The Texas Observer

Texas scientists have finally stopped agonizing over creationism and gotten busy organizing.

Today, a group of university professors announced in a press conference the 21st Century Science Coalition, a vehicle to promote science education in Texas and push back against the retrograde agenda at the State Board of Education. It’s about time. The obscure but powerful board is a known hotbed of pseudo-scientific activity. At least six of its 15 members, including Chairman Don McLeroy, are creationists who have done little to hide their contempt for evolutionary biology. With an overhaul of the state’s science curriculum underway, this religious right faction has an opportunity to leave its fingerprints all over biology textbooks.

That’s where the scientists, mostly biologists, come in. Dr. David Hillis, a professor of integrative biology at UT-Austin, came out firing at the press conference:

[McLeroy] is on record stating that there are two kinds of science: one that uses natural explanations, and one that relies on supernatural explanations. He is dead wrong about this: supernatural explanations have no place in science classrooms. Science is about testable explanations, and supernatural explanations are by their very nature untestable. It is clear that Chairman McLeroy wants to promote a particular religious, rather than a scientific, agenda in our science classrooms, and that has stimulated our group of over 800 Texas scientists to object.

The speakers made the usual — but necessary — statements that evolution is undisputed among the vast majority of scientists. To illustrate the point to a media that sometimes sacrifices accuracy for balance (”on one hand… but on the other”), the organizers piled up 10 years’ worth of the journal Evolution. Altogether, there are some 100,000 peer-reviewed articles supporting evolution published in this journal and others, said Dr. Dan Bolnick, an assistant professor at UT-Austin. “Not a single one shows that evolution has not occurred,” Bolnick said.

Dr. Richard Duhrkopf, who teaches — God bless him — biology at Baylor, had the best zinger of the day: “It’s time to keep religion and faith in the Sunday schools and not in the public schools.”

The coalition’s first goal is to strip language from the state’s standards that calls for the teaching of “strengths and weaknesses” in scientific theories. A committee of teachers has already recommended removing the language, but the board will make the final decision. McLeroytold the Austin American-Statesman that he wanted to maintain the status quo.

“Evolution shouldn’t have anything to worry about — if there’s no weaknesses, there’s no weaknesses. But if there’s scientifically testable explanations out there to refute it, shouldn’t those be included too?”

That argument is the new hobbyhorse of the creationist crowd. Having failed to get Intelligent Design into the classroom, the intellects of the creationist movement are pushing the “strengths and weaknesses” line. It’s a wedge to introduce creationist thinking into the classroom, says Dr. Sahotra Sarkar, a UT professor and founding member of the coalition. “What they’re trying to do is put in some completely phony doubts about what constitutes evolution,” said Sarkar.

This semester Sarkar is teaching a class to freshmen that touches on creationism. Of his 18 students, three of them claim to never have been taught a thing in high school about evolution, Sarkar says, even though it’s required by the state.

The Texas Education Agency and Commissioner Robert Scott have answered the federal lawsuit filed against them by former science curriculum director Chris Comer. (Comer was forced out in December over an email she sent to science teachers announcing a talk by an evolution expert.) In her suit, Comer alleges that she was fired for violating an unconstitutional TEA policy of “neutrality” on evolution.

The fatal flaw in Comer’s argument, according to TEA’s Motion to Dismiss (.pdf), “arises from a fundamental misconception of the relationship between the Texas Education Agency, headed by defendant Scott, and the State Board of Education.” The 15-member elected board of education develops curriculum, including what Texas schoolchildren learn about evolution, the motion states. TEA only administers that curriculum and provides oversight. “TEA staff, in their capacity as state employees, must not take positions, even by implication, on contested curriculum issues the State Board will be called upon to resolve,” the motion states.

