n a 6-4 vote Wednesday, the Kansas Board of Education adopted new guidelines which set "the most anti-evolution science education standards in the country," according to the Washington Times newspaper. The action ignored the recommendations of a 27-member committee of scientists and teachers that had labored for more than a year grappling with questions of education, religion and public school instruction. As a result, the state's 304 school districts will now be given the option of presenting scientific evolution, creationism or other accounts in science instruction classes.

   Dr. John Staver, who chaired the scientific committee that drafted the original recommendations, called the board's decision "a travesty to science education," and added: "Kansas just embarrassed itself on the national stage." He predicted that as a result of the vote, students in Kansas "are going to be behind their peers," because of "incomplete" science education. Governor Bill Graves echoed that sentiment, telling the Kansas Journal-World newspaper, "This is a terrible, tragic, embarrassing solution to a problem that did not exist." And committee co-chair Loren Lukes said that the majority of the education board chose religious beliefs over the scientific literacy of students. "They have no basis for their changes other than their own belief system," Lutes declared.

   As yesterday's meeting approached, it was expected that religious conservatives would come close in rejecting the committee's recommended standards, and instead leave the door open for the teaching of creationism and other religious accounts of how life and the universe began. But it was the important swing vote of Harold Voth, considered a "moderate" on the board, which passed the controversial proposal. Others voting in favor of the measure were Steve Abrams of Arkansas City, Scott Hill of Abilene, Mary Brown of Wichita, John Bacon of Olathe, and board chairwoman Linda Holloway of Shawnee. Opponents were: Val DeFever of Independence, Bill Wagnon of Topeka, Janet Waught from Kansas City, and Sunny Rundell of Syracuse. According to the Journal-World, following the vote Ms. Brown "half-jokingly challenged (Gov.) Graves to a debate over whether he had apes in his family tree.

   Mr. Wagnon said that the board's decision would alter school curriculums throughout the state and "dumb down" science programs.

   The new BOE standards reflect a new tactic for those who oppose the teaching of scientific evolution, and instead often embrace Old Testament accounts on the origin of life and the universe. Biblical literalists no longer confine themselves to quoting scriptures, particularly the book of Genesis, when carrying the fight against evolution to school boards; instead, they frequently adopt the parlance of science, suggest that the evolutionary approach is "incomplete" or refuted by new evidence, and that students deserve to "hear all sides" when evolution is discussed. The tactic has worked in some states; Alabama, for instance, mandated that all public school science texts come with a warning label claiming that evolution is only a theory, and that there are other equally compelling accounts.

   Yesterday's decision by the Board of Education, while not banning the teaching of scientific evolution, waters down school curriculums by leaving the door open for what critics warn is a ruse to indoctrinate students in religion -- so-called creationism. Dr. Staver noted that the move "is demeaning to all teachers in the sense that their hard work is being slapped in the face by a group of law people." And many of those "lay people" shared the sentiments of the 50-100 people who turned out for a public hearing on Tuesday, some of whom urged the Board of Education to prohibit the teaching of evolution. "I want my kids not taught the evolutionary theories (sic)," declared one citizen. "I don't believe there is any truth to them."

   The net effect of the board's decision is to elevate the status of creationism, which is being aggressively promoted in Kansas and other states by groups like the Institute for Creation Research, or Answers in Genesis. Mark Looy of the Answers group declares: "Students in public schools are being taught that evolution is a fact, that they're just products of the survival of the fittest. There's not meaning in life if we're just animals in the struggle for survival... It creates a sense of purposelessness and hopelessness, which I think leads to things like pain, murder and suicide."

   Former Kansas GOP state chairman Steve Abrams agrees. He told the New York Times recently that he "had some serious questions" about scientific evolution, adding that "it is not good science to teach evolution as fact." Abrams was instrumental in helping the BOE craft its new guidelines, which include "micro-evolution" -- change within a species -- but de-emphasize "macro-evolution," the mechanism whereby a species gradually evolves into an entirely new species. "The design and complexity of the design of the cosmos requires an intelligent designed," adds Abrams.

   But allowing local communities, boards of education and vocal pressure groups to decide the content of a science curriculum may have some unexpected results, even for the religious conservatives who supported the Board's action.

"Trying to make it optional is like trying to make it optional to talk about gravity in a physics class. The real losers are the children of Kansas..."

Mary Blythe, a district science specialist in Kansas City, Kan. warned that the new changes so eagerly embraced by the BOE could even result in new age and "occult-type things" being taught in science classes. "There could be a teacher somewhere or a group somewhere who would try to force that it," Blythe told the New York Times, adding, "It's a sad day for science in Kansas." Molleen Matsurmura of the National Center for Science Education, a California academic group which supports rigorous science programs in the public schools, added that the Board of Education chose to "remove paragraphs and paragraphs" from the original recommendations. Criticizing the move to leave decision on academics to local groups, Matsurmura added, "Trying to make it optional is like trying to make it optional to talk about gravity in a physics class. The real losers are the children of Kansas."

   Already, there is talk of an legal challenge to the new standards. Even Ms. Holiday admitted that the board is planning to consult with its attorney, but said that in the meantime, the new guidelines will be implemented. The slow pace of the justice system, though, is not the only avenue open to those who oppose the creationist-option; BOE member Bill Wagnon, who voted against the new standards, predicted a "backlash" in next year's election, when five of the ten seats on the board will be contested. "It's not going to go away," said Wagnon. "Support for reasonable, rational science standards as opposed to emotional ones is very strong."

[text only]