NCSE Evolution and Climate Education Update for 2013/03/01

(by NCSE Deputy Director Glenn Branch)

Dear Friends of NCSE,

A new issue of Reports of the NCSE. A graveyard of antiscience bills:
Indiana, Arizona, and Oklahoma. And a failed proposal to amend the
Virginia state constitution in a way that apparently would allow
students to opt out of learning about evolution.

RNCSE 33:1 NOW ON-LINE

NCSE is pleased to announce that the latest issue of Reports of the
National Center for Science Education is now available on-line. The
issue -- volume 33, number 1 -- features Alexander John Werth's "An
Evolutionary Focus Improves Students' Understanding of All Biology."
For his regular People and Places column, Randy Moore discusses
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. And Brian Swartz contributes a
review essay of Robert Asher's Evolution and Belief: Confessions of a
Religious Paleontologist.

Plus a host of reviews of books on various and sundry topics: Alan D.
Gishlick reviews Eileen Campbell's book for young readers Charlie and
Kiwi, John M. Lynch reviews Joel S. Schwartz's Darwin's Disciple,
Andrew J. Petto reviews Diana E. Hess's Controversy in the Classroom,
Michael Roos reviews George Levine's Darwin the Writer, Jeffrey
Shallit reviews Gregory Chaitin's Proving Darwin, and the late Niall
Shanks reviewes a set of audio lectures on Evolution and Medicine,
edited by Randolph M. Nesse.

All of these articles, features, and reviews are freely available in
PDF form from http://reports.ncse.com. Members of NCSE will shortly be 
receiving in the mail the print supplement to Reports 32:6, which, in
addition to summaries of the on-line material, contains news from the
membership, a regular column in which NCSE staffers offer personal
reports on what they've been doing to defend the teaching of
evolution, a regular column interviewing NCSE's favorite people, and
more besides. (Not a member? Join today!)

For the table of contents for RNCSE 33:1, visit:
http://reports.ncse.com/index.php/rncse/issue/current/showToc 

For information about joining NCSE, visit:
http://ncse.com/join 

ANTISCIENCE BILL IN INDIANA DIES

Indiana's House Bill 1283 died on February 25, 2013, when the deadline
for House bills to have their third reading in the House passed. The
fate of the bill was not unexpected: its sponsor Jeff Thompson
(R-District 28) told the Lafayette Journal and Courier (February 3,
2013) that he thought that it would not receive a hearing in the House
Education Committee, and a spokesperson for the committee's chair said
that it would not receive a hearing due to the volume of bills and the
limited time to address them.

Claiming that "some subjects, including, but not limited to, science,
history, and health, have produced differing conclusions and theories
on some topics," HB 1283 would have allowed teachers "to help students
understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the
strengths and weaknesses of conclusions and theories being presented
in a course being taught by the teacher" and prohibited state and
local education authorities from prohibiting them from doing so.

As NCSE previously reported, although evolution is not specifically
mentioned in the bill, previous legislation supported by its sponsor
and the similarity of its language to the language of previous
antievolution bills together make it amply clear that the teaching of
evolution in the state's public schools is a main target. In its
coverage of the bill, the Journal and Courier agreed, discussing the
antievolution legislation in Louisiana in 2008 and in Tennessee in
2012 and 1925 by way of background.

HB 1283 was the only antiscience bill in Indiana in 2013. State
senator Dennis Kruse (R-District 14) disclosed in November 2012 that
he intended to introduce a bill that would encourage teachers to
misrepresent evolution as scientifically controversial. He
subsequently changed his plan, saying that he would introduce a bill
that would allow students to challenge teachers to provide evidence to
support any claims the students found suspect. Apparently, however, no
such bill was introduced.

For the text of Indiana's House Bill 1283, visit:
http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2013/IN/IN1283.1.html 

For the story in the Lafayette Journal and Courier, visit:
http://www.jconline.com/article/20130202/COLUMNISTS30/302020045/ 

And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Indiana, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/indiana 

ANTISCIENCE BILL IN ARIZONA DIES

Arizona's Senate Bill 1213 died on February 22, 2013, when the
deadline for Senate bills to be heard in their Senate committees
passed. A typical instance of the "academic freedom" strategy for
undermining the integrity of science education, SB 1213 specifically
targeted "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global
warming[,] and human cloning" as supposedly controversial. Unusually,
however, a sponsor of the bill, Judy Burges (R-District 22), told the
Arizona Star (February 5, 2013) that climate science was her primary
concern, complaining of imbalance in the presentation of climate
change in the public schools.

