Not in Our Classrooms -- A Review

Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch. Editors. Foreword by Rev. Barry W. Lynn. Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design Is Wrong in Our Classrooms. Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. xi + 170 pp.

From the time of Copernicus to the present, religion and science have been locked in a seemingly unending war of attrition for the hearts and minds of the Western World. At least in the United States the battle rages on and from the poll numbers it would seem that with regard to evolution, “religion” is ahead on points. The 2005 Dover, PA trial that struck down an attempt to balance evolution with “Intelligent Design,” but as important as this decision was, it was merely another skirmish in an ongoing culture war.

Not in Our Classrooms is a response by the scientific community and its allies in the religious community to a well organized and well funded Creationist movement. With a preface by Barry Lynn of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, this is a handbook that can be used by supporters of evolution education, educators, and members of the religious community who wish to offer their support to this cause. Contributors to this relatively brief book include scientists, science educators, activists, and a theologian.

The book begins with a historical overview by Eugenie Scott, an editor of the book and executive director of the National Center for Science Education, which lays out the issues, highlights the central points of conflict and significant events such as trials in Arkansas, Louisiana, and most recently in Dover, Pennsylvania. Since proponents of Intelligent Design wish to distance themselves from earlier Creationist movements and present it as a scientific alternative to evolution and not a religious philosophy, Scott helpfully connects the dots between the predecessor entities and this most recent expression of Creationism.

The second essay, written by Nicholas Matzke of the NCSE, and Paul Gross, an emeritus professor of life sciences at the University of Virginia focus on the most recent expression of the Creationist/Intelligent Design movement – “critical analysis.” These groups may not believe in evolution, but they do evolve, especially as the courts rule. And thus, with Intelligent Design under suspicion, proponents have shifted to “critical analysis” as a way of slipping Intelligent Design into the curriculum through the back door. A tactic being used currently in Ohio and Kansas, partisans have attempted to introduce legislation or change curriculum standards to mandate that students be encouraged to question evolution – and thus “teaching the controversy” is introduced into the curriculum. The problem with this strategy is that there is no real controversy to be taught, except that students are left with the impression that evolution is a theory in crisis.

Being that I’m a theologian and not a scientist, I welcomed the contribution of Martinez Hewlett, a retired biology professor and devout Roman Catholic and Ted Peters, a Lutheran theologian. In a chapter entitled “Theology, Religion, and Intelligent Design” the authors remind us that there is no necessary contradiction between evolution as a scientific theory and religious faith, and Christian faith in particular. This is really the crux of the issue, for evolution opponents insist that evolution and atheism are commingled. They lay out the principle that the Christian command to seek truth requires that Christians seek out the best science, and at this moment that science is not Intelligent Design, which has no fertility – that is it does not further scientific discovery – is not good science and thus should be rejected. And as Christians, the authors insist that it is incumbent upon them to “provide young people in classrooms with the best science available,” and at this point the Darwinian model is that science (p. 82).

Jay Wexler is an attorney who specializes in church-state issues. He helpful clarifies the legal issues, especially as they pertain to the application of the First Amendment. As the Dover, Pennsylvania school board found out, ignorance of the law is no excuse, and as long as the scientific community insists that evolution is the accepted theory to explain the diversity of life on earth, courts will likely look with disfavor on Creationist and related attempts to circumvent science.

Brian Alters is a science educator who explains why teaching Intelligent Design is a bad idea. Not only is ID not good science, by including it in the discussion will only confuse students. He reminds us that science teachers are, by and large, not scientists, but scientifically trained educators, who must depend on the expertise of the scientific community. Alters recognizes as well that when ID is put into the conversation students likely will think that not only are the questions about evolution, but that evolution is necessarily in conflict with their religious beliefs. When that happens students and their parents will choose their faith over evolution. He also notes that because some science teachers are creationists and others are fearful of dealing with ongoing conflict evolution is often either taught poorly – again confusing students – or it’s not taught at all. And therefore, the American populace remains uninformed about this important scientific theory.

The final chapter is a set of guidelines written by the other editor, Glenn Branch, deputy director of the NCSE, for those who wish to advocate for a strong science curriculum and oppose efforts to bring ID or Creationism into the science classroom. And if anyone thinks this “battle” is going to end any time soon, Branch says that “Creationists are resilient, so it is unwise to assume that any victory for you is final” (p. 144).

The real point of this book is that this is a crucial issue of our time. Therefore, it requires the whole community to become informed and to become engaged in the cause. Branch includes in that call to action, the religious community, and clergy in particular. Why? Because, clergy have a vested interest in defusing the conflict between science and religion.

A small and inexpensive book, Not in Our Classrooms is easily and quickly read and could be handed out to science teachers, school administrators, board members, and members in various religious communities. From a religious perspective it is good to see a book on the issue that respects the religious community and seeks to engage this community as allies in the search for truth and knowledge. They recognize that Creationists and supporters of ID wish to drive a wedge between religion and evolution by characterizing evolution as inherently atheistic. Richard Dawkins may believe this to be true, but many like Ted Peters, Pope Benedict XVI, and me, think otherwise. And, as an introduction to the issues, there is no better place to start than with this manual. Besides, how can you go wrong with a book that carries on its cover the recommendation of Bill Nye the Science Guy®!

Rev. Dr. Robert Cornwall
Ponderings on a Faith Journey
April 20, 2007