Introducing preservice teachers to issues surrounding evolution and creationism via a mock trial
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Social studies and science education professors collaborated to introduce preservice teachers to the evolution vs. creationism debate via a mock trial. A hypothetical situation was created in which a sixth-grade teacher was fired for not balancing evolution and creationism in his teaching. Preservice teachers represented either the fired teacher or the school board in a trial that would reinstate the educator and affirm the right of the teacher to determine lesson content, or to uphold the decision for the teacher’s dismissal. Results suggested that the mock trial slightly increased students’ understanding of evolutionary principles. Students also reported themselves to be more aware of the difficulties of balancing evolution and creationism in science pedagogy.
- Clark, R. W. (1988). Who decides? The basic policy issue. InCritical issues in curriculum, 87th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I (pp. 179–187). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education. (Distributed by the University of Chicago Press.)
- Counter-attack (Creationists fight against teaching of evolution). (1996, August 17).The Economist, 340(7979), 26.
- Edwards v. Aguilard. (1987). 482 U.S. 578, 55U.S. Law Week 4860, 107 S. Ct. 2573, 96 L. Ed 2d 510.
- Futuyma, D. J. (1995).Science on trial. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, Inc., Publishers.
- Ghiselli, E. E., Campbell, J. P., & Zedeck, S. (1981).Measurement theory for the behavioral sciences. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
- Gould, S. J. (1999, August 23). Dorothy, it’s really Oz.TIME, 59.
- Howe, A. C., & Jones, L. (1998).Engaging children in science. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
- Jacobs, H. H. (Ed.). (1989).Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Washington, DC: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
- Koballa, T. R., & Tippins, D. J. (2000).Cases in middle and secondary science education. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
- Matsumura, M. (1998). How to fight creationist/evolutionist battles: Sometimes you have to look for common ground.Free Inquiry, 18(2), 37.
- McArthur, B. (1994). The new creationists.American Heritage, 45, 106.
- McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education. (1982). 529 F. Supp. 1255, 50U.S. Law Week 2412.
- Meeks, F. E. (1997, November 16). Moral and ethical issues for the new millennium.USA Today, 126(2630), 62.
- Moore, J. A. (1984). Science as a way of knowing: Evolutionary biology.American Zoologist, 24, 467–534.
- National Academy of Science. (1984).Science and creationism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Academy of Science. (1998).Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Nelkin, D. (1977).Science textbook controversies and the politics of equal time. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Nord, W. A. (1999). Science, religion, and education.Phi Delta Kappan, 81(1), 28–33.
- Skehan, J. W., & Nelson, C. E. (2000).The creation controversy and the science classroom. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
- Spalt, S. W. (1996). Coping with controversy: The professional epidemic of the nineties.Journal of School Health, 23(9), 339. CrossRef
- SPSS, Inc. (1994).6.1 SPSS base system user’s guide, Macintosh version. Chicago: Author.
- Introducing preservice teachers to issues surrounding evolution and creationism via a mock trial
Journal of Elementary Science Education
Volume 14, Issue 2 , pp 11-24
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links