"16% of US science teachers are creationists"

So sayeth the new scientist:

The researchers polled a random sample of nearly 2000 high-school science teachers across the US in 2007. Of the 939 who responded, 2% said they did not cover evolution at all, with the majority spending between 3 and 10 classroom hours on the subject.

However, a quarter of the teachers also reported spending at least some time teaching about creationism or intelligent design. Of these, 48% – about 12.5% of the total survey – said they taught it as a "valid, scientific alternative to Darwinian explanations for the origin of species".

Science teaching experts say they are not surprised to find such a large number of science teachers advocating creationism.

"It seems a bit high, but I am not shocked by it," says Linda Froschauer, past president of the National Science Teachers Association based in Arlington, Virginia. "We do know there's a problem out there, and this gives more credibility to the issue."
Better training

When Berkman's team asked about the teachers' personal beliefs, about the same number, 16% of the total, said they believed human beings had been created by God within the last 10,000 years.

Depressing, really.

Frankly, I am surprised. I'd expect this number to be much higher.

Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Frankly, I am surprised. I'd expect this number to be much higher.

I agree. I'm just thinking about all of the education majors I knew in college (granted almost none of them were interested in science) and a pretty good portion of them (I'd unscientifically say 1/3) were highly religious.

And since there aren't enough science teachers to go around, many educators from other backgrounds are being pressed into service for basic sciences to free up the "real" ones for higher-level classes.

So of course these ones are going straight into the rooms full of elementary, junior high, and freshman earth-science kids- the nigh impressionable ones. Sweet.

kaostheory wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Frankly, I am surprised. I'd expect this number to be much higher.

I agree. I'm just thinking about all of the education majors I knew in college (granted almost none of them were interested in science) and a pretty good portion of them (I'd unscientifically say 1/3) were highly religious.

Just being religious doesn't mean you're a young-earther or any other form of radical fundamentalist.

kaostheory wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Frankly, I am surprised. I'd expect this number to be much higher.

I agree. I'm just thinking about all of the education majors I knew in college (granted almost none of them were interested in science) and a pretty good portion of them (I'd unscientifically say 1/3) were highly religious.

Just 'cause you're religious doesn't necessarily mean you believe in bad science. Or in teaching bad science. Highly religious != Creationist.

clover wrote:

And since there aren't enough science teachers to go around, many educators from other backgrounds are being pressed into service for basic sciences to free up the "real" ones for higher-level classes.

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Sometimes I think that if there wasn't whole Atlantic between us, it would had to be made.

Spirituality and awareness cannot be taught. It is a deeply personal experience. Thus, schools should stick to teaching science... something that can be taught.

But dogma can be taught! So let's run with that.

Staats wrote:
clover wrote:

And since there aren't enough science teachers to go around, many educators from other backgrounds are being pressed into service for basic sciences to free up the "real" ones for higher-level classes.

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Fun fact: E Hunnie is in her third year of teaching for Chicago Public Schools. I'm in my third year in the corporate sector. We make almost the same amount. (I am decidedly ambivalent about this.)

wordsmythe wrote:
Staats wrote:
clover wrote:

And since there aren't enough science teachers to go around, many educators from other backgrounds are being pressed into service for basic sciences to free up the "real" ones for higher-level classes.

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Fun fact: E Hunnie is in her third year of teaching for Chicago Public Schools. I'm in my third year in the corporate sector. We make almost the same amount. (I am decidedly ambivalent about this.)

Try running those numbers when you're both 5, 10, 15+ years into your career. Teaching salaries quickly get left behind unless they go back for their Masters and PhD.

shihonage wrote:

Spirituality and awareness cannot be taught. It is a deeply personal experience. Thus, schools should stick to teaching science... something that can be taught.

Well said.

clover wrote:

But dogma can be taught! So let's run with that.

OG_slinger wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Staats wrote:
clover wrote:

And since there aren't enough science teachers to go around, many educators from other backgrounds are being pressed into service for basic sciences to free up the "real" ones for higher-level classes.

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Fun fact: E Hunnie is in her third year of teaching for Chicago Public Schools. I'm in my third year in the corporate sector. We make almost the same amount. (I am decidedly ambivalent about this.)

Try running those numbers when you're both 5, 10, 15+ years into your career. Teaching salaries quickly get left behind unless they go back for their Masters and PhD.

Funny that we're both looking into going back to school as well.

wordsmythe wrote:
Staats wrote:

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Fun fact: E Hunnie is in her third year of teaching for Chicago Public Schools. I'm in my third year in the corporate sector. We make almost the same amount. (I am decidedly ambivalent about this.)

What are both of your bachelors' in? I looked at teaching high school math when I graduated, but the pay difference would have been 10-15K right out of the gate and would only get larger over time. Even with a (mandatory, it seems) master's down the road, a strong financial incentive was present to teach at the college level or work in industry.

Staats wrote:
wordsmythe wrote:
Staats wrote:

I think this is root of this issue. You want good science? Hire scientists. (Start by paying well.)

Fun fact: E Hunnie is in her third year of teaching for Chicago Public Schools. I'm in my third year in the corporate sector. We make almost the same amount. (I am decidedly ambivalent about this.)

What are both of your bachelors' in? I looked at teaching high school math when I graduated, but the pay difference would have been 10-15K right out of the gate and would only get larger over time. Even with a (mandatory, it seems) master's down the road, a strong financial incentive was present to teach at the college level or work in industry.

I was English, she was education (minor in math).

Ah.. English. I'm thinking paying to attract science majors. There are only so many people that enjoy teaching enough to work for 50% of their industry potential.

I like to teach, but my experience has been with adults. I think kids would likely shred me.

Staats wrote:

Ah.. English. I'm thinking paying to attract science majors. There are only so many people that enjoy teaching enough to work for 50% of their industry potential.

If you teach a "needed specialty" (science, math, or foreign language) for low-income schools for a certain amount of time, the Department of Education will forgive a percentage of your student loans. That's a little like paying people extra, at least for a few years.

Yea, I know a few people that have done that - in fact, a couple of my high school teachers had just left such programs. I see where they're coming from (some bodies are better than no bodies) but programs like this encourage high turnover and a "hunker down" mentality to teaching.

Staats wrote:

Yea, I know a few people that have done that - in fact, a couple of my high school teachers had just left such programs. I see where they're coming from (some bodies are better than no bodies) but programs like this encourage high turnover and a "hunker down" mentality to teaching.

Our whole public education system encourages this sort of behavior.

KaterinLHC wrote:
kaostheory wrote:
Gorilla.800.lbs wrote:

Frankly, I am surprised. I'd expect this number to be much higher.

I agree. I'm just thinking about all of the education majors I knew in college (granted almost none of them were interested in science) and a pretty good portion of them (I'd unscientifically say 1/3) were highly religious.

Just 'cause you're religious doesn't necessarily mean you believe in bad science. Or in teaching bad science. Highly religious != Creationist.

*high five*