The launch of TiS has triggered public debate on teaching criticism of evolution and intelligent design in schools.

Top educators discuss our materials on the Science Upd8 website in a discussion begun by Tony Sherborne, Creative Director for the Centre for Science Education. Though he mistakes Intelligent Design for a pseudo-science and thinks it without supporting evidence, he does suggest that it can have a useful place in science lessons. The ongoing discussion shows how it is reasonable, even for sceptics, to consider including Intelligent Design in science teaching.

A less thoughtful approach was suggested by the British Centre for Science Education in the Financial Times letters column. This triggered a string of letters responding to this view: against, against (and see correction), for, for, against, and for.

Graham Stringer MP continues to press the BCSE line in the House of Commons. His early day motion now has forty-five signatories. He also asked the Secretary of State for Education and Skills “what advice he plans to give to schools on the information pack circulated to all schools by Truth in Science”.

He was given a holding answer by Jim Knight, Minister of State for Schools and 14-19 Learners:

It is up to schools to decide what teaching resources they need to help them deliver the national curriculum for science effectively. Neither intelligent design nor creationism are recognised scientific theories and they are not included in the science curriculum, the Truth in Science information pack is therefore not an appropriate resource to support the science curriculum.

The national curriculum for science clearly sets down that pupils should be taught: how uncertainties in scientific knowledge and scientific ideas change over time; the role of the scientific community in validating these changes; variation within species can lead to evolutionary changes; and, similarities and differences between species can be measured and classified.

Truth in Science has not claimed that the National Curriculum requires the teaching of Intelligent Design in schools. However, the National Curriculum is a minimum standard, and on 21 February 2005, Lord Filkin, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Education and Skills, confirmed that Intelligent Design can be discussed in schools.

Furthermore, the TiS resource pack contains much information that is explicitly required by the National Curriculum, including discussion of how variation within species can lead to evolutionary changes.

The Minister’s assertion that Intelligent Design is not recognised as a scientific theory raises the question “by whom?” Why is an inference based entirely on data collected from the natural world not scientific? What definition of science is being used here?

Richard Dawkins’ latest book promoting atheism is highly controversial, and not friendly towards Intelligent Design. But in our view he has made a useful contribution to the debate by stating (p. 58-59):

The presence or absence of a creative super-intelligence is unequivocally a scientific question...

Liberal think-tank Ekklesia attempted to link TiS with a story about Tony Blair’s views on creationism in schools. They were concerned by an answer he gave in an interview with New Scientist:

New Scientist: One subject that is of great concern to scientists is creationism. There has been a suggestion that creationism is being taught in some British schools. What are your views on this?

Tony Blair: This can be hugely exaggerated. I've visited one of the schools in question and as far as I'm aware they are teaching the curriculum in a normal way. If I notice creationism becoming the mainstream of the education system in this country then that's the time to start worrying. As I've said, it's really important for science to fight the battles it needs to fight. When something like MMR arises, or stem cells, that's the time to have a real debate.

TiS is promoting discussion of evolution and Intelligent Design. We would be interested to hear the Prime Ministers views on this, but the answer above is not directly relevant to our work. Major news outlets mentioned Tony Blair’s comments, but made no link to TiS.

The Ekklesia story is a confused account that lumps together: teaching controversy, Intelligent Design, creationism, astrology and tarot. They even accuse TiS of “getting fundamentalist-style religion into the science classroom”. TiS is simply calling for better knowledge of a scientific debate.