May 26, 2004
Dear Dr. Harrison:
Thank you for your acknowledgement to us regarding the referral of my critique of the Glencoe Biology textbook to your science curriculum specialists.
Serendipitously, I just came across an article yesterday by microbiologist Jonathan Wells entitled “Survival of the Fakest,” in which he summarizes the highlights of his evaluation of contemporary evolutionary instruction as set forth in his recent book Icons of Evolution. I have not read Icons itself, but it has been cited in numerous forums as being worthy of serious consideration in the matter of how evolution has been, and is being, mistaught in today’s textbooks.
Mr. Wells’s testimony figured prominently in decisions recently rendered by state school boards in Ohio, and Texas…and now in Minnesota (since I spoke to the board on May 11) which made concessions to the wishes of the public and members of the scientific community there to correct textbook errors and open up the subject matter to more objective scrutiny in its high school courses.
Please note that according to the North Carolina Standard Course of Study (in its present format, as well as in its projected revision commencing in the 2005-06 school year, one of the goals established is to weave pertinent concepts pertaining to “Science as a Human Endeavor” through all instruction in biology. One objective to be reiterated regards “the role of science in society.” “Intellectual honesty and ethical tradition” are set forth as “hallmarks’ to be pursued in its practice. Additionally: “Perhaps the most important aspect if this strand is that science is an integral part of society and is therefore relevant to students’ lives.” “As students explore writing by and about scientists, they will uncover human drama…. They will understand that knowledge generated by one generation maybe is expanded, modified, or even discarded by then next generation.” [Emphasis added]
Please have copies of Mr. Wells’s paper, enclosed herewith, given to your curriculum and science specialists as it provides more pertinent detail with greater measure of authority than does my hastily drafted, local critique. Additionally, note that on the last page Dr. Wells grades several widely used biology books; one of these is the Glencoe text to which he gives a “grade” of D-minus, based upon its use and graphic depiction of the venerable (albeit scientifically unsupportable) “icons” he elucidates in his own book.
In your reply to us you indicate that your science specialists will deliver a report to the curriculum committee on our critique and requests to board. We herewith request that we be provided a copy of this report, if possible, before review by the curriculum committee, so that we can submit additional comments if needed based upon conclusions and any recommendations forthcoming from staff which may be predicated upon said report.
Respectfully yours,
Jeffrey C. Long
American Family Association of Cumberland County