learn from evolution. The authors fifth point states that we should not leave out biblical sources because they are outdated and because superseded by modern science. Disrespect of religion should not happen, even in a public school setting. The last point is that when discussed in a school setting, the author urges that teachers distinguish between Darwinism as a scientific method and Darwinism as an ideology. I believe that people should follow these six simple tasks because they are easy to follow without any discrepancies. Although, there still will be controversy in the world about the subject matter, this could potentially help try and attempt to stop the arguing. These six points help people, students, and teachers get a better grasp of what could be taught in the classroom, instead of arguing which subject is best at teaching evolution, how the earth was created, and how humans became human over time. It merges both subjects together as a one whole subject to help give students a better understanding of evolution.

Scoring Rubric