PIERRE, S.D. (AP) - South Dakota legislators are weighing whether to let teachers decide how much skepticism to work into lessons on contentious scientific topics such as evolution and climate change.
A House committee today is set to consider the measure, which would give legal protection to teachers who want to discuss "in an objective scientific manner the strengths and weaknesses" of the subjects.
South Dakota is one of at least three states, along with Texas and Oklahoma, considering such a bill. Louisiana, Mississippi and Tennessee have enacted similar laws, according to Glenn Branch, deputy director of the California-based National Center for Science Education, which opposes the proposal.
Branch said there are concerns such a bill would embolden some teachers to start presenting creationism in their classrooms.
Critics argue the measure is bad for students and allowing teachers to teach any science curriculum they choose could subject school districts to litigation. Federal courts have struck down attempts to present creationism in various forms at public schools, Branch said.
South Dakota Sen. Jeff Monroe, the bill's prime sponsor, said that teachers should be able to talk about weaknesses in scientific theories, but he disputed it would allow for creationism to seep into school teachings. Rogue teaching of creationism instead of science wouldn't happen because it's not included in South Dakota's science content standards, he said.
The Republican has said that he has heard from concerned teachers, including one who was chastised for discussing how embryos develop and another who was frustrated she was forced to teach climate change as a fact.
"That's how we got off the theory that man can't fly, that's how we got off the flat earth theory, by analyzing the theories, not by being stuck, told this is true and you're going to believe it and they're going to teach it as true," said Monroe, who added it could help students learn.
The effort may face a hurdle in GOP Gov. Dennis Daugaard, who said in a recent letter to a group of Augustana University professors that he views the bill as unnecessary.
Deb Wolf, a high school science instructional coach who helps teachers in Sioux Falls schools write science curriculum said the bill is superfluous. She said she's concerned it would protect educators who teach things that aren't "truly science."
Pam Wells, a Mobridge-Pollock High School science teacher, said some parents have asked her to teach intelligent design during her 35 years in public schools. Wells said she read the textbooks they gave her on the subject, but decided not to include it in her curriculum because the theories weren't based in science.
Wells said one high school senior told her that he wouldn't come to her class if she dropped evolutionary theory and picked up intelligent design. "He said, 'If I wanted to learn about that I'd go to church," said Wells, who plans to testify against the bill.