Abstract
Current academic discussions of the public relationship toward, and broad-based rejection of, evolution are, as I argue, limited by the philosophical positions that underpin the dominant voices of science and science education. Reviewing past research concerning student, teacher, and community disposition toward evolution, there is clearly a lacking commitment toward enacting evolution education unqualified by religious deference in the USA. In this introductory chapter, I unpack crucial issues to understanding misunderstandings in evolution education.
The intellectual socialization of scientists and science educators does not necessarily include an education in understanding the rationales by which many people might not care much about their work. Demonstrative of the lengths some scientists have gone to advertise the overarching value of science for the lay public, they miss the larger domain of culture in which people operate and find significance in their lives. Science, in short, is but one of many competing values. Turning to the view that education is best described as a cultural process, my methodological rationale approaches analyzing evolution education with a different lens. How does a view through the entire educational structure, with an eye on the breakdowns of understanding between people, and their histories with the concept, give us a better grasp on how and why evolution education could come to be so stunted? Starting with the university as a good place to apprehend peoples’ understanding and relationship toward evolution, I situate this book by highlighting the relationship between regional master’s degree granting institutions and their prime role in generating the majority of teachers in the USA. I then detail how the content of the book expands from the university, back through student, faculty, and teacher histories, and into their communities and lives. This is an ethnographic story of people involved in evolution education, rich with the context and politics of how we variably understand each other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aerts, D., Apostel, L., De Moor, B., Hellemans, S., Maex, E., Van Belle, H., & Van Der Veken, J. (1994). Worldviews, from fragmentation towards integration. Brussels: VUB Press.
Affanato, R. E. (1986). A survey of biology teachers’ opinions about the teaching of evolution and/or the creation model in the United States in public and private schools. PhD Thesis, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Apple, M. W. (1993). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. New York: Routledge.
Bergman, J. (1979). The attitude of university students toward the teaching of creation and evolution in the schools. Origins, 6, 60–70.
Bernstein, B. B. (1971). Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language. Class, codes and control (Vol. 1). London: Routledge & K. Paul.
Bilica, K. L. (2001). Factors which influence Texas biology teachers’ decisions to emphasize fundamental concepts of evolution. PhD Thesis, Texas Tech University, Lubbock.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (Cambridge studies in social anthropology, Vol. 16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clough, E. E., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1985a). Children’s understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19(4), 304–310.
Clough, E. E., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1985b). How secondary students interpret instances of biological adaptation. Journal of Biological Education, 19(2), 125–130.
Cobern, W. W. (1996). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80(5), 579–610.
Cobern, W. W. (2000). The nature of science and the role of knowledge and belief. Science Education, 9, 3.
Dickerson, D. (2003). Understanding the relationship between science and faith, the nature of science, and controversial content understandings. PhD Thesis, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
Discovery Institute. (1999). The wedge. Discovery Institute: Center for renewal of science and culture. Retrieved from http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
Dreyfus, H. L. (1972). What computers can’t do; A critique of artificial reason. New York: Harper & Row.
Dreyfus, H. L. (1991). Being-in-the-world: A commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time, division I. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Eglin, P. G. (1984). Creationism vs. evolution: A study of the opinions of Georgia science teachers. PhD Thesis, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
Ervin, J. A. (2003). Effects of student ontological position on cognition of human origins. PhD Thesis, Ohio State University, Columbus.
Fensham, P. J. (2009). The link between policy and practice in science education: The role of research. Science Education, 93(6), 1076–1095.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.
Forrest, B. (2007). Understanding the intelligent design creationist movement: Its true nature and goals. Center for inquiry position paper. Retrieved from: http://www.centerforinquiry.net/uploads/attachments/intelligent-design.pdf
Forrest, B., & Gross, P. R. (2004). Creationism’s Trojan horse: The wedge of intelligent design. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fuerst, P. A. (1984). University student understanding of evolutionary biology’s place in the creation/evolution controversy. The Ohio Journal of Science, 84(5), 218–228.
Gauch, H. (2009). Science, worldviews and education. In M. Matthews (ed.), Science, worldviews and education. (Reprinted from the Journal Science & Education, Vol. 18, Nos. 6–7, Springer Verlag)
Gross, P. R., Goodenough, U., & Finn, C. E. (2005). The state of state science standards. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
Habermas, J. (1989). Theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon Press.
Hahn, D. (2005). Social, moral, and temporal qualities: Pre-service teachers’ considerations of evolution and creation. PhD Thesis, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Hallden, O. (1988). The evolution of the species: Pupil perspectives and school perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 10(5), 541–552.
