Creationism in Schools

Image courtesy of Mystic Politics

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. [Genesis 1:1-2 NIVUK]

Now Genesis is one of the most fascinating books of the Bible. yet to put it next to A Brief History of Time or On the Origin of Species is erroneous to begin with. For a start, it was written in around 1400BC and it was impossible for anyone to be giving an account of their experience. Additionally, it is widely accepted to be written in a poetic form that dominated much writing of this time. Added to this, early Hebrew writing did not often follow chronological form as today's writing does; it was block logic rather than step logic. Other later poetry was often grounded in history, but that does not mean that the creation story was too. There is whole books written on Genesis exegesis and I will stop here. 

Image courtesy of Schools Week

As Durham Free School closed, some damming evidence was discovered and shared by Schools Week [See <here>]. It appeared that on at least one occasions creationism was being taught in a science lesson; illegal and against their funding agreement. 

Quite rightly, creationism is not part of the science National Curriculum. It has a place in education, but this may be in the RE classroom looking at the variety of beliefs about creation. There is great diversity in all faiths, and this should be fully investigated. Indeed the new GCSE RE will further cover different traditions within faiths. 

Sadly, this story will be used as evidence of the 'danger' of having people of faith teaching in schools and in particular science. It also brings Genesis into an artificial battleground, the arena of "Science versus Religion". I have blogged about this before <here> and I fear it also gives ammunition to those who would close all faith schools in an instant.

There are lots of good people of faith teaching in both faith and non-faith schools, they do an excellent job. This is an isolated incident, so please don't judge us all.

Science Teachers & RE Teachers

Science and Religion are portrayed to be in harmony in the Tiffany window 'Education' (1890) - courtesy of Wikipedia

I absolutely love teaching and studying science and religion. I regularly do battle with students who claim it has to be either just science or just religion. The look of surprise on their face is often as dramatic as it is concerning for me personally. A faith never questioned, investigated or tested is no faith at all.

I am Catholic and I teach in a Catholic school. This obviously shapes some of my thoughts and ideas on this topic.

Some would claim that God can only be eschatologically verified; could proved true (at some future point) but could never be proved false. See John Hick's allegory of a quest to a Celestial City for more on this:

In this parable, a theist and an atheist are both walking down the same road. The theist believes there is a destination, the atheist believes there is not. If they reach the destination, the theist will have been proven right, however if there is no destination on an endless road, this can never be verified. This is an attempt to explain how a theist expects some form of life or existence after death and an atheist does not. They both have separate belief systems and live life accordingly, but logically one is right and the other is not. If the theist is right, he will be proven so when he arrives in the afterlife. However, if the atheist is right, they will simply both be dead and nothing will be verified. (From Wikipedia)

I disagree that Maths and Science are the same at school. Maths doesn't change, but Science can and does. However I obviously wouldn't go as far as one of my school teachers who claimed, "Pah! Science, all just based on assumption.". I do love (A-Level standard and not beyond!) logic and it's use in philosophy. 

It could be argued that Science teachers don't want to be troubled by the inconvenience of religion. It could cause, I'd imagine, a lot of distraction and potential confusion. However religion exists (that much is verifiable), and can be of great significance to students and their families. Is it right to say, "No place for that, go ask your RE teacher."?

The Research Review in Academies Weekly has highlighted some of the findings of a project looking at "Secondary school teachers’ perspectives on teaching about topics that bridge science and religion". It begins by stating a universally held view:

"We know some students dislike science because they perceive it as hostile to their religious views. We know that some dismiss religious studies, believing that science and religion are inherently in competition, and that science has emphatically won."

As the review states, "the study is exploratory; illustrating issues rather than describing large-scale patterns." however it gives an interesting first point of reflection for our own school experiences.

Many of the science teachers didn't want to discuss science and religion as they saw it as too controversial and didn't want parental complaint. I guess this is in some ways the opposite of RE teachers who will go out of their way to address controversial topics... I've no idea if there are stats on parental complaints, but I am pretty sure one way or another RE would come pretty high up. I love that fact.

However two of the teachers did not actively shut down such conversations, one seeing it as compatible, the other realising that "it was such an important part of his students’ lives".

The author of the review said that she believed 'respect' for religion in science lessons would manifest in a variety of different ways (with naturally everything in between):

• “this is nonsense, but I don’t want a dozen parents complaining”
• “this is nonsense, but my students have the right to diverse views”
• “I’m personally not religious, but my students are and I think that’s very valuable”

The RE teachers had a different view, and like me, actively tried to develop and challenge students views, especially the polar ones. The study (unlike my own experience, perhaps due to my faith school experience, where some students verge on the creationist) found many students taking the view that "religion was no longer credible or that science trumped religious explanations". We do also have this commonly in a Catholic school too, for the record.

For good RE, it is vital that we can move beyond one or the other, there are a lot of views in between.; not least the Vatican's and my own! Like other teachers in the study, and despite my best intentions and degree level Science and Religion study, sometimes I know enough science to respond well to student questions.

The study highlighted the issues of guidance: "Science teachers have little guidance or help on how to address science and religion, and so are negotiating their own way through this difficult territory. Similarly, where can RE teachers go for help on answering the science questions relevant to religion?"

For me, one of the great sources of guidance is the Faraday Institute (see <here>) and I'd particularly recommend their really really excellent resource Test of Faith (see <here>). It gives a great introduction and is useful for KS4 and 5. However I have used a few bits with Y8 too.

Interestingly no science teachers in the study had considered inviting a scientist of faith to speak to students (I often use Francis Collins videos in lesson, see <here>). I am tempted to try and find one to bring to a General RE session with 6th form.

As the review concludes, this research "offers a description of the status quo, but also a challenge to break the “don’t ask, don’t tell” culture surrounding religion in science lessons."

I am looking forward to reading the article in full, and finding out more about this complex relationship that exists within our schools between the science and RE departments. To be continued...

Read the review in Academies Weekly: <here>
Read the full research article: <here>