Evolution vs. Creationism

[AKA2D '91]

1. What are your thoughts on this subject?
2. Should students learn both concepts?


http://www.cnn.com/2002/EDUCATION/09...ion/index.html

FACT BOX
New policy
"It is the educational philosophy of the Cobb County School District to provide a broad based curriculum; therefore, the Cobb County School District believes that discussion of disputed views of academic subjects is a necessary element of providing a balanced education, including the study of the origin of the species. This subject remains an area of intense interest, research and discussion among scholars. As a result, the study of this subject shall be handled in accordance with this policy and with objectivity and good judgment on the part of teachers, taking into account the age and maturity level of their students.

"The purpose of this policy is to foster critical thinking among students, to allow academic freedom consistent with legal requirements, to promote tolerance and acceptance of diversity of opinion, and to ensure a posture of neutrality toward religion. It is the intent of the Cobb County Board of Education that this policy not be interpreted to restrict the teaching of evolution; to promote or require the teaching of creationism; or to discriminate for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, religion in general or non-religion."

Source: Cobb County Board of Education

[RedefinedDiva]

I think that the subject should not be touched. It is a sensitive subject. I fault the parents. Every day there is a lawsuit about something that they feel should not be taught in class. There is no way to teach creationism vs. evolution without getting into religion. Not everone believes the same things. Some students are bound to get offended and/or hurt and then, the parents are all in the faces of teachers for "forcing" views on their children. I'm glad that I don't even get that deep into science in my class.

[exquizit]

When I first went back to school I had to take History with a Professor who covered both ideas. He doesn't believe in God and loved to spark a huge discussion in class.I believe something like that is ok for college classes because it makes you think and learn how to conduct yourself in a debate about a personal topic that brings strong emotions to the table. As for anything beyond college, I don't feel it should be touched.

[straightBOS]

Teach them both.

There is as much evidence of evolution as there is Creationism.
The idea of the missing link is a much a theory as the idea of a world being created in 7 days. If my child has to be taught and tested on an unfounded theory that has never been proven then why not teach any old theory.

Until we find the non-existent "Monkey-man" aren't we selling ourselves the same lie scientists believe Creationists adhere to? Science fiction should not be considered a valid substitute for facts and actual data. But, because we treat is as such, we open the door for all theories to enter.

[Love_Spell_6]

I say teach it

High school children are much more advanced than we give them credit for. What would be the benefit of not teaching it? That's society' s problem now, trying to shield things from our children. Schools should put the info out there, and the other beliefs can be enforced at home.

[Little32]

I have seen some recent reports on this matter and here is a brief rant about creationism versus evolution.

In science classes, the teachers are teaching science. Granted science is often a fiction itself, these teachers should not be required to teach religion.

Also, if you teach creationism does that mean that you will have to learn the creation beliefs of multiple groups so that the separtation of church and state is maintained? I don't hear anybody (in general) protesting about equal time for the teaching of Buddhist, Hindu, Native American beliefs about creation.

I think that at best it should be introduced as a theory.

[UrbanizdSkillz]

I believe that if it is a science class, then science should be taught. I believe that Creationism should be left out of the discussion unless it is a religion based class. I am very firm in my belief in God but I believe that there is a time and a place for everything. If you as a parent wish to instill in your child creationism in the form of ANY religion, you should do that OUTSIDE of the classroom. I say this because I know that when it is brought up in class, I am very emotional about it because I know that God created the world and at face value, the story of creation is highly unlikely and it would take deep study within a THEOLOGY class to effectively teach creationism. If I am in a science class, then scientific theories should be taught on an UNBIASED(both Christians and Non-Christians alike) basis.

[AKA_Monet]

Over on this thread, we are have an entralling discussion of what is happening in Kansas:

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=&pagenumber=1

[RACooper]

Ideally all theories should be dealt with in classes, however context must also be given to the topics being discussed - ie. the credibilty of each theory shoulld determine the weight it is given... so on that regard Evolution so be the primary theory taught; with others (Creationism, Aliens, Atlantis, etc) being breifly touched on as "alternate" theories.

Originally posted by straightBOS
Until we find the non-existent "Monkey-man" aren't we selling ourselves the same lie scientists believe Creationists adhere to? Science fiction should not be considered a valid substitute for facts and actual data. But, because we treat is as such, we open the door for all theories to enter.

As for the "Missing Link" or "Monkey Man" that is a term from the 19th century... and a term no longer used (partly because it's no longer missing).

As for the "non-existant Monkey Man" I would direct you to look into Orrorin tugenensis a find exhibiting both Hominid and Primate traits... and has been dated to roughly 6MYA

However since there is still some debat in the scientific community about the morphology of the Orrorin tugenensis specimens... I would also direct your attention to the wealth of information and finds of the Australopthecus genus.

[squirrely girl]

we just had a long ass debate over this in my ethics class today with a ton of people voicing some very emotional opinions. i think i've got to side with the people who say 'teach both' - kids aren't stupid and i think that by presenting multiple sides to an issue, nobody is left out and people get to see the facts and make their own opinions.

- marissa

[SummerChild]

I agree. I am all for challenging students but I just don't think that there is a way to handle these subjects w/out getting into religion and because beliefs are so diverse, the focus of critical thinking would probably be lost by the students focusing on their beliefs of the *content* of either principle, which isn't the point at all.
SC

Originally posted by RedefinedDiva
I think that the subject should not be touched. It is a sensitive subject. I fault the parents. Every day there is a lawsuit about something that they feel should not be taught in class. There is no way to teach creationism vs. evolution without getting into religion. Not everone believes the same things. Some students are bound to get offended and/or hurt and then, the parents are all in the faces of teachers for "forcing" views on their children. I'm glad that I don't even get that deep into science in my class.

[James]

What do we mean by teach both ? Can't we sum up Creationism in a paragraph?

"And God Created the Heavens and Earth and all the things therin and on the 7th day he rested?"

Test on Friday?

Evolution requires a bit more effort because the theory is more developed, or at least longe,r and requires more background information.

I think all my basic science classes covered Creationism at least within the context of history.