16% of US science teachers are creationists

Scary shit

Despite a court-ordered ban on the teaching of creationism in US schools, about one in eight high-school biology teachers still teach it as valid science, a survey reveals. And, although almost all teachers also taught evolution, those with less training in science – and especially evolutionary biology – tend to devote less class time to Darwinian principles.

US courts have repeatedly decreed that creationism and intelligent design are religion, not science, and have no place in school science classrooms. But no matter what courts and school boards decree, it is up to teachers to put the curriculum into practice.

" Ultimately, they are the ones who carry it out," says Michael Berkman, a political scientist at Pennsylvania State University in University Park.

But what teachers actually teach about evolution and creationism in their classrooms is a bit of a grey area, so Berkman and his colleagues decided to conduct the first-ever national survey on the subject.

' Not shocking'
The researchers polled a random sample of nearly 2000 high-school science teachers across the US in 2007. Of the 939 who responded, 2% said they did not cover evolution at all, with the majority spending between 3 and 10 classroom hours on the subject.

However, a quarter of the teachers also reported spending at least some time teaching about creationism or intelligent design. Of these, 48% – about 12.5% of the total survey – said they taught it as a " valid, scientific alternative to Darwinian explanations for the origin of species" .

Science teaching experts say they are not surprised to find such a large number of science teachers advocating creationism.

" It seems a bit high, but I am not shocked by it," says Linda Froschauer, past president of the National Science Teachers Association based in Arlington, Virginia. " We do know there' s a problem out there, and this gives more credibility to the issue."

Better training
When Berkman' s team asked about the teachers' personal beliefs, about the same number, 16% of the total, said they believed human beings had been created by God within the last 10,000 years.

Teachers who subscribed to these young-Earth creationist views, perhaps not surprisingly, spent 35% fewer hours teaching evolution than other teachers, the survey revealed.

The survey also showed that teachers who had taken more science courses themselves – and especially those who had taken a course in evolutionary biology – devoted more class time to evolution than teachers with weaker science backgrounds.

This may be because better-prepared teachers are more confident in dealing with students' questions about a sensitive subject, says Berkman, who notes that requiring all science teachers to take a course in evolutionary biology could have a big impact on the teaching of evolution in the schools.

Why not have a clear cut religion class and a clear cut science class. If you teach science you should know how things are put together. Its like teaching math without being able to count to 10.

Indeed. I went to a Catholic high school myself, and even our science teachers didn' t teach creationism (this is in Australia). We had separate (compulsory) religion classes but that' s about as far as it went. We didn' t mix the two, and we certainly didn' t take the Bible as fact.

I remember someone asking my year 10 science teacher whether he believed in creationism. He said flat out " No, because it defies logic" .

Reminds me of a story my friend told me. He said he was talking to his very religious aunt about the " fishes and loaves" story from the Bible... which basically tells the story of how Jesus managed to feed a crowd of thousands on just a few fish and loaves of bread. My friend said to his aunt, " Oh, I get it... it' s a metaphor for people' s generosity, and because everyone contributed a little food and shared it all they were all able to eat." And his aunt was like, " No! It was a miracle." Very condescending and completely illogical.

16% isn' t a lot.

It' s a lot more than 0%, which is what it ought to be. Especially considering lots of students are zoned to schools and don' t get to select from the science teachers who teach science and the science teachers who teach religion.

In the US, religious zealots invaded the school boards. The average person doesn' t care about the curriculum and when you have a group of people with an agenda it becomes easy for them to have a majority in a closed democratic system.

The severity of the problem depends on where you live. The southern states are much worse.

I can' t read the article because of a stupid pop-up ad that won' t let me close it, but I assume they meant to say 16% of ALL US science teachers, including those that teach at religious schools (I personally went to a Catholic school). If this is the case, the results are not surprising or alarming.

You could also say it this way: 84% of all US science teachers believe in evolution! OMG 84%!!!!!!!! SCARY! Seriously, 16% is nothing. If 16% of people voted for George W Bush, you' d point at him and laugh at his pathetically low numbers. You' ll never be able to stamp religion out 100% because people like having nonsense to believe in. It makes them feel comfortable.

In most states, school boards don' t decide curriculum. State requirements are state requirements, and nowhere does it state that creationism has to be taught as a legitimate science. In fact, I have never had a class that explained creationism, no less taught it. I don' t know where you all get your rhetoric on our educational system, but it' s got some real holes.