But Andrew Morrill, the president of the Arizona Education
Association, told the Star that there was no need for the legislation.
"The curriculum for teaching science is already balanced," he said.
"If there's overwhelming evidence on one side, then within the science
curriculum there's going to be a look at that evidence." He added,
"The controversy is at the political level, not the scientific one."
(Morrill misattributed the language of the bill to the American
Legislative Exchange Council; it is, rather, based on the language
circulated by the Discovery Institute.)

The prime sponsors of SB 1213 were Judy Burges (R-District 22) and
Chester Crandell (R-District 6), with Rick Murphy (R-District 21),
Steve Pierce (R-District 1), Don Shooter (R-District 13), and Steve
Yarbrough (R-District 17) as cosponsors. The bill was the first
antiscience bill introduced in Arizona in at least the past decade;
the last statewide controversy over the teaching of evolution was
evidently in 2004, when the Arizona state board of education was
lobbied, in the end unsuccessfully, to include a directive for
teachers to discuss "intelligent design" in the state science
education standards.

For the text of Arizona's Senate Bill 1213, visit:
http://www.azleg.gov//FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/51leg/1r/bills/sb1213p.htm&Session_ID=110 

For the article in the Arizona Star, visit:
http://azstarnet.com/news/science/environment/az-bill-would-let-teachers-dismiss-global-warming/article_4bec9422-44b6-5b49-b0da-78513c959433.html 

And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Arizona, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/arizona 

ANTISCIENCE BILL IN OKLAHOMA DIES

Senate Bill 758, the so-called Oklahoma Science Education Act, which
would have undermined the integrity of science education in the Sooner
State, is dead. February 25, 2013, was the deadline for Senate bills
to pass their committees, but the Senate Education Committee adjourned
its February 25, 2013, meeting without considering it. Still active in
the Oklahoma legislature is House Bill 1674, styled the Scientific
Education and Academic Freedom Act, which differs from SB 758
primarily in mentioning "biological evolution, the chemical origins of
life, global warming, and human cloning" as supposedly controversial
topics. HB 1674 passed the House Education Committee on a 9-8 vote on
February 19, 2013.

As usual in Oklahoma, resistance to the antievolution bills was
spearheaded by the grassroots organization Oklahomans for Excellence
in Science Education, whose board of governors includes a former
member of NCSE's board of directors, Frank J. Sonleitner, and a
recipient of NCSE's Friend of Darwin award, Victor H. Hutchison. "OESE
has been a model of effective advocacy for supporting good science
education," commented NCSE's executive director Eugenie C. Scott.
"Unlike evolution and climate change, cloning isn't something that
NCSE is really interested in," she joked, "but we might make an
exception if we could clone people like Vic and Frank and all of the
hardworking and vigilant folks they work with in Oklahoma."

SB 758 would, if enacted, have required state and local educational
authorities to "assist teachers to find more effective ways to present
the science curriculum where it addresses scientific controversies"
and permitted teachers to "help students understand, analyze,
critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths
and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent to
the course being taught." Unusually but not uniquely, no scientific
topics were specifically identified as controversial, but the fact
that the sole sponsor of SB 758 was Josh Brecheen (R-District 6), who
introduced specifically antievolution legislation in the two previous
legislative sessions, is telling.

In late 2010, Brecheen announced his intention to file antievolution
legislation in a column in the Durant Daily Democrat (December 19,
2010): "Renowned scientists now asserting that evolution is laden with
errors are being ignored. ... Using your tax dollars to teach the
unknown, without disclosing the entire scientific findings[,] is
incomplete and unacceptable." In a subsequent column in the newspaper
(December 24, 2010), he indicated that his intention was to have
creationism presented as scientifically credible, writing, "I have
introduced legislation requiring every publically funded Oklahoma
school to teach the debate of creation vs. evolution using the known
science, even that which conflicts with Darwin's religion."

What Brecheen in fact introduced in 2011, Senate Bill 554, combined a
version of the now familiar "academic freedom" language -- referring
to "the scientific strengths [and] scientific weaknesses of
controversial topics ... [which] include but are not limited to
biological origins of life and biological evolution" -- with a
directive for the state board of education to adopt "standards and
curricula" that echo the flawed portions of the state science
standards adopted in Texas in 2009 with respect to the nature of
science and evolution. SB 554 died in committee. In 2012, Brecheen
took a new tack with Senate Bill 1742, modeled in part on the
so-called Louisiana Science Education Act; SB 1742 likewise died in
committee.

