The Emphasis Given to Evolution in State Science Standards: A Lever for Change in Evolution Education?

Science Education

Volumn 86, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 445-462

  Skoog, Gerald ^a   Bilica, Kimberly ^b  

^a TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141888369     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.10014     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Aguillard, D. (1999). Evolution education in Louisiana public schools: A decade following Edwards v Aguillard. The American biology Teacher, 61(3), 182-188.
2. Alabama State Board of Education (1995). Alabama course of study: Science (Bulletin 4). Montgomery, AL: Alabama State Board of Education.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1999). Statement on the Kansas State Board of Education decision on the education of students in the science of evolution and cosmology. Science, 286(5443), 1297.
6. American Federation of Teachers (1997). Making standards matter [Online], Available: www.aft.org/standards97.
7. Arkansas Department of Education (1997). Arkansas science curriculum framework [Online]. Available: http://arkedu.state.ar.us/sci.htm.
8. Arkansas Department of Education (1999). Science curriculum framework [Online]. Available: http://arkedu.state.ar.us/standard.htm.
9. Beem, K. (2001, Feb. 12). Kansas Board of Education eager to end debate. The Kansas City Star, A1.
10. Blank, R. (1996). How are state curriculum frameworks in science changing across the states? NASSP Bulletin, 80(577), 16-23.
11. Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy. Portsmouth, NH; Hinemann.
12. Collins, A. (1998). National science education standards: A political document. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(7), 711-121.
13. Colorado Department of Education (1995). Colorado model content standards for science [Online], Available: http://www.cde.state.co.us/download/pdf/science.pdf.
14. Doyle, D. (1999). De facto national standards. Education Week, 18(42), 36,56.
15. Finn, C., Petrilli, M., & Vanourek, G. (1998). The state of state standards. Fordham Report, 2(5), 1-39.
16. Georgia Department of Education (1998). Georgia's quality core curriculum [Online]. Available: http://www.glc.k12.ga.us/qstd-int/homepg.htm.
17. Goals 2000: Educate America Act (1994). Pub. L. No. 103-227 (3/31/94) Stat. 108.
18. Hoff, D. J. (1999). N.M. Board Scrambles to Avoid Kansas Comparisons (October 13, 1999) [Online]. Education Week on the Web. Available: http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug = 07ky.h19.
19. Holden, C. (1999, August). Kansas dumps Darwin, raises alarm across the United States. Science, 285, 1186-1187.
20. Johnson, L. (1954). The evolution controversy during the 1920's. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, New York.
21. Kansas State Department of Education (1999, Dec). Kansas curricular standards for science education [Online]. Available: http://www.ksbe.state.ks.us/outcomes/science.html.
22. Kennedy, M. (1997). The connection between research and practice. Educational Researcher, 26(7), 4-12.
23. Kentucky Department of Education (1999, Sept). Core content for science assessment [Online]. Available: http://www.kde.state.ky.us/oapd/curric/corecontent/science_cc_30.asp.
24. Lerner, L. S. (2000). Good science, bad science: Teaching evolution in the states. Long Beach, CA: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
25. Louisiana Department of Education (1997). Louisiana science framework: State standards for curriculum development [Online]. Available: http://www.doe.state.la.us/doe/publications/contents/ sci97t01.htm.
26. Maine Department of Education (1997). Maine's curriculum framework for mathematics and science [Online]. Available: http://janus.state.me.us/education/Tres/st.htm.
27. Minnesota Department of Education (1999). Scientific concepts and applications [Online]. Available: http://mecr.state.mn.us/la.pl?OBJ_REQ = VIEW&LA_ID = 6.
28. Mississippi Department of Education (1996). Mississippi science framework [Online]. Available: http://www.mde.k12.ms.us/acad/id/science/science3.htm.
29. Moore, R. (1999). The courage & convictions of Don Aguillard. The American biology Teacher, 61(3), 166-174.
30. National Academy of Sciences (1998). Teaching evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. National Research Council (1996), National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Science Teachers Association (1992). Scope, sequence and coordination of secondary school science. Washington, DC: NSTA.
33. New Jersey Department of Education (1998, Fall). New Jersey science curriculum framework [Online]. Available: http://www.state.nj.us/njded/frameworks/science/index.html.
34. New Mexico State Department of Education (1996). Content standards with benchmarks for kindergarten through 12th grade: Science. Santa Fe, NM: New Mexico State Department of Education.
35. New Mexico State Department of Education (1999). New Mexico standards for science [Online]. Available: http://www.cesdp.nmhu.edu/standards/content/science/index.htm.
36. Olson, L. (2001). Finding the right Mix [Online]. Education week on the web. Available: http://www.edweek.com/sreports/qc01/articles/qc01 story.cfm? slug = 17intro.h20.
37. People for the American Way Foundation (2000, March). Evolution and creationism in public education: An in-depth reading of public opinion. DYG, Inc., Washington, DC.
38. Quality Counts 2000. (2001). Seeking stability for standards-based education [Online]. Education week on the web. Available: http://www.edweek.com/sreports/qc01/articles/qc01story.cfm?slug = 17exec.sum.h20.
39. Scott, E. (2000). Not (just) in Kansas anymore. Science, 288(5467), 813-815.
40. Shankar, G. (1989). Analysis of factors influencing the teaching of evolution and creationism in Texas public high school biology classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas.
41. Skoog, G. (1979). Topic of evolution in secondary biology textbooks: 1900-1977. Science Education, 63,621-640.
42. Skoog, G. (1984). The coverage of evolution in high school biology textbooks published in the 1980s. Science Education, 68, 117-128.
43. Skoog, G. (1992). The coverage of evolution in secondary school biology textbooks, 1900-1989. In J. G. Herlihy (Ed.), The textbook controversy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
44. South Carolina Board of Education (2000, January). South Carolina curriculum standard: Science [Online]. Available: http://www.state.sc.us/sde/educator/standard/science/index.html.
45. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (1998). Wisconsin's model academic standards [Online]. Available: http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/standards/sciintro.html.
46. Wuethrich, B. (1999). Scientists strike back against evolution. Science, 286(5440), 659.
47. Zimmerman. (1987). The evolution-creation controversy: Opinions of Ohio high school biology teachers. Ohio Journal of Science, 97(4), 115-125.