Darby, Montana School Board

From Scienticity

Revision as of 06:41, 1 November 2005 by JNShaumeyer (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search
The draft of this article is incomplete.

Darby, Montana is a small, rural town (area: 0.5 mi2) on US Route 93, which follows the Bitterroot River in the Bitterroot Valley of western Montana. The town is in Ravelli County, Montana, of which Hamiltion is the county seat. Darby is 60 miles southwest of Missoula, not far from the Idaho border. Nearby is the 1.6 million acre Bitterroot National Forest.

Some 800 people live in Darby, and the Darby High School has some 180 students. In 2004, Darby became a central part of the national struggle in the US against religious incursions into public-school science classrooms.

Contents

Darby School Board Adopts Anti-Evolution Policy

In December 2003, there was a news story in the Ravalli Republic with this simple announcement[1]:

There's a town meeting scheduled in Darby Wednesday [10 December 2003] from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the junior high gym to discuss the merits of teaching the concept [of Intelligent Design creationism].

According to presenter Curtis Brickley -- variously described as "an intelligent design supporter"[2], a "local Baptist minister"[3], and a "Darby parent"[4] -- "The meeting is all about teaching origin science objectively." Intelligent Design creationism is principally advocated by the Discovery Institute, a conservative Christian think tank based in Seattle, WA[5]; Brickley's association with the Discovery Insitute is not known at this time.

The same news story also noted that

An attorney from the Montana School Boards Association advised Darby school officials that they shouldn't adopt curriculum that isn't in line with state standards.

The attorney's advice was not to be followed.

More than 200 people turned out for the presentation, which was described by a local reporter[6] two days later:

Brickley gave a two-hour, high-tech presentation on intelligent design, a biological origin theory that proposes that the intricate complexity of plants and animals is evidence that life could only be the work of an intelligent designer, not evolution. He's asked the Darby School Board to consider adding the ideas of intelligent design to its high school science curriculum, a step that would thrust Darby in the national spotlight of science education. [...] Darby School Board Chairwoman Gina Schallenberger said she liked what she heard at the presentation, and fellow trustee Doug Banks said he fully supports adopting intelligent design in the school's science curriculum.

Oddly, despite his presentation designed to arouse popular sentiment against evolution,[7]

Brickley doesn’t feel that the general public is prepared to properly debate the merits of intelligent design. “I try to avoid arguments because for 90 percent of the public, the dialogue is over their heads. I let the experts debate it and try to broker the information coming out of the intelligent design camp,” Brickley said.
[...]
Since Montana is a local control state, school boards have plenty of leeway in setting curriculum. In Darby, a simple majority of the five-person board has to vote for the policy change in two separate meetings for it to take effect, regardless of what the mainstream scientific community might think.
[...]
Since Brickley’s presentation, a group called Ravalli County Citizens for Science has also formed. The group is composed of parents concerned and outraged over the proposed policy change.

“This is a politically and religiously motivated action that seeks to place a religious agenda ahead of the interests of students. Students will be less prepared for college if this policy affects them,” parent and RCCS coordinator Rod Miner said.

At that time, the RCCS announced a public meeting for the following January 2004) to present their support for maintaining their school's science standards. Gina Schallenberger, the chair of the five-member board, agreed to table the policy change until after that meeting. Reportedly, the RCCS had also announced that it would consider sueing the school board, if necessary, to protect the science standards.

In an end-of-the year open letter[8] John Schneeberger, the coordinator for the Bitterroot Human Rights Alliance, Brickley's presentation was described as "slick and convincing, but wholly disingenuous and misleading." In his letter he says:

This latest effort by creationists to promote their religious concept about human origins in high school science classes is the most sophisticated so far and is part of a nationwide campaign [....] The Darby School trustee and board chair Gina Shallenberger apparently will introduce a proposal to adopt an "Objective Origins" policy at the January 5 meeting. "Objective Origins" would change instruction on evolutionary theory in biology classes to discussions of the theory coupled with critiques provided by organizations such as the Discovery Institute.

The policy change was evidently introduced and tabled as promised, and the Darby Junior High gymnasium was again the meeting place, this time on Wednesday, 21 January, for a presentation by Allan Gishlick of the National Center for Science Education,[9] on behalf of the RCCS. As reported,

The policy calls for students to "assess evidence for and against theories," and "to analyze the scientific strengths and weaknesses of existing scientific theories, including the theory of evolution." Although the policy doesn't spell out what other theories would be included in science curriculum and courts have emphatically prohibited the teaching of creationism in public schools, the objective origins curriculum inevitably will include discussions of intelligent design....Darby is the first school district in Montana to take up such a decision, according to Montana School Board Association officials.

Days before 2 February 2004, when the Darby school board was to vote on the "Objective Origins" proposal put forward by Brickly, interest was high and the opinion of the town was divided:[10]

The "modest" proposal [of Brickley's] has Darby in a tizzy. The school board took public comment Monday night [26 January 2004] and will reconvene Wednesday at 7 p.m. Intelligent design has been castigated as the work of pseudo-scientists whose primary interest is putting God in the classroom, while evolution has drawn comparisons to "godless communism."