As a relatively general standard, students don' t get into advanced science in the US until High School, and are never required to take a religion class, and quite frankly, your mind' s already made up one way or the other by that point. 45 minutes a day for a single semester isn' t going to change a person' s lifelong views, whether that course be religion, or science.

The policy is that you don' t need to believe in evolution, but you need to learn it. It seems fair enough to me. Being a product of the US educational system, and one of the few still in it here, I think I' d have a better grasp than most.

If there' s any problem in the US educational system, it' s health class, not science class.

In most states, school boards don' t decide curriculum. State requirements are state requirements, and nowhere does it state that creationism has to be taught as a legitimate science. In fact, I have never had a class that explained creationism, no less taught it. I don' t know where you all get your rhetoric on our educational system, but it' s got some real holes.

As a relatively general standard, students don' t get into advanced science in the US until High School, and are never required to take a religion class, and quite frankly, your mind' s already made up one way or the other by that point. 45 minutes a day for a single semester isn' t going to change a person' s lifelong views, whether that course be religion, or science.

The policy is that you don' t need to believe in evolution, but you need to learn it. It seems fair enough to me. Being a product of the US educational system, and one of the few still in it here, I think I' d have a better grasp than most.

If there' s any problem in the US educational system, it' s health class, not science class.

There are problems in all aspects of every education system, nothing is perfect.

I' m not talking about the majority, I' m talking about 12.5% of science teachers teaching creationism as a viable option over evolution.
It' s not about religion class, it' s about the people with the most control allowing this to happen and even fighting for it. Who do you think fought in favor of having creationism in schools?

As a seperate argument I would say that religion classes as they are taught don' t belong in school at all. I never said it was only the US either. I myself went to a catholic school, I took religion classes when I was younger, I know what theyteach, a few times a year the school brought us to church. You can argue that I had the option of replacing religion class with Moral which I did after one year of being introduced to christianity. I would counter argue that Moral class was equally void of any merit. In my case, it was especially bad because that class was taught by the same guy teaching religion. He wasn' t supposed to teach god but he certainly did not teach a secular view on morality. He had no understanding on the importance of measuring consequence, he only looked at the actions. On a few occassions he even slipped in some insight on the benefit of being a good christian. With another teacher she spent all class reading " chicken soup for the soul" , I' m not joking. I realize this is a drop in the bucket, but my point is that both religion and and substitute is a useless, a waste of time.

More importantly school should never teach opinion, schools should be like the news, neutral and purely objective backed up with proven facts. The argument of what harm can teaching religion do is ridiculous. The answer is probably nothing to an individual, but school is expensive cost for the country, it' s not a resource you waste.

Well it' s also important for the teachers to note that evolution is a theory and not 100% proven. I think creationism should be mentioned when teaching the theory of evolution. It would just be bad teaching not to show all major sides to an argument. I believe in evolution btw.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

I just think teachers should leave their belief' s inside their desk' s drawer when teaching a class. Students are there to learn the theories the way they should be learned, in an objective manner, not some sort or pseudo way thanks to a teacher' s subjective views and feelings towards a particular theory. If you believe in creationism, fine, just leave it out of evolution, and only bring it out when both theories must be compared, and vice-versa.

Teachers are there to teach theories relevant to the subject, wether proven or not. They are not being paid to teach their opinions on a subject. The exposition and discussion are two separate processes.

Well it' s also important for the teachers to note that evolution is a theory and not 100% proven. I think creationism should be mentioned when teaching the theory of evolution. It would just be bad teaching not to show all major sides to an argument. I believe in evolution btw.

Evolution is supported in the same way as the theory of gravity or the theory of elecromagnatism. A scientific theory is not a guess. I would say a theory is not 100% final, but what is included is generally proven. Mostly what is added is the " how" and not the what. We know evolution works and we know how it works too.

Evolution is a developed theory, creationism is not a real theory. It' s barely a hypothesis.

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

http://wilstar.com/theories.htm

But when you teach Creationism, which religion' s story do you teach? They can' t ALL be right. You go to Hell and burn forever if you believe in the wrong one, so be careful!

I have never been in a school where creationism is taught in science classes.

I' m pretty sure the class would riot if a teacher/professor even brought it up.

But yes there are always the southern states, they are intellectually 200 years behind the rest of the country. What do you expect from people who practice incest, polygamy, etc?

