Mick Hartley

Before the Times got hold of the story today – "Creationism should be taught in science classes as a legitimate point of view, according to the Royal Society" - it started out as a post at the Guardian's science blog:

So how might one teach evolution in science lessons, say to 14 to 16-year-olds? Many scientists, and some science educators, fear that consideration of creationism or intelligent design in a science classroom legitimises them.

For example, the excellent book Science, Evolution, and Creationism published by the US National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine, asserts: "The ideas offered by intelligent design creationists are not the products of scientific reasoning. Discussing these ideas in science classes would not be appropriate given their lack of scientific support."

I agree with the first sentence but disagree with the second. Just because something lacks scientific support doesn't seem to me a sufficient reason to omit it from a science lesson.

The writer, Michael Reiss, as well as being a reverend (well goodness me) is also director of education at the Royal Society, and professor of science education at London University's Institute of Education. If he truly believes that lack of scientific support isn't a sufficient reason to omit something from a science lesson, then you have to wonder quite how he got there.

 I do believe in taking seriously and respectfully the concerns of students who do not accept the theory of evolution, while still introducing them to it. While it is unlikely that this will help students who have a conflict between science and their religious beliefs to resolve the conflict, good science teaching can help students to manage it – and to learn more science.

Creationism can profitably be seen not as a simple misconception that careful science teaching can correct. Rather, a student who believes in creationism has a non-scientific way of seeing the world, and one very rarely changes one's world view as a result of a 50-minute lesson, however well taught.

All of which places some strain on the poor biology teachers, who are supposed to be "respectful" towards pupils who simply refuse to accept scientific findings.