TEA’s motion lists a number of other controversial curriculum issues on which TEA staff may not voice an opinion in public:

• Whether schools should teach “whole language” or “phonics” in English Language Arts;

• Whether schools should have grammar as a separate section of the English curriculum or embedded in the overall curriculum;

• How schools should present the treatment of minorities in U.S. or Texas history;

• Whether schools should have required reading lists in English or other subjects (and if so what books should be included on them);

• Whether schools should emphasize scientific processes or content;

• Whether schools should require laboratory instruction in science courses;

• How schools should integrate the Spanish-language grammar or decoding skills into English TEKS for students with limited English proficiency (LEP);

• Whether to include instruction on contraceptives along with abstinence, in the presentation of human sexuality in health education.

TEA stresses in its court filings that the “neutrality” policy only applies to its employees, not classroom teachers, who must follow the direction of the board of education.

The agency may have the upper hand, legally speaking — I haven’t a clue about the law in this area — but what a sad thought that career educators and public servants are effectively muzzled on any issue the conservative majority on the SBOE deems “controversial.” Consider what the far-right members of the board of education has done to textbooks over the years. The L.A. Times summarizes a few choice samples:

In a nod to those who believe God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, a sentence saying the ice age took place “millions of years ago” was changed to “in the distant past.” Descriptions of environmentalism have been attacked as antithetical to free-enterprise ideals; a passage describing the cruelty of slavery was derided as “overkill.”

Still, the teaching of evolution is the official policy of the state. If TEA staffers generally, and the science curriculum director in particular, are tasked with administering the state’s policy on science, how can they reasonably be expected to remain “neutral” on evolution? What does that even mean?

Today, a variety of caucuses met at the Democratic state convention in Austin to discuss issues, strategy, and hear a little politicking from candidates up and down the ballot. You’ve got your Gun Owners Caucus and your Progressive Populist Caucus, Texas Stonewall Caucus and Motorcycle Caucus, Native American Caucus and Tejano Democrats Caucus. That’s the Democratic Party in all its messy glory - diverse interests trying to fit under a Big Tent.

One of the more interesting active Dem organizations here is the Texas Muslim Democratic Caucus, the first of its kind in the nation, according to one of the organizers. The caucus started about four years ago and represents Muslim Ds across the state. It has at least 70 delegates attending the convention - 60 from Dallas alone as well as folks from Beaumont, San Antonio, Houston, and even unlikely locales like Marshall and East Bernard.

Caucus president Sarwat Husain said the caucus is important in encouraging Muslims, still reeling from the post-9/11 backlash, to come out of the shadows and become politically engaged. Muslim women, in particular, are fearful of speaking out. “I cannot tell you what courage wearing this [hijab] takes in the United States after 9/11,” Husain said. “The stares that go right through you.”

Husain rattled off the statistics: 7-10.5 million Muslims in the U.S. with close to two million registered voters, 83 percent of which are Democrats. There are some half-a-million Muslims in Texas. That’s not an insignificant cache of potential voters but Democrats need to do more to reach out, she said.

“This is one market you’re losing,” Husain said, addressing the gathered pols. “They are waiting for you out there.” The caucus heard from about ten candidates for offices ranging from the State Board of Education to Congress. In courting votes, the candidates pledged to support freedom of religion, tolerance, and to push back against the zealotry of the religious right in Texas.

State Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin) asked the caucus members to come educate the not-terribly enlightened members of the Texas Legislature. “The way we are approaching things is very exclusive, not inclusive,” Howard said, referring to the Bible class bill passed in the Texas Legislature this year.

Board of Education candidate Laura Ewing, a former Friendswood City Council member, discussed the urgency of electing moderates to the board in light of an upcoming overhaul of social studies curriculum standards. Texas students urgently need to learn about the Muslim world as part of their education, Ewing said. “Otherwise we’ll only study dead white men… and that’s not our world, is it?,” she asked.

Someone in the audience brought up the recent kerfuffle in Friendswood during which a junior high school principal was reassigned for inviting two Muslim women to speak to students following an attack on a Muslim student. That prompted Cindy Steffens, a Muslim delegate from Houston, to tell a story about how her young son’s teacher asked the boy to accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. Interviewed later, Steffens said she and the school handled the incident quietly. Confrontation is not what American Muslims seek, Steffens said, but rather acceptance.

