ABSTRACT
The initial impetus for this collection of chapters was the ongoing controversy and heated discussions about teaching intelligent design in public school science classes. It became clear from the tenor of this debate, both in science classes and in the general media, that beliefs about “science” tend to be relatively impoverished and unsophisticated. This is true of the general public as much as of students in science classrooms, especially at the high school level. Many in the general public view science as essentially a collection of facts and doubt many of those facts on an issue-by-issue basis; they do not have a sophisticated understanding of scientific theories and how these are supported or falsified by evidence. Unfortunately, this is equally true of students who attend science classes. In an in-depth investigation of 9-16-year-olds, Driver, Leach, Millar, and Scott (1996) found that most students at all ages thought good science involved investigations involving sensory perception data, with little understanding of a more sophisticated model-based view of science (Duschl). Likewise, Smith and Wenk (2006) found that most college freshmen understand theories as tested hypotheses, without understanding that theories are the complex explanatory frameworks that guide hypothesis testing (Duschl). As a case in point, the theory of evolution is one of the most wellestablished scientific theories we have today, on par with the theory that the Earth is spherical and orbits the sun. And yet, a 2009 Gallup poll showed that less than 40% of the U.S. population accepts evolutionary theory. More surprising, and a little disheartening, Windschitl (2004) found similar results with pre-service science teachers (Duschl). The fact that people’s beliefs about science are so unsophisticated helps explain why intelligent design and creationism remain ideas with a powerful appeal to large segments of the U.S. population. Intelligent design is not merely a view about whether or not God created the world and all living things within it-a view held by all Abrahamic faiths-but about the specific way in which God is claimed to have done so. In denying the facts generated
by the scientific study of biological evolution, intelligent design is also an attack on science and the findings generated by science that have implications for many other pressing issues of deep concern to people at large (see Dembski, 1998, 1999). Evolutionary theory is the central framework for understanding the biological world-from genetically modified foods to resistance to antibiotics, both of which are explained by this theory. For this reason it is worth exploring the controversy between intelligent design and scientific theories of evolution as a way to better understand science and how evolution can be taught more effectively. The chapters in this volume were commissioned for this purpose. Our concluding chapter will not try to repeat them, but to pull out some common themes and conclusions about how best to teach the demarcation between science and pseudoscience or other forms of knowing, such as religious faith.
