More Evolution, Religion and Society
I've been giving more thought to this class I'll be helping to teach as the professor has been discussing it with me and the other AI recently. I'm impressed with how dedicated she is to good paedagogy. Most interesting is this anonymous survey she's planning to give out first class:
1. In high school, I was taught evolutionary biology
(a) not at all
(b) for less than 1 week
(c) for about 1 week
(d) for more than 1 week
2. In high school, I was taught some form of creationism alongside evolution in my biology class
(a) true
(b) false
(c) true, but the creationism was taught only as a false theory
3. To what extent are religious beliefs about the origins of life compatible with evolutionary science, which concerns the diversity of life on earth (the tree of life)?
(a) compatible
(b) not sure
(c) incompatible
4. Circle the answer that best completes this statement:
“The amount and quality of the evidence supporting evolutionary science is ____”
(a) excellent
(b) good
(c) fair
(d) poor
(e) nonexistent
5. Circle the answer that best completes this statement:
“The amount and quality of the evidence supporting the supernatural creation of separate species is ____”
(a) excellent
(b) good
(c) fair
(d) poor
(e) nonexistent
6. This question asks you about whether evolution should be taught in high school. Please circle the view that most closely corresponds to your own.
(a)Evolution is as wellsupported as most other science we are taught in high school
(b)There are serious problems with evolutionary science, but we should be taught it anyway
(c)There are such serious problems with evolutionary science that it should not be taught in high school
I freaked out when I saw #2. I forgot that all the unsuccessful attempts to get creationism into schools has been in public schools, there are probably plenty of religious private schools already teaching it. (Which means that there should probably be a fourth option "True, but evolution was only taught as a false theory". I dare not suggest such a response!) Apparently, in past years the class has been divided roughly 50/50 between evolution and creation. I find that so hard to fathom coming from people looking for an education, which is why I suggested question #3, in the hope of bringing a little moderation and dialogue to the debate.
Still, this whole thing worries me plenty. That's not to say I'm not looking forward to it, really I am! It's just a little unsure of how to deal with fundamentalists; I think I understand Christianity quite well but there's something about fundamentalism that I just find it difficult to empathise with. I think I'll have to try to follow Lisa's lead. She says that she likes to be completely upfront with the students, she even makes a point of telling them that, even though she originally trained as a biologist, her brother is a creationist and she respects that perspective.
When I first came here (1 year ago now) the orientation people emphasised that culture shock occurs. I haven't really had too much, almost none so far. But being told that it's ok to feel that way is something I've remembered, like I'm reserving the right not to understand. I think this is what I've been saving it for.
Oh, and I had a look at the class list today. I have two classes of 29 students, one of whom is surnamed "Bridgewater"!
posted by Nick @ 3:40 pm
4 comments
4 Comments:
Hmm...I am quite happy to stick to subjects so awe inspiringly dull that no one actually cares about the way, the truth and the light of the matter, as long as it works.
Yep, my advice is stick to boring stuff. Watch peoples eyes glaze over about it all, including students. Them especially!
Why has no one put the Manning equation on the front page of a newspaper, disputing its empirical roots? And the Bernoulli vs. Euler debate will keep raging, but it will never make you any enemies in class, whatever your view.
That's the thing, I do have teaching experience, just not experience teaching philosophy. I've taught tons of chemistry (theory and practice) as well as physics and maths but all these things are obviously right. If a student wants to argue that the instructions are wrong all you need to do is give his test tube a flick to demonstrate that it wasn't mixed properly. Or, the worst case scenario, occasionally you have to say, "I have no idea what you've done wrong. Try it again with fresh reagents." But teaching evolution will be more fun than Tollens' Test even!
The only thing that I actually fear is that one of the creationists might bring one of those propaganda leaflets that just make shit up. I can't argue against them when they're making up evidence.
Yep, I know what you guys mean. My answers to students' questions generally fall into these categories:
1) Yes, that's right
2) No, that's wrong
3) Yes, that's right, but it might've been easier to do it this way
Of course, Darwinian evolution is probably right, and if it isn't, it just needs tweaking. The thing is it requires abandoning long held mis-conceptions about where we come from, which is the problem. And I don't think anyone will care if you tell them 'denitrification is not the work of a divine creator, but a natural chemical process'.
Try that with Darwinian evolution and, well, for some strange reason, people get a bit iffy about their rights.
Post a Comment
<< Home