From many scientist interviews I have seen, many scientists have religious ideas regarding the matter, but they know it is simply their belief and they don' t teach things that can' t be experimented on.

More importantly school should never teach opinion, schools should be like the news, neutral and purely objective backed up with proven facts. The argument of what harm can teaching religion do is ridiculous. The answer is probably nothing to an individual, but school is expensive cost for the country, it' s not a resource you waste.

Why not? So long as you' re not required to believe what is being taught, who cares what they' re presenting?

The most I ever learned about American World History (US in it' s relation to the world) was from a teacher who had ideas quite contrary to mine. She would teach what we needed to learn for the exams, and then it would be an unofficial open forum, where we all expressed our opinions on the subject at hand. I didn' t agree with everybody' s views, but I consider myself a more intelligent person for hearing them.

The only time Creationism is brought up in Science courses is to explain what the beielif is, and that it is held by people. There is no validation of the theory, nor is there any judgement passed on it. It' s simply presented as a belief.

There' s nothing wrong with providing an open dialogue in the school system. It' s when you start restricting what stutents can be informed of that you begin to have issues.

The only time Creationism is brought up in Science courses is to explain what the beielif is, and that it is held by people. There is no validation of the theory, nor is there any judgement passed on it. It' s simply presented as a belief.

Yeah obviously, but that' s not contrary to what I meant. There' s a difference between identifying different ideas and perhaps teaching the history of the ideas/opinions. It' s another thing entirely to give a bias/emic perspective on these ideas. Just as you wouldn' t want a Nazis teaching the class about nazism, a feminist teach about feminism, or a liberal in your class teaching liberalism.

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

...or a liberal in your class teaching liberalism.

Welcome to college. I find in college nothing is taught from an unbias perspective. Every one of my classes that dealt with history or government was horribly slanted. My English classes were literally writing papers about how conservatives were horrible people. My teacher hated me in that class.

Also, Agent, you contradicted your own argument...

Just as you wouldn' t want a Nazis teaching the class about nazism, a feminist teach about feminism, or a liberal in your class teaching liberalism.

If that were the case then you wouldn' t want a scientist teaching science because of a bias. I know what you meant though...

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

There are a couple of common types of people and how they relate to their jobs.

1)There are people who believe that they have a responsibility in their job and an ethical code in their job to do their job to the best of their ability without having their job-related actions dictated by their personal beliefs, opinions and biases.

2)There are people who are motivated to get a job so they can exert their personal beliefs, opinions and biases through the position of influence that that job provides.

The first kind of person is more intelligent and ethical. The second kind of person is a big fvcking problem. Even in a job that is all about beliefs, faith, prescribed codes of behavior (a priest for example), the first type of person is the better person for the job because they are supposed to be guided by their holy texts' scriptures or what have you, not solely by their own arrogant opinions and judgments of other people.

It seems like I' m having a flashback of a thread like this....

If that were the case then you wouldn' t want a scientist teaching science because of a bias.

you cant be bias science.

My English classes were literally writing papers about how conservatives were horrible people.

Well they are.

Look around your classroom, half of the people attending your school probably wouldn' t be there if it wasn' t for laws passed by liberals. You don' t bite the hand that feeds you.

And look around some more, half of them are in their early 20' s and probably have friends/family participating in a retarded war.

Plus it' s a great time to hate conservatives considering this particular conservative government has been a catastrophe.

My last year of college I had a presentation/speech about how evil conservatives and organizes religion are, the crowd went nuts with applause by the time I was done, and it was the easiest thing I have ever done, it is WAY to easy to dig up dirt on them.

ORIGINAL: Vx Chemical

If that were the case then you wouldn' t want a scientist teaching science because of a bias.

you cant be bias science.

Sure you can. Not science as a whole, but ideas in science. There are plenty of things scientists debate about because a lot of theories and such simply can' t be proven. Don' t take that as me saying religion is right, I' m just saying things like what caused the big bang, what actually sparked life, did dinosaurs become birds, even things like how the moon came to be are debated constantly in the scientific community from a scientific standpoint... there is plenty of bias in science. Since no human was around to witness those things people will make up their own minds hence a bias.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

Fossil.

ORIGINAL: emofag

My English classes were literally writing papers about how conservatives were horrible people.

Well they are.

Look around your classroom, half of the people attending your school probably wouldn' t be there if it wasn' t for laws passed by liberals. You don' t bite the hand that feeds you.

