The Wichita Eagle, August 3, 2000, Thursday

Debate over science standards in Kansas is far from over

By Jenny Upchurch

    The state's controversial science standards most likely will be
replaced next year with ones that say evolution is a fundamental concept
of science.

    And new state assessment tests in science may be delayed until the
standards are changed.

    In the wake of Tuesday's primary, candidates and current members of the
State Board of Education said they would change the current standards,
which omit evolution. The board attracted considerable controversy and
national attention a year ago when it adopted the standards.

      Tuesday, voters rejected three of the four candidates who backed the
new standards, including incumbent Mary Douglass Brown of Wichita. Most
candidates in the Nov. 7 general election support adding evolution to the
standards.

    Although nothing is certain, the most likely scenario is that the new
board, to be installed in January, would review a science curriculum
proposal similar to the one offered last year by a 27-member panel of
science experts. Drafts of that proposal were rejected by a majority of
current board members.

    "Those were standards developed over 14 months, and I'd certainly like
to take a look at those again," said Carol Rupe, the former Wichita school
board member who defeated Brown in the 8th District Republican primary in
Wichita.

    Dick Williams, Rupe's Democratic opponent, said he also would want to
revise the science standards. Taking the panel's recommendations "would be
my action as a board member."

    Loren Lutes, co-chairman of the science panel, said he is looking
forward to "updating the standards as we feel they should have been. We
think it's pretty exciting."

    Still, the process is not likely to be easy.

    "People think it's very simple, a matter of just reversing a decision,
but it's not. It's very complicated," said Janet Waugh of Kansas City, one
of the four board members who opposed omitting evolution last year.

    And the debate still rages.

    Board members who discarded the science panel's standards said they
have never opposed teaching evolution.

    "I wanted evolution, too, if they'd agreed it be a theory, not a
fact.  We knew we couldn't teach creationism in science class," said Harold
Voth of Haven, who helped rewrite the science panel's proposal to leave out
evolution.

    "If there is a motion to reverse, then what are we saying?" said board
member John Bacon of Olathe, who voted for the standards last year. "Are we
saying that all we want taught in public schools is the origin of monkeys
to man?"

    No, said board member I.B. "Sonny" Rundell of Syracuse. "I have no
problem with creationism. I'm a born-again Christian, but I think we need
to cover all parts of the sciences in the standards."

    However, Rundell said, he will not go along with a quick fix.

    "I don't want us to go in and cut and slash," he said.  "That's what
got us in trouble before. Common sense needs to prevail, and I don't think
it did to begin with."

    At least one voter in Derby agreed. "I think they need to study it. I
think they should do a little research before they start pushing it on the
children," Lesa Lusk said of the standards. She voted for Rupe because she
liked her moderate views.

    Other parents who voted for Rupe said they wanted their children to
learn about evolution.

    "I would like to see more of an emphasis on physical science and more
open to scientific interpretation in biology. Scientific truth must be
followed," said David Neighborhood of Wichita.

    Religion, said Sandy Witsman, shouldn't have anything to do with what
children learn in science. "There are a lot of scientists who are also
Christian. I don't think the two are in opposition to each other."

    The anticipated flip-flop in science standards may complicate the
state's student assessment process, however.

    The state Department of Education is now writing science assessment
tests based on the existing standards.

    "When we change the science standards, it may necessitate some
tweaking
of the science assessment," said Bill Wagnon, a board member from Topeka.
"The new standards have not been in effect long enough to have had
districts out investing large amount of money in new curriculum
materials."

    (Julie Mah, Nicole Hughes and Warisa Chulindra of The Eagle contributed
to this article.)

POWRÓT