澳门跑狗论坛

Textbooks鈥攖eachers鈥� road maps through the curriculum鈥攇enerally do a respectable job of covering evolution, according to experts who have reviewed the books, though the thick volumes tend to be weaker in describing the theory鈥檚 relevance across the many areas of science.

Leading textbooks strongly present major points on evolution, the experts say, despite being jammed with information to comply with the academic standards of so many different states鈥攁 concern across many subjects.

鈥淚f you look at the major textbooks on the market, they all have one, two, or three chapters on evolution,鈥� said Rodger W. Bybee, the executive director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study organization, in Colorado Springs, Colo., which develops textbooks and other instructional materials.

Despite scientists鈥� concerns about the recent resurgence of criticism over the teaching of evolution, Mr. Bybee believes textbooks have, in fact, 鈥渟trengthened empirical arguments鈥� in presenting the theory in recent years, in response to critics鈥� attempts to find holes in it. He expects those efforts in the coverage of evolution to continue.

A 2000 study by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington found that high school biology books were strong in presenting basic facts on evolution and other major scientific concepts. But those facts were too often presented in isolation, that analysis found, rather than in ways that described evolution鈥檚 influence throughout science.

鈥淜ids need to understand why the scientific community supports evolution, and why it鈥檚 important,鈥� said Jo Ellen Roseman, who directed the study and is also the director of Project 2061, an AAAS venture to improve learning in science, mathematics, and technology.

She attributed textbooks鈥� weaknesses in coherence partly to the tendency of the authors鈥攑rimarily college professors鈥攖o gloss over connections that seem obvious to them, but might not be to precollegiate students.

Sticking to Science?

Publishers and other textbook experts say major science books avoid discussing 鈥渋ntelligent design,鈥� a purported alternative to the theory of evolution, because the mainstream scientific community does not regard it as legitimate science. Yet one widely used textbook, Glencoe鈥檚 2004 edition of Biology: The Dynamics of Life, describes intelligent design and other views in a section titled 鈥淏iology and Society.鈥� The concept is described as a belief, not a scientific theory.

April Hattori, a spokeswoman for the Glencoe/McGraw-Hill, a division of the New York City-based McGraw-Hill Education, said the book makes no other references to intelligent design. Overall, it treats evolution as a 鈥渦nifying concept鈥� in science, she said, which the publisher recognizes is backed by the vast majority of scientists.

At the same time, some private schools have shown an increased interest in science textbooks that discuss either creationism or intelligent design, said Derek J. Keenan, a vice president of the Association of Christian Schools International, in Colorado Springs. His organization represents 3,700 U.S.-based religious schools, many of which use Christian-themed science texts alongside those favored by the mainstream scientific community. Those schools, he said, often seek out texts through Christian-oriented publishers, such as A Beka Book, in Pensacola, Fla.

A Close Reading

Textbooks have come under inspection in a closely watched federal lawsuit on the Dover, Pa., school board鈥檚 decision last year to require students to be exposed to intelligent design. Sixty copies of a pro-intelligent-design textbook, Of Pandas and People, were anonymously donated to a district library.

Part of the controversy in Dover stemmed from board members鈥� objections to approving the prominent Prentice Hall textbook Biology, for use in the district. That book, which gives a broad treatment to evolution, is written by Kenneth R. Miller, a Brown University biology professor, and Joseph S. Levine, a longtime science writer. During the trial, Mr. Miller was questioned by a school board lawyer about a heading on one section of the book titled 鈥淪trengths and Weaknesses of Evolutionary Theory.鈥�

Mr. Miller testified that the authors added that wording to conform with Texas state standards, which call for students to critique various scientific theories and hypotheses. The Dover policy says students should be exposed to 鈥済aps/problems鈥� in evolution; the language in Mr. Miller鈥檚 book, the lawyer implied, seemed to justify such criticism.

The professor, however, said the headline was taken out of context. Intelligent-design advocates, he said in an interview, 鈥渨ill try to take that [language] and make something out of it.鈥� Virtually any textbook discussion of evolution, he noted, could be scrutinized in the same way.

Mr. Miller has heard criticism that one of his previous biology texts was long on evolution facts and short on coherence across subjects. Not so with Biology, he said, which tries to make those connections. In fact, the author joked that a Dover school board member鈥檚 complaint that his book was 鈥渓aced with Darwinism鈥� could aptly describe his work.

鈥淭hat,鈥� Mr. Miller said, 鈥渟hould be a quote on the back cover of my book.鈥