“The Muslim community in America almost has to do what Barack Obama did,” said Yusuf Mohammed, Steffens’ husband. “He’s black but he transcended race.”

It looks like the Institute for Creation Research is ready to wage a David vs Goliath battle in Texas to win the right to grant graduate Master of Science degrees, much like it did in California.

Last week, the Institute filed a petition with the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board demanding that the board reverse its April decision to deny the Institute the ability to issue Master of Science degrees in Texas. The ICR is claiming “viewpoint discrimination” and that the board’s decision was unconstitutional.

An Institute press release says the petition paves the way for a lawsuit against the education board in state or federal court.

After the vote in April, Dr. Henry Morris, president of the Institute, told the Observer that the Institute might take its case all the way to the Texas Supreme Court. “We were denied the right to operate in California and we went through a lengthy and onerous court case before we won,” he said. “It’s an option that we will consider in Texas if we are denied.”

The coordinating board has 180 days to hear the case. Institute spokesman Lawrence Ford told the Houston Chronicle that the ICR’s appeal described the board’s ruling as “academic (and religious) bigotry masquerading as Texas Education Code enforcement.”

The ICR teaches that the earth was created in a week and that the planet is 6,000 years old. The Institute would like to grant degrees to science teachers who would teach in private schools.

Creationism studies in Texas went back to square one Thursday. The nine-member Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board backed Commissioner Raymund Paredes’ recommendation to deny the Institute for Creation Research’s bid to teach creationism as science.

After Wednesday’s lengthy hearing and full day of testimony, board members voted that public testimony not be admitted today—proof, perhaps, that God is merciful.

The vote was quick and unanimous.  Joe Stafford, assistant commissioner for Academic Affairs and Research, read into the record a Texas Education Code statute about preventing public deception in the face of fraudulent or substandard college and university degrees. He also read from Texas Administrative Code rules 12a and 12d, which discuss the quality and content of curricula.

Dr. Henry Morris, CEO of the Institute for Creation Research, told the Observer that his school will appeal the decision within 45 days. Morris said the ICR may also take its case to the Texas Supreme Court.

A bid to teach creationism as science in Texas is facing extinction. Raymund Paredes, commissioner of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, today recommended that the Institute for Creation Research not be allowed to offer a Masters of Science degree in Science Education.

The ICR teaches that the earth was created in a week and that it is 6,000 years old.

Paredes made his recommendation before the Coordinating Board’s Academic Excellence and Research Committee. On Thursday the 9-member Coordinating Board will meet to take a final vote on the Commissioner’s recommendation.

Three participants spoke in favor of ICR’s application: a radio announcer with a science background, a military officer, and a tax attorney. Seven folks spoke against authorizing ICR to grant degrees. Among them were several science teachers and two representatives of science education organizations: the Science Teacher’s Association of Texas and the Texas Academy of Science.

Commissioner Paredes said in a press release that he based his recommendation on two considerations: ICR failed to demonstrate that the proposed degree program meets acceptable standards of science and science education, and the proposed degree is inconsistent with Coordinating Board rules that require the accurate labeling or designation of programs.

Dr. Henry Morris, president of the ICR, told the Observer he was not surprised by Paredes’ recommendation. Morris said there has been an “intensity of resistance from the academic community toward creationism in the last year in Texas.” He cited the dismissal of Texas Education Agency employee Chris Comer, the upcoming review of TEKS and critical thinking standards for Texas schools, and the pro-creationism movie “Expelled” as topics that had generated media attention and public debate in the last year.

Morris said if the Board votes to uphold the Commissioner’s recommendation, the Institute will appeal the decision in the next 45 days. If the appeal is denied, Morris said, the Institute may take its case to the Texas Supreme Court. “We were denied the right to operate in California and we went through a lengthy and onerous court case before we won,” he said. “It’s an option that we will consider in Texas if we are denied.”

