Almost 100 years ago, science teacher John Scopes was convicted of violating a Tennessee law that prohibited teaching the theory of evolution. Although his conviction was overturned on a technicality in 1927, laws banning classes on Darwin’s theory stuck around for another 40 years. They were ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1968.
Over the past few decades, conservative or religious groups that object to including the theory of evolution in science classes have tried a different approach. Now, they argue, if the “scientific” theory of evolution is taught, other views, such as “intelligent design” – a stand-in for creationism – should also be taught.
The approach is not limited to evolution. Legislatures across the country are proposing or passing laws that purport to encourage scientific discussion, but instead encourage students to treat established, scientific theories as equivalent to ideas that lack scientific study.
In 2012, legislators in Tennessee – the same state where the Scopes trial took place nearly a century ago – approved a law that obligated teachers to present the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories.” What constituted a scientific “strength” or “weakness” was not defined.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Similar bills were introduced in North Dakota in 2019 and Oklahoma in 2023. If the Oklahoma bill passes, teachers will be encouraged to explore scientific theories in class and to help students “analyze certain scientific strengths and weaknesses.”
And a new law in West Virginia allows teachers to discuss or answer “questions from students about scientific theories.” The bill’s author, state Sen. Amy Grady, said the law is about “encouraging students to think, encouraging students to ask questions and encouraging our teachers to be able to answer them.”
In my view, legislation dealing with the teaching of scientific theories is being used to influence what is taught in public schools. The law is likely to face a legal challenge. More than 20 years ago, in Kitzmiller v. Dover, a federal court ruled that intelligent design was not science; it lacked empirical evidence and testable hypotheses. Teaching it would violate the First Amendment’s prohibition against state support of religion.
As an educator – and as a scholar who studies the nature of science – I believe an understanding of scientific knowledge is critical; scientific theories are part of this knowledge.
Accepted scientific theories are the best explanations available so far for how the world works. They have been thoroughly tested and are supported by evidence, often pulled from different fields. For example, evidence supporting large-scale evolution comes from fossils, DNA analysis and comparing the anatomy of different organisms.
Scientific theories can be revised. They can change, or even be discarded, but they are durable. The history of science is full of stories about new evidence, reinterpretation of existing evidence and advances in technology spurring changes in the sciences. For instance, the discovery of the microscope in the 16th century literally changed how scientists saw the world.
Scientific theories have explanatory power about the natural world. The Earth’s gravity, for instance, can be explained through the theory of general relativity. Theories have predictive power, too. They can be used to generate research ideas. As summarized by astrophysicist and author Neil deGrasse Tyson: “A well-constructed theory should explain some of what is not understood and, more importantly, predict previously unknown phenomena that can be tested. A successful theory is one where experiments consistently confirm its predictions.”
- YouTubewww.youtube.com
Given these characteristics of scientific theories, the current crop of legislation governing how theories are introduced and taught in classrooms is concerning. Underpinning these laws is the assumption that accepted scientific theories are nothing more than conjecture.
For example, a 2023 bill from Montana prohibits science instruction on “subject matter that is not scientific fact.” The bill devalues scientific theories as hunches or unproved assumptions. It undermines their inclusion, as established ideas, in the K-12 curriculum. Atomic theory may be a theory, but it is fundamental to people’s understanding of matter and is a foundation of all the physical sciences.
Legislation that invites classroom exploration, debate or analysis of theories may mask other intentions. The sponsor of Senate Bill 140 in Oklahoma, for example, said he hoped the law would “expose the ‘theory’ aspect of evolution by allowing alternate views to be presented.”
Laws like the one passed in West Virginia go a step further. They open the door to discussions about alternatives to scientific theories. This allows nonscientific notions to be introduced covertly. Writing for Scientific American, Amanda Townley, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, criticized the West Virginia law. She expressed concern and said such laws open the public classroom door to false beliefs such as the Earth being flat or that crystals can heal.
In contrast to legislators who would allow any kind of theory to be taught in science class, experts such as Fouad Abd-El-Khalick, a leading international science education researcher, advocate that students in K-12 be taught about the characteristics of scientific theories in developmentally appropriate ways. U.S. standards for teaching science, for instance, say that by the end of 12th grade, students should understand that a “scientific theory is a substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.”
Students should be encouraged to think critically and ask questions – like “What is the evidence that supports this theory?” or “How was this theory tested?” – with the caveat that any theories in question should have already attained the status of “scientific theory” before being admitted into the curriculum.
Education scholars say K-12 education must provide students a “functional level of scientific literacy” that enables them to understand and make decisions about issues related to science in everyday life, from vaccines to baking cakes.
Part of attaining this literacy is understanding and trusting knowledge produced by science, such as facts, laws – and scientific theories.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
When Galeno-Sanchez was 14 years old, her father passed away in Mexico from cancer but she wasn’t able to visit him.
“I couldn't go to say goodbye to him, to tell him that I loved him very much, to give him the last hug,” Galeno-Sanchez said in Spanish. “It’s like a scar that stays with you.”
The heart-wrenching experience molded Galeno-Sanchez and, with the help of neighbors, the now 47-year-old converted her home into a vibrant butterfly sanctuary in an effort to bring awareness to the species that was declared vulnerable to going extinct.
