Debate Forum Right, 8/16/11

Debate Forum Right, 8/16/11

Creationism or evolution or both

By Kelly Kohls
Board member, Springboro Community City School District

Kelly Kohls

At a recent school board meeting I asked the Springboro Schools curriculum director a few questions about curriculum that community members had previously asked me. The questions posed were related to teaching creationism as a supplement to evolution (current public education does not include creationism content). These questions were not answered that night, so the subject was left open for investigation.

There was no further discussion by the board nor a vote for anything related to this topic. A Dayton Daily News article published the next day implied that the district was almost ready to teach this controversial topic, and that falsehood sparked both community and national debates. Some believe that evolution is based on science and that creationism is a belief. However, evolution is fraught with scientific voids that leave students with many questions. Teaching creationism is simply teaching a belief in human history.

Also, teaching students that there are two trains of thought is not advocating for any religious views but rather encouraging a critical look at these two subjects. Each student can then investigate the science and beliefs of their own family and heritage. Certainly, no matter which theory one believes, they both have merit and are important for teaching critical thinking to students already being asked to think critically about other controversial issues.

The U.S. was founded on a search for religious freedom and it contained a belief that humans were created. The Native Americans that were in this country before the European settlers arrived also believed in creationism. From a historical perspective, creationism is a part of American history.

The debate of this issue has brought many comments to light: one teacher stated he taught this topic in a history class; another teacher (see below) shares his opinion which others say is illegal. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that schools may not require the teaching of creationism while other smaller district courts have ruled that public schools cannot advocate for creationism. Historians, philosophers and educators disagree and argue about this topic.

A former teacher wrote to me last week:

I am a retired West Virginia public school teacher. For the last five years of my full-time career, with the full knowledge (and dismay) of state and county school officials, as well as the ACLU, I demonstrated to my students that mathematics proves beyond the shadow of doubt that evolutionism is nonsense. The students saw that the evidence clearly shows that every item associated with humans, animals and plants are intelligent designs and intelligent design is science. I always let the students figure it out for themselves and allowed them to believe what they chose, but at least they were exposed to the scientific facts that extremists want to censor from the minds of public school students. Evolution is more impossible than the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and the Headless Horseman. Stand firm for true science.
Yours truly,
Karl Priest

If public schools are prohibited from teaching science curriculum that contains theories and beliefs, there are many courses that would not be taught in public schools such as psychology, human development, art interpretation, history, economics etc.

A science is referred to as a soft or hard science based on its ability to answer the questions posed from that science. A soft science refers to a science where the answers are not exact or proven. A soft science is where there could be more than one answer and the science used needs to be applied to the solution.

If we are really responsible for teaching analytical methodology, then how can we omit the use of beliefs and theories which then motivate a student to work toward the answer that makes the most sense to them? The most famous scientists of this world have been made so with the motivation to prove something wrong or right. We should let our students prove how humans came into and evolved into existence. It is about science, not religion. Single mindedness will destroy critical and investigative learning and thinking. We need to strengthen our youth in this aspect of education. Question marks in a young mind motivate investigation and innovation. Learning isn’t always comfortable but creating inquiry is inspirational.

This debate will likely continue and get very heated, giving ample reason to advocate the following:

1.  For parents to choose a public school that inspires critical, evaluative and inspirational education, follows the traditional beliefs and teaches both points of view for all subjects, or to choose an education system that advocates for strictly one side of a controversial issue: creating the great scientists of the world, or making students politically correct.

2.  That school choice would allow a family to choose a public school system that follows a philosophy that more closely matches family values.

Kelly Kohls has five children currently enrolled in the Springboro Community City School system. She is currently an adjunct instructor at the Art Institute of Ohio in Cincinnati. Kelly is committed to ensuring that the children of the Springboro community receive an excellent education. Reach DCP guest writer Kelly Kohls at
ContactUs@DaytonCityPaper.com.

2 Responses to “Debate Forum Right, 8/16/11” Subscribe

  1. Kevin S. August 16, 2011 at 10:55 am #

    The problem is that neither creationism nor intelligent design is a scientific theory. To be a scientific theory, an idea must be capable of being falsified by empirical observation. In other words, there must be some evidence that, if it existed,prove the idea to be false. No advocate of creationism or intelligent design has, to my knowledge, ever mentioned any experiment or observation that they believed would falsify either idea.

    Therefore, these ideas have no place in a science classroom. Now, if you want to teach creationism as part of a class on religion or mythology, or teach intelligent design in a philosophy class, that’s fine. Of course, most evangelical Christians wouldn’t like having an actual philosophy class where students debated whether it’s really possible for a God with all three “omnis” to exist….

  2. Eric Specht August 17, 2011 at 12:13 am #

    Why not teach both as possible answers? Evolution cannot be proven as fact. Neither can creationism. Mankind has been on earth for some 6,000 years according to the bible, however life forms that may have existed on this planet in the some odd 16 billion years before man showed up are not documented in the bible. Why not allow for the possibility that the remains that have been used to “prove” evolution are from an entirely different creation? Who knows how many gods have put some form of life on this planet? How many cataclysms have wiped those creations from the face of the earth only to have some new life form take it’s place? Teach both of them as mythology if you want, but stop trying to present a theory as a fact to the extent that naysayers and bible believers are ridiculed. Both may have some validity.

Leave a Reply

One good eye

Cyclops Festival returns for fourth DIY year By Tim Anderl Photo: Cyclops Festival, the handmade art and apparel event, will take […]

Causing an uproar

Godsmack shreds across the country By Alan Sculley Photo: Godsmack will perform on Aug. 17 at Riverbend Music Center in Cincinnati […]

Yellow Springs Theater Company

New company of professionals pushes theatrical boundaries By Joyell Nevins Photo: The Yellow Springs Theater Company rehearses D’Arc Comedy by wanda […]

Give it a spin

Whirled Festival of Tops By Jennifer Hanauer Lumpkin Photo: The festivities begin at 5 p.m. in the area north of the […]

On craft and craftsmanship

In the studio with Landon Crowell By Eva Buttacavoli Photo: Landon Crowell, Inertia in Light of a Likely Disaster, 2011. Wood, […]

Modern masters, talking turkeys and the king himself

Your summer roadmap to art in Cincinnati By Susan Byrnes Photo: Trenton Doyle Hancock, “Hot Coals in Soul,” 2010. Acrylic and […]