The timing may be coincidental, but it just so happens that the next Kansas state board of education meetings will begin on ‘Darwin Day’ February 12!
The timing may be
coincidental, but it just so happens that the next Kansas (USA) state
board of education meetings-during which newly drafted science standards
containing many additional references to evolution will be discussed (and
probably approved)-will begin on “Darwin Day,” February 12!
AiG has obtained a draft
of the new “Science Education Standards” as composed by a state writing
committee. The group has worked since the fall in an effort to insert more evolutionary
teaching into the science classes of the public schools in Kansas.
This was in (over)reaction
to a mild de-emphasis of evolution in the standards approved by the former board
of education on August 1999. As we have reported on this Web site (see list
of articles below), it was mistakenly thought by many Kansans (through a
clever disinformation campaign by some evolutionists) that evolution had been
omitted entirely from the science curriculum-which never happened. As a
part of this overreaction, Kansans voted in new school board members who vowed
to bring more evolutionary content to the state standards.
In the draft of the new
standards that AiG has reviewed, the proposed changes are substantial and very
- In the former standards
approved, it was written that “science is the human activity of seeking
logical explanations for what we observe in the world around us” (p.
4). The committee has removed the word “logical” and substituted
the word “natural.” Some observers believe this is a direct challenge
to creationists who believe that a “supernatural” element should
not necessarily be excluded from inquiry.
- A paragraph has been
added on how to deal with students (probably creationists) who raise questions
in science classes that are outside the domain of science. Of course, evolutionists
define science in their own exclusive terms, saying that anything supernatural
falls outside science, thus removing the supernatural from any discussion
- A whole new paragraph
entitled “Patterns of cumulative change” has been added to give
more of an evolutionary emphasis to the standards. It states in part: “Accumulated
changes through time, some gradual and some sporadic, account for the present
form and function of objects, organisms, and natural systems…. An example
of cumulative change is the biological theory of evolution, which explains
the process of descent with modification of organisms from common ancestors”
- Also, the phrase “biological
evolution, gradual changes of characteristics of organisms over many generations”
has been added (p. 38). Interestingly, in the same paragraph, the term “micro-evolution’*
(which creationists accept - see our Q&A sections on speciation,
natural selection and mutations)
has been deleted.
- The evolutionary timeline
of millions of years has been added: (a reference to 100 million years; p.
- In the section of “Unifying
concepts and processes” that should be known by students in grades 9-12,
biological evolution has been added to the list of major topics that students
should learn in life science. A new phrase (p. 58) “the theory of evolution
is both the history of descent, with modifications of different lineages of
organisms from common ancestors” (to be understood by students in grades
9-12) has been added. A variation of this phrase is also found on p. 72.
- On p. 59, the overarching
false statement “evolution by natural selection is a broad, unifying
theoretical framework in biology” has been inserted.
The new board members sworn
in last month are immediately following up their promise to make the bankrupt
evolutionary worldview even more prominent in Kansas’s public school classes.
We trust, however, that educators in Kansas who oppose such an attempted indoctrination
will realize that the new standards now under review are merely suggestions
or guidelines for teachers to follow. In addition, teachers should possess enough
academic freedom to teach the controversial topic of origins science as they
see fit and, at the least, expose young people to the serious flaws in molecules-to-man