Members of the Pilsen community helped paint butterflies outside of Claudia-Galeno’s home.Jacqueline Cardenas
The mother of two children had already founded Women for Green Spaces, an organization that promotes access to green spaces and the growth of pollinators in the Pilsen neighborhood of Chicago by growing native plants for the monarch habitat to thrive.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Every year, a generation of monarch butterflies can travel up to 3,000 miles from as far north as Canada to Mexico and spend the winters there. They reach Chicago by the end of May and, in most summers, there are three generations of monarchs in Illinois, according to the Nature Museum.
But the species’ population in Mexico has dropped by more than 80 percent since the 1990s and by more than 95 percent since the 1980s in California, according to the Center for Biological Diversity.
David Zaya, a botanist at the Illinois Natural History Survey, says part of the species’ decline is tied to the loss of natural grasslands across the state, making it harder for milkweeds (the only plant monarchs can lay their eggs on and caterpillars can feed on) to grow.
“A lot of the milkweed in the state was in corn and soybean fields that 25 to 30 years ago had milkweeds in them and now they don't because the way that farming is done is different,” Zaya said. “It's a lot more reliant on chemicals that remove weeds, including milkweed.”
There are other factors that have led the monarch’s numbers to drop, including climate change, droughts, pollution, deforestation, disease outbreaks, and pesticide and herbicide use.
Much of these effects have been caused by human beings, Galeno-Sanchez pointed out.
“We are practically destroying our planet. “We have to realize that after we destroy the pollinators and all the other species, we are going to destroy ourselves as human beings,” Galeno-Sanchez said. “We are not immortal.”
Though planting more native plants like milkweeds won’t solve the problem, it is “part of the solution,” Zaya said.
“What planting more milkweed does is it raises the baseline of monarchs that we can have and in raising the baseline, we have more protection from those dips,” Zaya said.
Since 2017, the University of Illinois at Chicago has partnered with more than 45 energy companies and transportation agencies to develop the first nationwide Candidate Conservation Agreement with Assurances.
This formal agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, non-federal property owners and land managers may benefit up to 26 million acres of land managed by energy companies and departments of transportation across the United States, according to UIC Today.
While these efforts are helpful at the local level, in order for the monarch species to truly survive, it requires a collaborative plan between three countries.
The Trilateral Monarch Butterfly Sister Protected Area Network, an alliance between wildlife refuges and national parks in the United States, Mexico and Canada, was born out of a collective vision to safeguard wildlife across North America.
The project has led to the creation of 13 monarch butterfly protected areas across the three nations.
Diego Pérez Salicrup, a plant ecologist at the Institute for Ecosystem and Sustainability Research at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, said another way the international community can help preserve the environment is by controlling forest fires.
Though controlling the fires “is much easier said than done,” Pérez Salicrup said. “The reality is that we don't know how much you need, or how often, or how. ... There's a lot of research we have to do.”
Pérez Salicrup said often people perceive forest fires to be destructive but if they are managed, scientists can prevent catastrophic fires like the flames that engulfed Yellowstone National Park in 1988.
“In places like the Monarch Butterfly Biosphere Reserve, if we remove the fires, we will come across that same scenario in 30 years,” he said in Spanish. “What we want is for there to be fires but in the dose and the frequency that the forest needs it.”
Elsa Anderson, an environmental assistant professor at Northwestern University, said that anyone can play a role in saving monarch butterflies and the greater environment, “no matter where you live.”
“Find a way to plant milkweed,” Anderson said. “Whether that’s in a pot, whether that’s asking your property manager if you can have a little space in the lawn to grow some native plants, whether it’s asking your property manager to stop spraying pesticides, everybody has a little entryway to their home or a small pocket of space where they can plant milkweed.”
Anderson recommends people download apps like BudBurst and iNaturalist, which can teach them about different plants and animals around them.
“Those are great ways to build your knowledge and your understanding, without needing to get a college degree or read a big heavy book,” Anderson said.
The next step in making a difference is to get involved in the political process.
“Talk to your alderman, talk to your homeowners association,” Anderson said. “Talk to people who are making decisions at a higher level about your neighborhood and advocate for more native plants.”
There are a lot of benefits to planting native plants that people can point out to those in positions of power in order to be heard, Anderson said.
Those benefits include: lower watering costs, higher water infiltration, reducing flooding, lowering heat, improving mental health and reducing violence in neighborhoods.
Galeno-Sanchez first nurtured milkweeds in her backyard butterfly sanctuary but has since planted the native plants across Pilsen, including at over four local elementary schools and several local churches.
Women for Green Spaces, with its nearly 40 members, recently earned $14,000 from the Chicago Region Tree Initiative to locate places in the city that disproportionately lack trees and plant them there.
Galeno-Sanchez said she hopes adding more trees can help rebuild another piece of a frailing ecosystem.
“We need to increase the number of trees, and not only in Pilsen. We have to increase the number of trees all over the planet, in all countries," she said.
Women for Green Spaces also earned $3,000 from Whole Kids to plant fruits and vegetables in Orozco Community Academy’s community garden.
Despite her efforts, Galeno-Sanchez only has faded memories of a garden that was once filled with monarch butterflies fluttering their wings while resting on leaves.
“This year has really shaken me up in a way I didn’t expect,” she said. “I didn't expect to see my garden empty, without monarch butterflies."
The mother said she can’t help but feel like everything she is doing is still not enough.
“Honestly, I would like to feel that all this is helping but I am losing hope. I don’t want to lose them,” She said, letting out a deep sigh before picking her head up and saying with conviction: “Look, we can’t lose hope because we have no other choice. I want my grandchildren to know about the monarch butterflies.”