And look around some more, half of them are in their early 20' s and probably have friends/family participating in a retarded war.

Plus it' s a great time to hate conservatives considering this particular conservative government has been a catastrophe.

My last year of college I had a presentation/speech about how evil conservatives and organizes religion are, the crowd went nuts with applause by the time I was done, and it was the easiest thing I have ever done, it is WAY to easy to dig up dirt on them.

It' s just as easy to dig up dirt on liberals. It' s amazing how every post you write comes off as ignorant.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

Sure you can. Not science as a whole, but ideas in science. There are plenty of things scientists debate about because a lot of theories and such simply can' t be proven. Don' t take that as me saying religion is right, I' m just saying things like what caused the big bang, what actually sparked life, did dinosaurs become birds, even things like how the moon came to be are debated constantly in the scientific community from a scientific standpoint... there is plenty of bias in science. Since no human was around to witness those things people will make up their own minds hence a bias.

I agree with you for the most part... the only thing is, if it turns out the universe is actually a deterministic system, then it would be possible to prove how it began.

ORIGINAL: Rampage99

ORIGINAL: emofag

My English classes were literally writing papers about how conservatives were horrible people.

Well they are.

Look around your classroom, half of the people attending your school probably wouldn' t be there if it wasn' t for laws passed by liberals. You don' t bite the hand that feeds you.

And look around some more, half of them are in their early 20' s and probably have friends/family participating in a retarded war.

Plus it' s a great time to hate conservatives considering this particular conservative government has been a catastrophe.

My last year of college I had a presentation/speech about how evil conservatives and organizes religion are, the crowd went nuts with applause by the time I was done, and it was the easiest thing I have ever done, it is WAY to easy to dig up dirt on them.

It' s just as easy to dig up dirt on liberals. It' s amazing how every post you write comes off as ignorant.

If by dirt you mean exposing that a guy cheats on his wife just like millions of other people do, sure.

I mean dirt as in, sending us to war for nothing via political deception, fraudulent elections, religious bias in government, etc. Everytime a liberal gets kicked out of office it' s for something stupid like for being gay, hiring prostitutes, etc. Everytime conservatives get kicked out its for actual fraud.


And you probably voted for bush, you don' t have the right to call anyone ignorant, piece of trash. You get extra trash points if you voted for him twice, dumb f*ck.

And btw, you don' t even know what bias means, I doubt you had a college education.

You are ignorant. I didn' t vote in the last election. I can' t say I was all that impressed with anyone running. Same goes for this time around. I may vote for McCain just so Hilary doesn' t get into office though...

Also you are attacking people with the label ' conservative' , rather than the actuals views of conservatives. There' s a big difference.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

Please, you' re a known religions nut.

I love how it' s all done in the name of morality and religion, here' s a tip conservatives : god doesn' t give a *** how many times you cheat on your wife or wether or not you' re a homo, he cares about more pressing issues like letting people die on the streets for lack of healthcare and genociding ourselves in pointless wars.

Conservatives are trash, they are cowards. Conservatives in liberal controlled countries are too scared to put out their greedy agendas, the problem with the US is people like to take it up the ass, if people had the balls to go out there and burn the white house we would never see another conservative party in office, conservatives don' t represent the people, period.

And of course you aren' t impressed with any conservatives running, no one is.

Bill Clinton > George Bush
Bill Clinton > Bob Dole
Al Gore > George W
Kerry > George W
Obama/Hillary > McCain

And I' m not talking about the left side being better candidates for the people, I' m talking about them not being complete ***ing morons.

Conservatives don' t give a *** about the candidates, they vote for themselves, not for the people. I' m pretty well off myself and don' t need anything that liberals stand for, but I' m not an asshat and want to improve the country, not lower my taxes. Boo hoo hoo I own 2 homes and drive luxury cars, lower my taxes please *Cry cry* Get the *** out of here. " Screw proper healthcare, my sons going to be a doctor and him being rich is more important than saving your cancer infested uninsured mother, am I right?"

You are trash, end your life please.

And don' t even bother replying to this, everyone here is liberal and you' re only going to make yourself look bad by exposing your insane/inhumane conservative ideologies.

Conservative f.ucks!

ORIGINAL: emofag

Please, you' re a known religions nut.

