Board members say it is unlikely that intelligent design will even be considered. More likely is a fight over whether to keep an existing requirement that teachers present both the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories, including evolution.
Barbara Cargill, R-The Woodlands, favors keeping that standard.
"Part of preparing our students for postsecondary success includes providing them with a well-rounded education," she said. "Having the freedom to discuss the scientific strengths and weaknesses of a theory such as evolution teaches students how to evaluate both sides of an issue. It prompts them to be critical thinkers, and it also helps them to respect the opinions of other students even if they disagree."
Bradley said he does not foresee any successful effort to remove the "strengths and weaknesses" requirement from the science standards.
"Evolution is not fact. Evolution is a theory and, as such, cannot be proven," he said. "Students need to be able to jump to their own conclusions."That's funny. The phrase "jump to conclusions" is often used of people who come to the wrong conclusion because they don't look at all of the evidence. Freudian slip? Every time a board of education member gets up and says "evolution is just a theory" it reminds me of how badly educated our education board members really are. Is this the kind of science education they are getting out of school? If so, how can we hope to reverse the process?