And does Patterson really think that Kansas has decided to avoid teaching evolution? You would think a journalist would check his facts first.

The standards are located on the Kansas State Department of Education website here at link

I have only glanced at the 123 pages. On that cursory glance, I note that there is indeed a fair amount of criticisms/questions about evolution in the additional specifics under the benchmark indicators, at least in grades 8-12.

There is one reference in the standards to irreducible complexity, which is located in the paragraph that questions whether microevolution can be extrapolated to explain macroevolution and the existence of systems that "appear irreducibly complex."

The only reference to the term "intelligent design" is a specific disclaimer on page ii that the standards do not include intelligent design and that the standards neither mandate nor prohibit teachers from discussing intelligent design.

As with all state standards, I am sure there are a number of weaknesses in the way the standards were drafted and a number of things that could be improved, and I will probably try to read through them in more detail at some point, but on a quick review it doesn't look to me like the sky is falling.

Eric

If it is true that the "Kansas board has now flung its students straight into the yawning maw of irrationality," rather that spew rage and rhetoric, try thinking like a scientist. Use this "observation" to develop a testable hypothesis about the Kansas student population. Then test. But why expect the self-appointed "pro-science" crowd to think like scientists.

Whether students from Kansas can excel should be a very simple question to answer: Treat them as you would students from any other state, and in 5 or 10 years, see if students from Kansas are doing significantly worse than students from other states. Indeed, this would be the scientific way of answering the question, as opposed to relying on fears and prejudices.

Exactly. Perhaps the critics are afraid to approach this as a scientific problem because they are afraid their rhetoric will be unsupported by the data. For example, the ACT has a science test and here are the 2005 results.

The avg Kansas score has been 21.6 and 21.5 for 2005 and 04, respectively. If Patterson is correct, those scores should begin to plummet. We could also compare Kansas to neighboring states (Nebraska, Oklahoma and Missouri) whose scores are similar. If Patterson is correct, the scores in those states should hold steady while Kansas plummets.

BTW, didn't Ohio make some similar change a few years ago? Their ACT science scores have not changed (although we only have two data points thus far).

"Okay, can someone please tell me what the Kansas curricula now states so I can determine of it merits discrimination?"

Actually, I have a post coming up about this.

"Krauze…the frightening truth is that these people sincerely believe what they say AND they believe that what they believe is obviously true."

To me, this would only be frightening if I thought there was a real chance of it happening. Remember when the editor of Scientific American wanted university presidents to refuse "admission to high school graduates who were not taught evolution as a fact in their preparatory curricula" They blew him off. I have difficulty imagining these presidents turning down students (a.k.a. paying customers), because of what Kansas high schools are teaching.

But this begs the question- How is the dogmatic indoctrination to NDE in any way helpful to students?