With SB 758, Brecheen seemed to be following the lead of Tennessee's
"monkey law" (as it was nicknamed by House Speaker Emeritus Jimmy
Naifeh), enacted (as Tenn. Code Ann. 49-6-1030) over the protests of
the state's scientific and educational communities in 2012. The major
difference is that SB 758 omitted the monkey law's statement of
legislative findings, which cites "biological evolution, the chemical
origins of life, global warming, and human cloning" as among the
topics that "can cause controversy" when taught in the science
classroom of the public schools. The history of Brecheen's legislative
efforts clearly demonstrates that it is evolution which was primarily
the target of the new bill, however.

For the text of Oklahoma's Senate Bill 758 and House Bill 1674
(documents), visit:
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf/2013-14%20int/sb/SB758%20int.doc 
http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf/2013-14%20int/hb/HB1674%20int.doc 

For the website of Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, visit:
http://www.oklascience.org/ 

And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Oklahoma, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/oklahoma 

A MISSOURI AMENDMENT IN VIRGINIA?

Would a proposed amendment to the Virginia state constitution have
undermined the teaching of evolution in the state's public schools?
Senate Joint Resolution 287 would have revised a portion of the state
constitution that concerns freedom of religion. Among the revisions
was the addition of a provision "that no student in public schools
shall be compelled to perform or participate in academic assignments
or educational presentations that violate his religious beliefs."

The summary of SJR 287 as introduced explains, "The proposed amendment
is based on a provision in the Missouri Constitution approved by the
Missouri voters August 7, 2012." The effect of the Missouri amendment
on evolution education there is worrisome, as NCSE previously
reported. Before it was adopted, The New York Times (August 6, 2012)
expressed editorial concern that the amendment "would allow students
who believe in creationism ... to opt out of assignments on
evolution."

Similarly, in Virginia, Americans United for Separation of Church and
State worried on its blog (January 30, 2013) that SJR 287 was aimed at
allowing creationist students "to drop out of biology class if an
assignment or presentation deals with evolution," and state senator
Janet D. Howell (D-District 32) likewise told the Washington Post
(January 29, 2013) that SJR 287 "makes it so a child can say, 'I don't
want to study evolution because I don't believe in it.'"

William M. Stanley Jr. (R-District 20), a cosponsor of the resolution,
told the Post, "They should still be able to recite Darwin's theory,"
explaining that creationist students would not be permitted to ignore
evolution in class, although they would not be penalized for rejecting
it. He was not, however, quoted as explaining why it would not violate
the provision in question to compel a student to study evolution if he
or she claimed that it violated their religious beliefs.

After SJR 287 was introduced, it was referred to the Senate Committee
on Privileges and Elections, which modified it slightly and reported
it back to the Senate on January 29, 2013. On February 5, 2013, at
Stanley's request, the Senate recommitted it back to the committee,
where it is effectively dead because February 5 was the deadline for
each house to complete work on its own legislation. The legislature is
scheduled to adjourn sine die on February 23, 2013.

The resolution was sponsored by Stanley and Charles W. Carrico Sr.
(R-District 40), with Mark L. Cole (R-District) serving as its patron
in the House. Even if the resolution had passed the Senate, it would
still have had further hurdles to jump: as the Post explained, "To
amend the state constitution, the resolution would have to pass the
General Assembly twice, with a general election for the House of
Delegates between the two legislative sessions, and then receive
approval from voters in a referendum."

For information about Virginia's Senate Joint Resolution 287 from the
state legislature, visit:
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?131+sum+SJ287 

For NCSE's report and The New York Times's editorial about the
Missouri amendment, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/2012/08/worry-from-missouri-007512 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/opinion/prayer-in-missouri.html 

For American United's blog post and the story in the Washington Post, visit:
https://www.au.org/blogs/wall-of-separation/constitutional-calamity-virginia-senate-committee-flunks-religious-liberty
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-politics/va-panel-oks-measure-to-allow-prayer-religious-activities-in-all-public-places/2013/01/29/674a7d04-6a6f-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html 

And for NCSE's previous coverage of events in Virginia, visit:
http://ncse.com/news/virginia 

Thanks for reading. And don't forget to visit NCSE's website --
http://ncse.com -- where you can always find the latest news on 
evolution and climate education and threats to them.

-- 
Sincerely,

Glenn Branch
Deputy Director
National Center for Science Education, Inc.
420 40th Street, Suite 2
Oakland, CA 94609-2509
510-601-7203 x305
fax: 510-601-7204
800-290-6006
branch@ncse.com 
http://ncse.com 

Read Reports of the NCSE on-line:
http://reports.ncse.com 

Subscribe to NCSE's free weekly e-newsletter:
http://groups.google.com/group/ncse-news 

NCSE is on Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter:
http://www.facebook.com/evolution.ncse 
http://www.youtube.com/NatCen4ScienceEd 
http://twitter.com/ncse 

NCSE's work is supported by its members. Join today!
http://ncse.com/join