Controversial science policy dropped

By Eric Maddy
The SCORE

The Rio Rancho school board voted 3-2 Monday night to eliminate a controversial science policy that opponents believe encouraged the teaching of “intelligent design” and other alternatives to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

But don’t expect the controversy to go away.

Cases making their way through the federal court system may eventually end up at the Supreme Court. And two of the three board members who voted in favor of the policy will be up for election in two years.

It was the election of Divyesh Patel two years that signaled a shift in the board that led to the reversal of the policy. In 2009, board president Lisa Cour and board secretary Margaret Terry, who joined Patel in the majority, will be up for reelection if they choose to run.

So is Don Schlichte, who sided with board vice president Marty Scharfglass in keeping the policy.

“It’s not the end of the topic,” Schlichte said. “This thing is going to be debated and decided on cultural levels, on academic levels and judicial levels far beyond Rio Rancho.

“This topic is not over, and I don’t think it will ever be over as we just teach primarily evolution as fact because half of our population is never going to agree with that. They’ve had 60 or 70 years already to do that in our country, and still 50 percent of us don’t believe it. So it’s never going to end as long as we teach that as fact, because 50 percent of the population just doesn’t buy it.”

As the swing vote in reversing the policy, Patel has strong beliefs on the issue, too.

“The teachers are distressed by this policy’s presence. They feel the pressure to make sure they teach the right curriculum, which they are,” he said. “It’s just they are afraid of somebody and accusing them of not representing their views. Our duty as board members is to make sure we have policies that enhance the process of education, and to be fair to students and teachers to make sure there is no undue pressure.

There is opportunity in philosophy and comparative religion classes to discuss alternative theories. And I believe that there are other policies that cover expressing views or handling other belief systems. But not in science. It’s simple.”

Patel acknowledged the policy could be changed by a court ruling or election results.

“That’s what elections are for. People will elect board members that represent their views,” he said. “I hope not, because we have more important issues to tackle in terms of getting U.S. students to a higher level in the international markets compared to other countries.”

An overflow crowd forced district officials to set up chairs outside the board room at the beginning of the meeting to avoid breaking the 63-person limit set by fire code. But after presenters from earlier agenda items left, there were open seats left in the board room by the time the science policy came up for discussion.

A total of 14 speakers addressed the board on the policy. Eleven were in favor, including four teachers from Rio Rancho High. Among those wanting the policy eliminated were Marshall Berman, a past vice president of the New Mexico Board of Education, and David Thomas, a former president of the New Mexico Academy of Science.

Among the three supporters of the policy were Joe Renick, the executive director of the Intelligent Design Network, and Mike Patrick of Rio Rancho Focus.

The discussion, which lasted more than 75 minutes, brought out little in the way of new information.

Those who support the policy believed:

•By not discussing alternative interprets of data, it prevents critical thinking in certain science classes.

•Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is just that, a theory, as opposed to accepted fact that opponents of the policy believe it is.

•Not discussing alternative theories violates First Amendment rights to freedom of expression.

•The policy reinforces state and local rules on the discussion of controversial issues.

Those who wanted the policy removed believed:

•It encourages the teaching of “intelligent design” or “creationism” and brings religion into the classroom in violation of the traditional separation of church and state.

•It could make the district defend itself against lawsuits accusing it of introducing religion into schools.

•Science is self-policing and continually changes as new information is gathered, while religions are based on personal beliefs and faith, thus remaining stagnant..

•It is redundant because the issue is already covered by state regulations and curriculum requirements, and by other school board policies covering freedom of expression and controversial issues.

•It forced teachers to discuss alternatives that could not be supported by scientific evidence.

•It implies Ro Rancho High science teachers do not follow state and board requirements and curriculum and need a special policy to supervise them.

•It makes the district, and by default the community, an “evolutionary war battleground” that teaches intelligent design, and subjects them subject to state and national ridicule.

•By highlighting his area of study, it gives undue weight to one of 121 performance standards science teachers are required to address in grades 9-12.

•It is based on a political and religious disagreements and divides the community.


To read a transcript of the last board discussion on this issue, click here.

Due o technical issues, dditional comments from board members and the public were not posted on Tuesday as planned. They will be posted here at a later date in the near future.