Is Science Class the Best Place to Expose Creationism?

In a follow-up editorial to the goings on involving Arroyo Grande Technical School's Brandon Pettenger and his attempts to inject at least some degree of young earth creationism into the science curriculum, Joe Tarica opines that, perhaps, science class is the best place to bring up young earth creationism:

We can examine the bones of dinosaurs and early human ancestors to prove the two never walked the Earth together, despite what the Creation Museum claims.

We could explore just why it would be obviously impossible for Noah to get two of every creature into an ark to avoid the great flood. He was in the Middle East, for crying out loud. How would he get his hands on polar bears, penguins and all the many other species of animals that live in unique habitats half a world away?

We can study astronomy, light and matter to understand the formation of the universe, which most certainly did not occur a mere 6,000 years ago.

A huge assumption is being made here: that the science teachers that bring up creationism will actually honestly address the science. As we have seen in a number of instances all over the country, not all science teachers do this. In fact, the reason this ruckus started in the first place is that there is evidence that Pettenger didn't. if Pettenger favorably brought up a blog like Answers in Genesis (none of the stories mention which blogs he asked his students to summarize) then the train has already left the tracks.  Further, he wouldn't be alone.

A poll that was done some years back revealed that 29% of special science teachers in England who were polled approved of the teaching of creationism alongside evolution.  A similar poll done in the United States, in 2011, showed that 13% of high school biology teachers who responded “explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design by spending at least one hour of class time presenting it in a positive light” and that only 28% of high school biology teachers actually followed NRC guidelines on teaching of evolution because it is so controversial.  If you opened the door to the examination of creationism in science class, how would you control for these things?  I think it would be very hard to do so.

Arroyo Grande Technical School: Tribune Editorial

The editors of the Tribune in San Luis Obispo have written an editorial on the scuffle involving Brandon Pettenger and his inclusion of creationism as a discussion issue in class.  From the Tribune:

We don’t mind if science teachers want to briefly stray from the state-sanctioned curriculum to, say, discuss a shark attack off our coast, or engage in lively debate over nuclear power, or even to briefly vent about not being able to watch Dodgers games on TV.

After all, the best teachers are those who make their classes relevant, timely and interesting. If that means occasionally deviating from the lesson plan, so be it. But to spend three days showing a filmed debate on creationism vs. evolution — as Arroyo Grande High School science teacher Brandon Pettenger reportedly did — and to assign students to read and summarize a pro-creationist blog is not OK. It violates state teaching standards and the Lucia Mar Unified School District’s board policy. It also takes advantage of a position of authority to foist religious instruction on a captive audience, even if it’s done under the guise of giving students the information they need in order to decide for themselves.

It would be helpful if there was more information about which blog they summarized. If the blog is BioLogos, then the science is sound, even if it is within the context of Christian theology. If the blog was Answers in Genesis, then there is no science and the teacher did a massive disservice to the students. Once again, though, much is unclear. Did he have them summarize the scientific failings of the blog? Was it in the context of a discussion of “bad science?” Would be nice to know.

Meanwhile, Out in Sunny California...

In the public school district of San Luis Obispo, a teacher has been reprimanded for bringing up creationism in a science class.  Kaytlyn Leslie writes for the Tribune:

An Arroyo Grande High School teacher violated state teaching standards by requiring students to discuss creationism as a viable alternative to evolution during life science classes, district officials said.

The teacher, Brandon Pettenger, seems to be no longer teaching the life sciences class, although Lucia Mar Unified School District officials declined to confirm that.

So what was he teaching? Not clear. The story continues:

After investigating complaints about Pettenger, Fiorentino said his department found no evidence that Pettenger was letting his personal religious beliefs influence his teachings.

“I don’t believe that the intent was something religious on the teacher’s part,” Fiorentino said. “Based on my investigation, it was just a way to motivate those 11th-graders into discussion.”

He said this appeared to be the first time any discussion of creationism had been a part of Pettenger’s curriculum.

If this is the case, there is no justification for removing him from the life sciences class. Whatever the rest of the world thinks, groups like AiG think they are doing science, even if none of it stands up to scrutiny. That needs to be addressed on one level because the kids are going to encounter it at some point and need to be aware of it.