I love how it' s all done in the name of morality and religion, here' s a tip conservatives : god doesn' t give a *** how many times you cheat on your wife or wether or not you' re a homo, he cares about more pressing issues like letting people die on the streets for lack of healthcare and genociding ourselves in pointless wars.

Conservatives are trash, they are cowards. Conservatives in liberal controlled countries are too scared to put out their greedy agendas, the problem with the US is people like to take it up the ass, if people had the balls to go out there and burn the white house we would never see another conservative party in office, conservatives don' t represent the people, period.

And of course you aren' t impressed with any conservatives running, no one is.

Bill Clinton > George Bush
Bill Clinton > Bob Dole
Al Gore > George W
Kerry > George W
Obama/Hillary > McCain

And I' m not talking about the left side being better candidates for the people, I' m talking about them not being complete ***ing morons.

Conservatives don' t give a *** about the candidates, they vote for themselves, not for the people. I' m pretty well off myself and don' t need anything that liberals stand for, but I' m not an asshat and want to improve the country, not lower my taxes. Boo hoo hoo I own 2 homes and drive luxury cars, lower my taxes please *Cry cry* Get the *** out of here. " Screw proper healthcare, my sons going to be a doctor and him being rich is more important than saving your cancer infested uninsured mother, am I right?"

You are trash, end your life please.

And don' t even bother replying to this, everyone here is liberal and you' re only going to make yourself look bad by exposing your insane/inhumane conservative ideologies.

Lol. Even more ignorance.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

If by dirt you mean exposing that a guy cheats on his wife just like millions of other people do, sure.

Forget Bill. Hillary is the scary one. The amount of times she' s been caught in coverups, half-truths and outright lies makes my head spin.

Forget Bill. Hillary is the scary one. The amount of times she' s been caught in coverups, half-truths and outright lies makes my head spin.

Yeah Hilary is a snake, Obama is the only half decent option at this point. But lets be honest here. Do you guys really think America will elect a black or female president? I don' t think so, lets be realistic. The only canidate you guys have is McCain, depressing isn' t it?

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

Forget Bill. Hillary is the scary one. The amount of times she' s been caught in coverups, half-truths and outright lies makes my head spin.

Yeah Hilary is a snake, Obama is the only half decent option at this point. But lets be honest here. Do you guys really think America will elect a black or female president? I don' t think so, lets be realistic. The only canidate you guys have is McCain, depressing isn' t it?

It is depressing. I' m not that big of a fan of Obama though... he just seems to be the trendy pick, the cool person to vote for. It' s a f*cking pathetic election year.

XBL Gamertag: Rampage99

" Basically, pollute the air all you want, your just speeding up the inevitable. Our future generations are f*cked as it is and there' s really nothing we can do about it. Have a nice day "

Obama is basically retarded when it comes to economics. There is no way in hell I would vote for him. He' s really just a good politician. He has barely any experience and he gives all sorts of dreamy speeches like he is going to change everything but in reality he is full of crap and just another politician.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

More importantly school should never teach opinion, schools should be like the news, neutral and purely objective backed up with proven facts. The argument of what harm can teaching religion do is ridiculous. The answer is probably nothing to an individual, but school is expensive cost for the country, it' s not a resource you waste.

I agree with your point there but using the news as an example is not the best one. The news and media in general have many underlying agendas and will place sensationalism above fact anyday. To get purely objective information is hard, mainly limited to peer reviewed journal articles. Even those can sometimes have bias in them.

Do you guys really think America will elect a black or female president? I don' t think so, lets be realistic. The only canidate you guys have is McCain, depressing isn' t it?

The Republicans are in for a big beating this year. They' ve already lost three special elections for the House of Representatives in formerly-Republican strongholds over the last several months. They stand to lose upwards of 20 more House of Representatives seats, a dozen Senate seats and the presidency. And they have no one to blame but themselves. McCain is already trailing in polls versus either Obama or Clinton. They are getting taken out behind the woodshed this year and it' ll take them a generation to recover from it. Good riddance.

Let the hate flow through you.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

I love how the democrats wait for the year where they would be pretty much guaranteed to win, but then pick a woman/black guy to run for office.

I love how the democrats wait for the year where they would be pretty much guaranteed to win, but then pick a woman/black guy to run for office.

I guess either wins could be seen as important. I think it would be well if a woman or a black guy won.

Im not much for McCain, or just in general republicans.

Let the hate flow through you.

Hate, no... shadenfreude, definitely!