1. EVOLUTIONARY THEORY AS A TEACHING TOOL IN UNDERGRADUATE SCIENCE COURSES FOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION MAJORS: SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY VERSUS INTELLIGNET DESIGN “THEORY” AND OTHER FORMS OF CREATIONISTIC “SCIENCE” Edward L. Crisp Geology Department West Virginia University at Parkersburg

2. INTRODUCTION  Evolutionary theory is one of the (if not the) strongest, most factually supported paradigmic scientific theories in science today. It is the central organizing theme in the biological sciences (including the medical sciences) and a major cornerstone in paleontology and historical geology.  As we all know, the teaching of biologic evolution in the public school system is currently under serious attack from the Intelligent Design movement. A movement that is taking advantage of the scientific illiteracy of the general public to emplace a faith-based, nonscientific alternative to evolutionary theory into the public school science classroom.  As most of us are aware, this is really a social, cultural, and political attack rather than one that has any scientific merit. It is a “stealth” attempt to undermine real scientific inquiry and emplace the old-fashioned creationistic view into the public school science classroom.

3. USING EVOLUTIONAY THEORY AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE METHODS OF SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IN ALL SCIENCE CLASSES, PARTICULARY THOSE CLASSES WITH FUTURE PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS  Elementary Education (K-6) majors at most colleges and universities are required to complete a course in physical science and earth science, as well as one or two semesters of introductory biology. Those students specializing in science often must also complete an astronomy and geology course (often physical geology). They may also be required to take physics, chemistry, botany, and zoology.  Usually college level courses in biology, botany, and zoology have a significant component of the course dedicated to evolutionary theory. Even in these courses, the overwhelming factual evidence supporting evolutionary theory should always be stressed.  However, physical science, physics, chemistry, earth science, physical geology, and astronomy usually do not cover biologic evolution. Also the nature of scientific inquiry is often covered briefly in the first lecture, then the course content is stressed in the remainder of the course without emphasizing the nature of scientific inquiry.  Evolutionary theory may be discussed in all science courses as a tool to illustrate the nature of scientific inquiry and how science differs from faith-based philosophies. Today, with the dangers to science education inherent in the Intelligent Design movement, explaining evolutionary theory and its strong basis in sound scientific inquiry to future elementary education teachers is extremely important.

4. STUDENT SURVEYS OF SCIENCE ATTITUDES  During the Summer 2005 and Fall 2005 semesters at West Virginia University at Parkersburg (WVUP), a science attitudes survey was administered to 204 students in introductory physical science, earth science, physical geology, astronomy, and some sections of introductory biology. Over 50% of these students are elementary education majors. This will be an ongoing process for several semesters and will eventually allow a determination of any changes in attitudes by administering both a pre and post survey.  Twenty questions or statements relating to attitudes towards science, scientific inquiry, and evolutionary theory were included in the survey. The students were asked to respond to the questions or statements by choosing a number from 5 to 1, with 5 indicating strong agreement, 4 indicating agreement, 3 indicating that they don’t know or have no opinion, 2 indicating disagreement, and 1 indicating strong disagreement.  Many of these students have strong religious beliefs and believe that the Bible is an accurate and adequate explanation for the origin and development of Earth, life, and humans.

5. RESULTS OF STUDENT SURVEYS  I will present the results of some of the more pertinent survey questions. There were 204 student respondents. QUESTION # 1. Do you believe that Earth is several billion years old or relatively young (about 10,000 years old). (Note: for this question only a response of OLD or YOUNG was allowed) OLD = 78% YOUNG = 22% OLD = 76.5% YOUNG = 21.6% NO ANSWER = 1.9%

6. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #2. Do you accept the methods of science as the best procedure for acquiring information that describes and explains how the Universe works? AGREE = 76% DON’T KNOW = 15.7% DISAGREE = 8.3%

7. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #18. Prior to attending college, were you taught the basic methods of scientific inquiry of nature? AGREE = 63.3% DON’T KNOW = 20.6% DISAGREE = 16.1%

8. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #8. Do you think that a scientific theory is just a hunch or guess that scientists use to explain nature? AGREE = 24% DON’T KNOW = 14.7% DISAGREE = 61.3%

9. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #17. Prior to attending college, were you taught the basic concepts of the modern theory of biologic evolution in the public school system? AGREE = 56.3% DON’T KNOW = 15.7% DISAGREE = 27.9%

10. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #6. Do you accept the concept that biologic evolution is a fact (that is, organisms have changed over time with modern organisms being the modified descendants of past organisms)? AGREE = 62.7% DON’T KNOW = 13.7% DISAGREE = 23.6%

11. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #13. Do you accept that modern man and modern great apes had a common ancestor several million years ago? DON’T KNOW = 22.5% DISAGREE = 33.9%AGREE = 43.6%

12. RESULTS (CONT.) AGREE = 75% DON’T KNOW = 16.2% DISAGREE = 8.7% QUESTION #9. Do you think that fossils that are found in layered rocks of the earth are an adequate record to indicate that organisms have changed over time?

13. RESULTS (CONT.) AGREE = 65.7% DON’T KNOW = 16.2% DISAGREE = 8.7% QUESTION #10. Do you have confidence in the concept that the rate of decay of radioactive elements that occur in rocks is a valid way to determine the age of rocks of Earth’s crust ?

14. RESULTS (CONT.) AGREE = 60.8% DON’T KNOW = 13.7% DISAGREE = 25.5% QUESTION #12. Do you think that a person can be religious and believe in God and also accept the concept of biologic evolution, including the evolution of man?

15. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #20. Do you think that the Bible is an accurate and adequate explanation for the origin and development of Earth, life and humans? AGREE = 63.3% DON’T KNOW = 20.6% DISAGREE = 16.1%

16. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #14. In your opinion, are many scientific theories based on faith also? DON’T KNOW = 26.5% DISAGREE = 39.3% AGREE = 34.4%

17. RESULTS (CONT.) QUESTION #7. Do you think that “creation science” should be taught in our public schools as an alternate explanation to that of biologic evolution to explain the diversity of life on Earth? That is, fair time for both creationism and evolution. AGREE = 57.3% DON’T KNOW = 22.1% DISAGREE = 20.6%

18. SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS  Although the survey results indicate some contradictions, most (76%) of the students in the survey accept the methods of scientific inquiry as the most valid way to describe and explain nature.  More than three-fourths of the students surveyed accept that Earth is several billion years old. Additionally, the majority accept radiometric dating as a valid method to determine the age of Earth’s rocks.  The majority (63%) of the students surveyed accept biologic evolution as a fact and accept that fossils are an adequate record to indicate that organisms have evolved. However, they are less comfortable with the concept that modern man and modern great apes had a common ancestor, with only about 44% accepting this view.  About 60% of the students think that a person can accept evolution and also believe in God and practice religion.  Despite all of the above, about 57% of the students think that “creation science” should be taught in the public schools alongside evolutionary theory. Another 22% did not know or had no opinion on this. Also about 55% of the students think that the Bible is an accurate and adequate explanation for the origin and development of Earth, life, and humans. This type of thinking by future teachers is not good for science and indicates a lack of understanding of the nature of scientific inquiry.

19. CONCLUSIONS  The current “push” by the “wedge” of the Intelligent Design movement is a serious and dangerous attack on the teaching of valid scientific inquiry in the nation’s public school science classrooms.  Elementary education majors entering introductory college science courses do not fully understand the methods of scientific inquiry nor the theory of biologic evolution.  College science teachers that train future public school science teachers should make every effort to strongly emphasize the nature of scientific inquiry and how it differs from faith-based philosophies.  The theory of biologic evolution should be taught in all introductory college science courses (particularly those containing elementary education majors that are specializing in science) as an example of a most robust, extensively tested, and widely accepted paradigmic scientific theory.  Evolutionary theory should be presented in some detail to these students to illustrate how it differs from cultural views of life’s past and present diversity based on religious or philosophical beliefs.

20. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU!