PZ Myers talked about science education in America the other day. It was based on a scientific review of the country regarding evolution and the science curriculum standards of each state. Here is a handy map from the review:
As you can see, West Virginia got an F. There was a review in 2000 by another group (see the review for links) where we also got an F. So over 9 years, we have made barely any improvements in science standards regarding evolution. Apparently there is no mention of human evolution at all, but a reference to some biological evolution. Unfortunately the F grade means there is either creationist jargon included and/or disclaimers.
Unfortunately the information on West Virginia in this review is sparse. But in their appendix, is a table that shows the grade for various aspects of evolution in state science standards. Here is the part for West Virginia in 2009:
| State | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| WV | 10 | 30 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 45.5 | F |
Notes for the table columns:
- 2: The E-word is used, but not often. It may well appear more frequently in earth science or astronomy sections than in life-science sections.
- 3: Biological Evolution is mentioned, but not in a way that encourages clarification of its role in the life sciences
- 4: Human Evolution: No treatment of human evolution
- 5: Geological Evolution: Words such as “plate tectonics” and “continental drift” are used, but in a limited way and/or at the high school level only
- 6: Cosmological Evolution: There is a brief treatment, usually only at the high school level
- 7: Historical Sciences: Connections among the historical sciences treated?” No Treatment
- 8: Creationist Jargon: No use
- 9: Disclaimers: No use
- 10: Raw Score
- 11: Percentage
- 12: Grade
The book they used for this review: 21st Century Science 9-12 Content Standards and Objectives for West Virginia Schools, adopted in 2008.
PZ Myers said a few things that I think are important:
First thing you have to keep in mind is that state science standards just say what should be taught, not necessarily what is taught. States with great standards can still have many teachers who are doing a poor job and not meeting those standards; similarly, there are great teachers in those failing states that go above and beyond to teach evolution well. The standards merely represent what direction the educational authorities in that state want their schools to take. A state with an A standard is declaring that they are aiming high for their students; the F states have essentially announced that they are giving up and diving for the basement.
If your standards are good, don’t be complacent: keep them that way, and also work locally to make sure your school districts actually implement them. If your state is shading into the dark grays…look for a state citizens for science group, or if you don’t have one, create one. Write to your representatives and let them know what’s going on; maybe send them a copy of the Mead and Mates paper and shame them a little bit.
Do something, though. It would be nice to see the United States get straight As someday.
Well, our standards are not very good at all. I don’t know what we can do, but I figure the first step is awareness of the problem.
Your thoughts are welcome.
I went to high school in West Virginia, at Summers County High School, and our science class was rather good on these aspects. I hope this was not an isolated incident in the state.
Reply to This Comment
Neece Reply:
September 14th, 2009 at 1:30 am
That’s good to know, Chad. I hope your science experience was the norm. It might also be timing. Maybe things used to be better than they are now?
Reply to This Comment