Morris said the real issue at hand is “whether science can tolerate a different presumption about the beginning point of creation.”

The ICR attorney said it was a question of freedom of speech and the Constitution that the Institute should be granted the authority to teach science in Texas.

Steven Schafersman, who testified against ICR at the hearing, said he thought Commissioner Paredes had made a “decisive and strong decision based on sound reasoning.”

“The ICR attorney said it was about fair play and free speech, but I disagree,” Schafersman said. “They have the right to teach whatever they want, but not the right to have the state grant them the authority to teach pseudoscience.”

There’s always home schooling…

In recent years, the voices of religious moderates and progressives have been lost amidst the din raised by the yelpings of the religious right.

(Case in point: As I was writing this post I received a “weekly update” by email from Christians United for Israel, the lobbying outfit of Christian Zionist and San Antonio pastor John Hagee, who has of late been agitating for war on Iran. “It is not a matter if war is coming,” Hagee thundered in the email. “It’s only a matter of when!”)

But people of faith concerned with matters other than speeding Jesus’ return or stoking the nation’s cultural wars have never really gone away in this era of fundamentalism. They’ve been here all along, trying to be heard, trying to regroup.

Tonight I attended a dinner at the United Methodist Women in Texas’ 20th Annual Legislative Event in Austin. The event is officially nonpartisan but the coins of the realm are social justice and the common good - those abused, but still useful and necessary ideas. Texas Impact, an interfaith organization that marries progressive religious values with political action, is hosting the conference. The women learn the nuts and bolts of the political process while brainstorming ways to make education, the environment, and health care top priorities again.

Tonight the women heard from two men - branding guru and former Bushie Matthew Dowd and Texas campaign finance expert Fred Lewis - who both see a state and nation that is in dire need of spiritual, political, and social mending.

Dowd described the current zeitgeist. “Nearly every major institution in this county - the American public, the people of Texas have lost faith in them,” said Dowd. Scandal after scandal has discredited corporations, government, churches, even the Boy Scouts and sports. This crumbling of the traditional social order has “created tremendous anxiety and disconnected us from each other,” said Dowd.

“We don’t feel part of a community, we don’t know where to turn.” Americans don’t trust either major political party to represent our dreams, though we do respond to leaders who at least seem authentic. (This authenticity, or appeal to “gut values,” is the rallying cry of Applebee’s America, a book which Dowd co-authored with Douglas Sosnik.) Young people are simultaneously plugged in (read: Facebook, MySpace) and tuned out. The mostly silver-haired audience gasped at the statistic that the average working person now has nine jobs before they turn 30.

This all adds up to a crisis. But a crisis that will precipitate a great “turning” - something that only happens every four generations in Dowd’s estimation. Dowd didn’t say exactly what this turning would look like but stressed the opportunities for organizing at the “local” level.

“When you look at that landscape you see a great, great fertile ground for people like you in this room,” he told the Methodists.

Fred Lewis reminded the audience that what draws them together is community and a faith in the common good. “You can have too much community and you can have too much individualism,” Lewis remarked. “Right now in this county we don’t have a problem of too much community. We have individualism run amuck.”

If demography is destiny, Texas is in trouble. While 87 percent of Anglos in the state graduate from high school, only 75 percent of African-Americans and 49 percent of Hispanics do. Today, one in two babies born in Texas are Latino. Yet the state leaders seem to have little interest in improving public schools.

“If that continues and we don’t do something to change that by investing in early education, good teachers, health care for our kids and their families, our standard of living will decline,” Lewis said.

The answer is bringing low- and middle-income people into the political process. Lewis described a project he is involved in called Houston Votes. It is estimated that one million Houstonians are eligible to vote but not registered. The goal is to reach out to people - mostly people of color - living in the older, marginalized suburbs of Harris County. So far, the group has knocked on 20,000 doors.

“The people there over and over again have told us that what they care about is education and health care for their families,” Lewis said.

Look for more coverage of faith in action tomorrow from my colleague Dave Mann.