The middle ground isn't exactly heavily populated.
...
Part of the debate in Darby is about what exactly will be taught in science class if objective origins is approved. Curtis Brickley has his own ideas, and they do nothing to appease the policy's critics.
...
Science moves ahead through controversy, in fact, but that controversy is tangible, Christian said. [Don Christian is associate dean of the biological sciences division at the University of Montana.] "Scientific controversy involves scientific data and ideas, and how did the scientist measure something, and did they interpret the results correctly, and can it be duplicated," he said. "Intelligent design has not entered the realm of scientific debate."

It has, however, entered into the realm of public debate, one that continues Wednesday at 7 p.m. in the Darby Junior High School gym.

On 2 February 2004 the school-board vote was taken, and the results were reported in local newspapers the next day by reporters following the story. Jenny Johnson[11] wrote in the Ravalli Republic:

Despite legal recommendations advising against the action, Darby School Board trustees Monday adopted an objective origins policy that will allow the school's science curriculum to teach theories other than evolution.

Trustees voted 3-2 to adopt the policy - Mary Lovejoy and Bob Wetzsteon opposed the policy, and Chairwoman Gina Schallenberger, Doug Banks and Elisabeth Bender voting for the policy change.

"This is not a good policy to adopt," Lovejoy said. "We need to go to the state before we consider this."

Wetzsteon, the other nay vote, said he didn't understand how the board can go against the recommendation of the school board's attorney.
[...]
Darby's policy doesn't specifically include language requiring intelligent design to be a part of science class, but instructs teachers to challenge the theory of evolution. Teachers are "encouraged to help students assess evidence for and against theories, to analyze the scientific strengths and weaknesses of existing scientific theories, including the theory of evolution."

On the same date, Michael Moore[12] wrote in The Missoulian:

Against the advice of the principals and teachers it employs and the attorney who represents it, the school board here voted 3-2 Monday night to approve an "objective origins" policy that will change the way science is taught.
[...]
[School-board member Doug] Banks said "objective origins" is just a way to teach both sides of the evolution "debate," but the board has no plan in place for such instruction, nor does it have plans for teacher training. Banks said the fact that the district has no curriculum in place is unimportant. Policy leads, he said, and curriculum will follow.
[...]
Elizabeth Kaleva, the board's attorney through her position as the attorney for the Montana School Boards Association [...] had also warned the board that it would likely be sued over such a policy by groups or individuals that believe that "objective origins" is a catch phrase for putting religion into science class.

Reaction from the capital was swift:[13]

"That isn't science," said [Montana State] Superintendent of Public Instruction Linda McCulloch. "That's exactly what it's all about is teaching creationism. It doesn't matter what you call it. Creationism is not a recognized science."

She said Tuesday that the Darby School District runs the risk of violating the Montana Constitution and jeopardizing funding if it adopts a policy and curriculum that introduce creationism into science classes.

The same report noted that this vote by the school board was the first, and that a final vote was still needed to implement the policy change. Darby was still far from settled on the issue.

Darby Reacts to Anti-Evolution Policy

Status

Notes

  1. ^ Jenny Johnson, "Where did we come from?: Darby meeting to discuss teaching intelligent design", Ravalli Republic [MT], 9 December 2003.
  2. ^ Loc. cit.
  3. ^ James Glanz, "Montana Creationism Bid Evolves Into Unusual Fight", New York Times, 29 February 2004; reproduced in "Montana Creationism-Whole town gets involved in debate".
  4. ^ Jenny Johnson, "Intelligent design presentation draws hundreds", Ravalli Republic [MT], 12 December 2003.
  5. ^ "Discovery Institute, Wikipedia, date on article when accessed: 23 October 2005.
  6. ^ Johnson, 12 December 2003, op. cit.
  7. ^ Josh Mahan, "Changing Courses: Engineering Intelligent Design in Darby Schools", Missoula Independent, 23 December 2003.
  8. ^ John Schneeberger, "An open letter to the Darby School Board -- December 31, 2003", Ravalli Republic [MT], 5 January 2004.
  9. ^ Jenny Johnson, "Opponents of origin theories plan presentation", Ravalli Republic [MT], 20 January 2004.
  10. ^ Michael Moore, "Origins debate deeper than Darby", The Missoulian [MT], 28 January 2004; this is a fascinating analysis of the debate in the community at a dramatic climax prior to the school-board vote.
  11. ^ Jenny Johnson, "Darby adopts origins policy", Ravalli Republic [MT], 3 February 2004.
  12. ^ Michael Moore, "Darby schools OK 'objective origins'", The Missoulian [MT], 3 February 2004.
  13. ^ Associated press, "State education chief: Darby school policy not science", Billings [MT] Gazette, 3 February 2004.


Other Sources

Retrieved from "http://scienticity.net/wiki/Darby,_Montana_School_Board"
Personal tools
science time-capsules