The Kansas State Board of Education committee voted Thursday to not include teaching intelligent design and creationism in K-12 education. The board will reconvene in April to evaluate and accept or reject the committee’s decision.

The committee was asked to consider including teaching intelligent design and creationism in the science curriculum. In 1999, the board voted to remove teaching evolution from state curriculum, but it reinstated evolution in the classroom in 2000.

Jennifer Gleason, assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, said she was relieved that the committee didn’t side with proponents of teaching of intelligent design.

“They want to give an improper definition of what science is,” Gleason said.

The concept of intelligent design suggests that somewhere in the process of creation a supernatural being or force is responsible because aspects of creation are unexplainable and thus a result of supernatural intervention.

Evolution and its possible conflict with religious beliefs has been an issue in many states for many decades.

Pennsylvania, Ohio, Georgia and Kansas have had disputes regarding teaching evolution. Perhaps the most famous case of controversy over teaching evolution comes from the 1920’s case Tennessee v. John Scopes, commonly known as the “The Monkey Trial.”

Ed Wiley, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology, said that intelligent design and creationism weren’t science. To teach them in the classroom along with evolution will confuse students, he said.

Heidi Kuster, New York City graduate student, doesn’t understand why there is such a conflict between evolution and religion. Raised Catholic, she said her faith had no conflict with evolution as a theory, citing a letter issued by Pope John Paul II.

“Science doesn’t tell you how to live your life,” Kuster said.

Denise Shields, Olathe sophomore, said the theories should be taught together to provide a balanced viewpoint.

Nick Zawada, Sioux Falls, S.D., junior, said he didn’t necessarily agree with either of the two theories, but that educators should be fair and teach both.

Wiley, who was at the University of Kansas after the removal of evolution from the state curriculum in 1999, addressed the board after that decision. He is drafting comments to the board at the request of the science curriculum committee chairman, Steve Case, assistant research professor with the Center for Research on Learning.

Paul Mirecki, chairman of religious studies, said the board was reacting more to political pressure than to a belief that intelligent design and creationism were scientific theories. He said the opinions of voters and taxpayers should not define science.

“Science is not a democratic process and is not determined on the basis of majority rules,” Mirecki said.

...

“No, I personally don’t agree with it, but that’s just the way I was raised.”

— Josh Person, Olathe junior

“I don’t think they should be taught alongside each other. If you want to learn about it you should go to church.”

— Alicia Sagedal, Omaha Neb. junior

“Sure, it’s good to know about everything.”

— Brittany Windall, Chicago freshman

“Sure, the best thing to is to teach both sides and let the student decide.”

— Jeremy Riggs, Lawrence sophomore

s