printable versionReader questions scientific method behind assertions about creationism
I read with interest the article on Donald Kennedy's lecture that students who are taught creationism in high school lack the critical thinking skills necessary for college [because it] discourages students from applying the scientific method (Stanford Report, April 11). The article cites his credentials as having worked to improve science education and having read creationist textbooks. It would appear that to generalize about students' critical thinking skills based on something that has been presented to them or something they have read rather than their performance belies his stated dedication to the scientific method. What metric does Kennedy offer to support his conclusion? Have past Stanford students who have come from Christian schools somehow failed to demonstrate critical thinking skills necessary to obtain advanced degrees in science and mathematics, or have they, in fact, been acquiring these degrees since Stanford was founded?
I would guess that Kennedy's laudable efforts in improving science education imply that the lack of critical thinking skills is widespread and not just limited to those who went to Christian schools. Has Kennedy ever attended the science fairs run by the ACSI (Association of Christian Schools International)? I have, and I find them to be good examples of the students' curiosity and application of the scientific method—in spite of their having been taught creationism. At the intermediate school level, the projects were required of every student, not just those interested in science.
For the record, I attended public school. I am not a creationist and think that creation science is religion, not science. While I am not in favor of teaching creationism in public schools, I am also not averse to having it presented and examined. Students should see that some of the arguments presented on its behalf are misstatements of scientific facts, theories or principles. Ideally this would lead to a discussion of what constitutes science and the scientific method. I think Kennedy would probably agree that the latter discussion would further students' knowledge and appreciation of science. This would be preferable to dismissing an entire group of people as incapable of critical thought.
Several questions remain: Does Stanford, which aggressively seeks diversity in its student body and faculty, have room for those who hold religious beliefs that may conflict with some of the tenets of science? Are non-Christian students whose religions have unscientific creation beliefs (e.g., Hindu, Native American, Shinto) judged by the same standards as students from Christian schools? Are there scientific, social or historical heresies that are, for all practical purposes, banned at Stanford? And lastly, should Christian school students not apply for admission to Stanford because they will be regarded as not having the intellectual curiosity required for a college education simply because they have been exposed to creationism or come from a school with the word "Christian" in its name?
Brian Beck, '66
Whittier, Calif.
Editor's Note: In the April 11 issue of Stanford Report, the introductory paragraph of the story "Kennedy lectures on challenges facing K-12 science education" stated that, according to Donald Kennedy, students who are taught creationism instead of evolution lack the critical thinking skills necessary for college. The paragraph would have more accurately reflected Kennedy's words had it said the following: Teaching creationism instead of evolution in the classroom discourages students from developing a set of critical thinking skills that are necessary for college-level science, according to President Emeritus Donald Kennedy.