Hassard, J. (2005). The art of teaching science inquiry and innovation in Middle School and High School. New York: Oxford University Press.
Heidegger, M. (1962 [1927]). Being and time. New York: Harper.
Ingersoll, R. (2006). Turnover among mathematics and science teachers in the U.S. In J. Rhoton & P. Shane (Eds.), Teaching science in the 21st century. Arlington: NSTA Press.
Jensen, J. M. (1999). Creating a continuum: An anthropology of postcompulsory education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 30(4), 446.
Jorstad, S. (2002). An analysis of factors influencing the teaching of evolution and creation by Arizona high school biology teachers. PhD Thesis, University of Arizona, Sun City.
Kierkegaard, S. (1962). The present age: And of the difference between a genius and an apostle. New York: Harper & Row.
Kincheloe, J. L., & Tobin, K. (2009). The much exaggerated death of positivism. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4(3), 513–528.
Kliebard, H. M. (1987). The struggle for the American curriculum, 1893–1958. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Kyzer, P. M. (2004). Three Southern high school biology teachers’ perspectives on teaching evolution: Sociocultural influences. PhD Thesis, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa.
Labaree, D. F. (1997). Public goods, private goods: The American struggle over educational goals. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 39–81.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Larson, E. J. (1985). Trial and error: The American controversy over creation and evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lederman, N. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–879). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lerner, L. S. (2000). Good science, bad science: Teaching evolution in the states. Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Levine, A. (2006). Educating school teachers. Washington, DC: Education Schools Project.
Lucas, A. M. (1971). The teaching of “adaptation”. Journal of Biological Education, 5(2), 86–90.
Lynd, R. S., & Lynd, H. M. (1929). Middletown. A study in contemporary American culture, etc. London: Constable & Co. printed in U.S.A.
Moore, R. (2007). The differing perceptions of teachers & students regarding teachers’ emphasis on evaluation in high school biology classrooms. The American Biology Teacher, 69(5), 268–271.
Morris, H. M. (1974). Scientific creationism. San Diego: Creation-Life.
Naugle, D. K. (2002). Worldview: The history of a concept. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans Pub.
Numbers, R. L. (1998). Darwinism comes to America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Numbers, R. L. (2006). The creationists: From scientific creationism to intelligent design. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Shankar, G., & Skoog, G. (1993). Emphasis given evolution and creationism by Texas high school biology teachers. Science Education, 77(2), 221–233.
Skoog, G. (1979). Topic of evolution in secondary school biology textbooks: 1900–1977. Science Education, 63(5), 621–640.
Skoog, G. (1984). The coverage of evolution in high school biology textbooks Published in the 1980s. Science Education, 68(2), 117–128.
Skoog, G. (2005). The coverage of human evolution in high school biology textbooks in the 20th Century and in current state science standards. Science Education, 14(3–5), 3–5.
Snow, C. P. (1962). The two cultures and the scientific revolution; the Rede lecture, 1959. Cambridge: University Press.
Spindler, G. D. (1987). Education and cultural process: Anthropological approaches. Prospect Heights: Waveland Press.
Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51(April), 273–286.
Toumey, C. P. (2004). Introduction. In S. Coleman & L. Carlin (Eds.), The cultures of creationism: Anti-evolution in English-speaking countries. Aldershot: Ashgate.
United States. (2005).United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania: Case no. 04cv2688 Judge Jones ; Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. plaintiffs v. Dover Area School District, et al., defendants. S.l: s.n..
Valencia, R. R. (2010). Dismantling contemporary deficit thinking: Educational thought and practice. London: Routledge.
Varenne, H. (2007). Difficult collective deliberations: Anthropological notes toward a theory of education. Teachers College Record, 109(7), 1559–1588.
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan.
Wrathall, M. A. (2006). How to read Heidegger. New York: W.W. Norton.
Wuthnow, R. (2005). America and the challenges of religious diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Wuthnow, R. (2009). No contradictions here: Science religion and the culture or all reasonable possibilities. In H. W. Attridge & R. L. Numbers (Eds.), The religion and science debate: Why does it continue? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Zimmerman, M. (1987). The evolution-creation controversy: Opinions of Ohio high school biology teachers. The Ohio Journal of Science, 87(4), 115–125.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Long, D.E. (2011). Evolution Education: A Lay of the Land. In: Evolution and Religion in American Education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1808-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1808-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1807-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1808-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)