Page 40 - Acoustics Today Spring 2011

Fig. 1. The National Center for Science Education provides scientific and legal information about evolution to teachers, school administrators, the press, and the public.
As our standards development proceeded, the little lead- in words at the beginning of each standard provoked debate. I was bothered by an asymmetry that I saw as unnecessary and scientifically unjustifiable: Evolution standards, like those above, were introduced with lead-ins like “Describe the evidence...” and “Understand the data...” while non-evolu- tion standards like “Know that matter is made of atoms” used dogmatic lead-ins like “Know that...” I argued that students would better learn about the methods of science and the nature of scientific knowledge if they had to understand the evidence leading to the conclusion that matter is made of atoms, instead of just knowing it as a fact. I made little head- way on that issue: The chemistry and physics teachers want- ed to retain their dogmatic emphasis on factual content, to save time and effort, and the anti-evolution contingent argued against dogmatic lead-in words only in standards involving evolution and the age of Earth. In the middle, the biology teachers were ok with lead-ins like “Describe the evi- dence...” as a simple reminder of how to make all students
volunteer activities, like reviewing articles for journals or helping organize conferences. Not so! He said that I would soon find myself crossing the line from advisor to advocate, and that Los Alamos employees cannot advocate for or against legislation—except as private citizens, of course. So my standards activity had to be as a private citizen—nights, weekends, vacation—and if I wanted to find a biologist I should try calling people at home. Many months later, it became obvious how wisely he had foreseen my transition from advisor to advocate—and then to activist, and eventual- ly to all of the above in a blur of multi-tasking.
On July 28, 2003, the Intelligent Design Network of New Mexico (IDnet-NM) issued a press release15 announcing a Zogby International poll purporting to show that scientists at New Mexico’s national laboratories supported teaching intel- ligent design along with evolution by a five-to-one margin. Based on my decades-long employment at one of those national laboratories, this statement felt insulting and outra- geous, almost as if IDnet-NM had said “five out of six mem- bers of the Acoustical Society of America believe the Earth might be flat.”
That poll nonsense triggered my personal transition to activism in the culture war, awakening me to the brazen mendacity of the leaders of the anti-evolution movement and the seriousness of their threat to public education.
In two weeks, we would be submitting our science stan- dards to the State Board of Education. Those ten elected and five governor-appointed men and women might vote to adopt the standards, reject them, or amend them. IDnet-NM members had been helping write and review the standards
feel comfortable in science class.
From advisor to activist
14
Soon after Steven asked me to help with the science stan- dards, I had started asking around Los Alamos National Laboratory (where I’ve worked since 1981) to try to find a biologist who might also want to get involved. The Los Alamos Government Relations Officer asked me to stop. I love a surprise, and that was a big one. I had been assuming that advising the Education Department about science would be similar to other unofficial but acceptable science-related
36 Acoustics Today, April 2011