Don McLeroy, the chariman of the Texas State Board of Education, was interviewed last week on Texas Monthly Talks on PBS.  Why do I care about this?  Well, McLeroy heads this elected group of 15 individuals and they have a lot of power over what gets taught in Texas public schools and this year the curriculum standards for Texas are up for revision.  This includes the science curriculum standards as well and since Don McLeroy is a creationist, this causes me concern.

First, a little background on the Texas SBOE, then on to some of the more interesting discussion points brought up in the interview.  The Texas SBOE duties include, as I mentioned, defining curriculum standards and outlining testing standards.  In addition, they have a major say in the selection of textbooks used in the Texas public school system.  In other words, they have a lot of control over what gets into the schools and what does not.

Before I go on to discuss the interview, let me point out that the entire interview can be seen on the Texas Montly Talks website at the link here.  If you have any issues with what I say, I recommend watching the full interview then go research more about McLeroy and the topics covered and make up your own mind.

And now, onto the discussion…

Three main topics were discussed during the interview

1. The current debate regarding the revision of the English curriculum standards
2. The upcoming revision of the Science curriculum standards specifically regarding Evolution
3. Abstinence only sex education

I haven’t followed the issues around the English standards, but what I found interesting from this discussion was when asked how McLeroy came to his conclusion regarding his position on the standards, this is what he had to say.

So basically, McLeroy has nothing but his own common sense to bolster his position.  He himself is not an educator, he was a dentist.  He has no direct experience educating children other than his own, yet his common sense is enough to override the position of experts in the field.  He can’t even point to studies or other states programs to bolster his opinion.

Next, on to the Science curriculum and the upcoming revision of the standards.  Specifically, the topic discussed is about Evolution and Intelligent Design.  The clip below shows McLeroy’s response about how to teach Evolution in the schools.  Again, remember, he isn’t a biologist.

McLeroy stresses that they should teach the strengths and weaknesses of Evolution and he points out, in his view, three main weaknesses.

1. The fossil record and the “gaps”
2. The Cambrian explosion
3. Not enough time and too much information and where does the information come from

He states that the fossil record has big gaps and not enough transitional forms.  This is an old creationist argument.  There will always be gaps in the fossil record because no matter how many transitional fossils are found, they will always ask for where the one between any two are.  It’s a never ending argument.  It’s like walking halfway to your destination and stopping, then walking halfway from there and stopping, again and again and again.  No matter how many steps you take, you never reach your destination.  In the same way, they can continue to state that there are missing transitional fossils until the end of time.

The Cambrian explosion refers to a period of time, roughly 570 million years ago, not 2 billion years ago as McLeroy states, when many new forms are seen in the fossil records.  But it needs to be put in perspective.  We’re talking about a period of time of roughly 30 to 50 million years in which this wide diversification is found.  He says it happened in “a geographic instant”, well I think he meant “geologic” instant.  Sure, it’s a relatively short period of time geologically, but it’s still a long time.

Lastly, he can’t believe that “random” chance and mutation can account for everything there is.  Well, this is another misconception of Evolution.  It is a process of adaptation through natural selection.  It is not random.

This section of the interview was frustrating.  I kept waiting for the next logical question to be asked, but it never came.  I wanted to know how much time is actually spent on Evolution in the Science class?  Of that, how much time should they allocate to showing the strengths of Evolution versus the weaknesses.  The answers to these questions would have been very enlightening.

Then I wanted him to be asked to name at least one other theory in science where they mandate the strengths and weaknesses be taught and to give specific examples.  Evolution always seems to be singled out.  That should raise a flag in most peoples minds about their true intentions.  Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t remember my science class talking about weaknesses in the theory of gravity or atomic theory or relativity.  They might have talked about controversies or parts of the theory still subject to testing, but they didn’t call them weaknesses.

Lastly on this issue, how can we expect high school science teachers to be able to accurately explain every aspect of any scientific theory.  And how can we expect high school students with no background in the detail of the topics to be able to comprehend all the evidence for these theories.  It’s simply impossible at this level of education.  All this concept of strengths and weaknesses does is create doubt in the minds of the students with an inadequate set of information on which to base a decision and that’s the goal of this type of argument by the creationists.  Spread doubt in the general public about accepted scientific principles until they no longer become generally accepted.  There is a reason colleges teach and give specific degrees in Evolutionary biology.  Any subject, whether it is science or engineering or accounting takes years to understand the nuances and details.  People dedicate their lives to the study of Evolution.  Those are the experts we should be listening to when defining our science standards regarding this subject.

Toward the end of the clip McLeroy mutters something about science says “the source for it is nothing”, referring to where all the information came from to create eyes, teeth, fingernails, etc.  You hear him stumble here a bit almost as if he wants this to be a reference regarding a deity, but realized that he can’t go there.  Is he asking why science has not said who created Evolution?  Well, science isn’t about the supernatural, but about explaining the natural world.  Evolution explains the diversity of life that exists on this planet, not who or what created it.

But if this is all the weaknesses he can come up with, I guess I shouldn’t be worried.  Now don’t get me wrong, there are controversies and discussions regarding evolution, but they’re not at the level McLeroy is spouting.  The gang over at arstechnica have a good article about this topic.  I suggest perusing on over there to see what’s really up in terms of controversies within the scientific community regarding Evolution.

And if you want more, you can click here for some of the evidence for Evolution.

I do agree with one thing he says on this topic and that is we need good science teachers in the classrooms.  This is something I think we can all agree upon, the only issue would be how each of us would define a good teacher.

Ok, now on to the final topic…sex, well sex education anyway.  He starts off fine saying he is for choice for parents, one program for abstinence only and another for a comprehensive view.  Maybe this makes some sense.  But then he talks about being comfortable with teaching condom use in the abstinence only class but ONLY in the context of marriage and goes on later to say marriage between a man and a woman.  Note his statement that the key word in this debate is huband/wife.

I’m sorry, but this guy scares me and he’s running the group that gets to decide what every child in Texas learns or doesn’t learn.

Ok, that’s enough, I’m tired now.  But I’ll leave you with the qoute of the talk from none other than Don McLeroy himself.

“I certainly don’t want to force my views on anybody else.”

Wow, I want that framed and put on the wall of every school board in the country and have it read at the beginning of every meeting and before every vote.