by Scientific theory has had a rough time in America’s public schools.
Almost 100 years ago, science teacher John Scopes was convicted of violating a Tennessee law that prohibited the teaching of the theory of evolution. Although his conviction was overturned on a technicality in 1927, laws banning classes on Darwin’s theory stuck for another 40 years. The US Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional in 1968.
In the past decades, conservative or religious groups that oppose the theory of evolution have tried to include it in science classes on a different approach. Now, they argue, if the “scientific” theory of evolution is taught, other views, such as “intelligent design” – a stand-in for creation – should also be taught.
Expand efforts
The approach is not limited to evolution. Legislatures across the country are proposing or passing laws that purport to encourage scientific discussion, but instead encourage students to treat established scientific theories as ideas lacking in scientific study.
In 2012, lawmakers in Tennessee—the same state where the Scopes trial took place nearly a century ago—passed a law forcing teachers to “present the scientific strengths and weaknesses of existing scientific theories.” What constitutes a scientific “strength” or “weakness” has not been defined.
Similar bills were introduced in North Dakota in 2019 and Oklahoma in 2023. If Oklahoma’s bill passes, it will encourage teachers to explore scientific theories in class and help students “analyze certain scientific strengths and weaknesses.”
And a new law in West Virginia allows teachers to discuss or answer “questions from students about scientific theories.” The bill’s author, cited by Senator Amy Grady, said the law is about “encouraging students to think, encouraging students to ask questions and encouraging our teachers to be able to answer them.”
Court battles ahead
In my opinion, legislation relating to the teaching of scientific theories is being used to influence what is taught in public schools. The lawsuit is likely to face a legal challenge. More than 20 years ago, in Kitzmiller v. Dover, a federal court ruled that intelligent design was not science; empirical evidence and testable hypotheses were lacking. Teaching it would violate the First Amendment’s prohibition on state support of religion.
As an educator – and as a scholar who studies the nature of science – I believe that an understanding of scientific knowledge is vital; scientific theories are part of this knowledge.
Accepted scientific theories are the best explanations available so far for how the world works. They are thoroughly tested and backed by evidence, often drawn from a variety of fields. For example, evidence supporting large-scale evolution comes from fossils, DNA analysis and comparing the anatomy of different organisms.
Updating theories
Scientific theories can be revised. They can be changed, or even discarded, but they are permanent. The history of science is full of stories of new evidence, reinterpretation of existing evidence and advances in technology driving changes in the sciences. For example, the discovery of the microscope in the 16th century changed the way scientists saw the world.
Scientific theories have explanatory power about the natural world. The gravity of the Earth, for example, can be explained by the theory of general relativity. Theories also have predictive power. They can be used to generate research ideas. As astrophysicist and author Neil deGrasse Tyson summarized: “A well-constructed theory should explain some of the incomprehensible and, more importantly, predict testable, previously unknown phenomena. A successful theory is one whose predictions are consistently confirmed by experiments.”
Given these characteristics of scientific theories, the current crop of legislation governing how theories are introduced and taught in classrooms is a cause for concern. Underlying these laws is the assumption that accepted scientific theories are nothing more than speculation.
Debate facts
For example, a 2023 bill from Montana prohibits science teaching on “matter that is not scientific fact.” The bill devalues scientific theories as unproven premises or assumptions. It undermines their inclusion, as established ideas, in the K-12 curriculum. Atomic theory may be a theory, but it is fundamental to human understanding of matter and is the foundation of all the physical sciences.
Legislation that calls for the exploration, debate or analysis of theories in the classroom may conceal other intentions. The sponsor of Senate Bill 140 in Oklahoma, for example, said he hoped the law would expose the ‘theory’ aspect of evolution by allowing alternative views to be presented.”
Laws like the one passed in West Virginia go a step further. They open the door to discussions about alternatives to scientific theories. This allows unscientific opinions to be secretly introduced. Writing for Scientific American, Amanda Townley, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, criticized West Virginia’s law. She expressed concern and said such laws open the public classroom door to false beliefs like the Earth is flat or crystals can heal.
Towards scientific literacy
In contrast to lawmakers who would allow any kind of theory to be taught in science class, experts such as Fouad Abd-El-Khalick, a leading international science education researcher, recommend that students in K-12 be taught about the specifics of science theories. in developmentally appropriate ways. US standards for teaching science, for example, say that by the end of the 12th grade, students should understand that “a scientific theory is a grounded explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through it. observation and experiment.”
Students should be encouraged to think critically and ask questions – such as “What evidence supports this theory?” or “How has this theory been tested?” – with the caveat that any theories in question should have already achieved the status of “scientific theory” before being admitted into the curriculum.
Education scholars say that K-12 education must provide students with a “functional level of science literacy” that enables them to understand and make decisions about science-related issues in everyday life, from vaccines to baking cakes.
Part of achieving this literacy is understanding and trusting knowledge produced in science, such as facts, laws – and scientific theories.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a non-profit, independent news organization that brings you reliable facts and analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. Written by: Ryan Summers, University of North Dakota
Read more:
Ryan Summers receives funding from the National Science Foundation, the ND EPSCoR, and the National Institute of Health.
