According to the BHA website, Government changes Free School model funding agreement to ban creationist schools. From that article:

The British Humanist Association (BHA) has welcomed a new revision of the model funding agreement for Free Schools by the Government in order to preclude ‘the teaching, as an evidence-based view or theory, of any view or theory that is contrary to established scientific and/or historical evidence and explanations.’ This highly significant change has been made in order to ban creationism from being taught in Free Schools, and prevent creationist groups from opening schools. The change follows the BHA coordinating the ‘Teach evolution, not creationism!’ campaign, which called for this precise change.

Good news indeed. More information at the BHA website, with further onward links.

Bookmark It

The British Humanist association reports that the Everyday Champions Church is returning to the Free Scool fray (Creationist Everyday Champions Church re-launch Free School bid as ‘Exemplar Academy’). Sort of, anyway.  It turns out it’s the same people, without overt Church involvement.  According to the BHA:

Everyday Champions Academy was proposed and sponsored by Everyday Champions Church, a creationist church based in Newark. Following having their bid rejected, the team met with the Department for Education in an attempt to get the decision overturned, and their local MP, Patrick Mercer, met with Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove to attempt the same thing.

What the heck their MP is doing trying to go against Government policy on not teaching creation?  Anyway, the people behind the bid are trying again.

The new Exemplar Academy is proposed by the same group of individuals from Everyday Champions Church as proposed the previous Free School, however the Church is no longer sponsoring the school, and the school will no longer be formally designated with a religious character. Instead, it will have a Christian ‘faith ethos’. 

Sounds ominous to me.  It’s worth visiting the BHA site for the full low-down.  Of course this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to attempts by evangelicals and fundamentalists to drum their ridiculous creationist notions into children’s minds.

Bookmark It

The latest newsletter from the British Centre for Science Education (BCSE) is now available on the BCSE Blog.

Bookmark It

Happy Kitzmas. This is the sixth anniversary of the famous decision in Kitzmiller vs Dover School Board, which really exposed the duplicity of those in the Intelligent Design creationist movement. Judge Jones, who many did not see as a particular ally to those fighting this incursion of religion into American schools, actually provided a exceptional smack-down of the devious and dishonest strategy taken by those wishing to push Intelligent Design creationism as science. This has led to many US-based bloggers to conclude that Intelligent Design creationism is something of a ‘busted flush’. But in reality, this is only true in the USA, where publicly funded schools are prohibited by the Constitution from teaching or promoting religion. In contrast, here in the UK we have a government that actively encourages the development of faith schools, and via its ideologically driven Free Schools raises the spectre of increasing the presence of creationism in our nation’s schools.

I have been re-reading much of the Dover trial transcripts and associated material available on the web, and quite frankly the hopelessness of the Intelligent Design creationists’ position should have been evident from the start.  In fact it was obvious to the Discovery Institute, who with drew their ‘big guns’ from the case.  Crucial to the case was the testimony of Barbara Forrest, who’s book Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design (written in collaboration with Paul Gross) clearly demolishes any pretence that Intelligent Design is in any way different from any other religious ideology.  Indeed, the underlying history of the ID creationist movement is littered with creationist and religious outpourings by ID creationist principals, all of whom I suspect clearly recognise where their support (particularly financial) was to be sourced.

The Discovery Institute did their best to prevent Forrest’s testimony.  In an article written a few months after Jones handed down his verdict, Forrest makes some interesting points, including the appearance of a faked interview (later flagged as a ‘parody’) – unfortunately this appears to have been ‘disappeared’ from the web. Interestingly, one reads that William Dembski attended Forrest’s deposition – and withdrew from the case four days later.

So, why do I not recognise this as the end of Intelligent Design creationism?  Because in the UK, we are seeing an upsurge of interest in religiously motivated schools, using the government’s Free School programme.  This of course is seen by some as pushing at the open door labelled ‘Faith Schools’.  If the Catholics and Church of England can run so many schools, why can’t the more aggressive evangelical arm of creationism do the same? (There are some other kinds of faith school, but this article is concerned mostly with those of a christian focus.) The British Humanist Association is most concerned (More creationist Free Schools planned for 2013 opening), as is the BCSE.

One possible source for creationist material is the Centre for Intelligent Design (C4ID). C4ID is based in Glasgow, is run by a triumvirate of evangelical christians (at least one of whom preached the literal truth of the creation as described in Genesis), and funded by unclear means.  It seems to be largely a conduit for pushing the kind of material produced by the Discovery Institute. Recent events organised by C4ID have included an especially secret Intelligent Design conference, a lecture tour (mostly of churches) by American ID proponent Michael Behe, and last month a lecture by the senior Discovery Institute figure Stephen Meyer. I was invited to the latter event, and blogged about the reasons I didn’t go - also see this follow-up article.  On the ground, we have a young man, Jonathan McLatchie, with a strange internet presence. I don’t think he’s officially part of C4ID, but he is clearly part of the ID creationist machine, frequently posting his garbled and distorted accounts of biology in attempts to make evolution look unfounded.  Amusingly, McLatchie often cross-posts his material over at a christian website, where his other postings make interesting reading.  His latest biology related drivel can be seen at the (bizarrely named) Evolution News and Views blog: Treasure in the Genetic Goldmine: PZ Myers Fails on “Junk DNA” (in which McLatchie has another go at PZ Myers – see Moran and Myers’ take at Sandwalk) and Animation Reveals Engineering Elegance of RNA Interference (in which McLatchie seems somewhat overawed by an animation of molecules in action).  I do worry that all this blogging activity will jeopardise his progress towards gaining his Masters in Evolutionary Biology.  Yes, Jonathan McLatchie, a person who choses to believe that evolution is wrong and that life is due to the efforts of a supernatural entity, appears to be studying for a Masters in Evolutionary Biology.  When my irony meter subsides, two thoughts cross my mind – firstly, whether McLatchie seeks to emulate Jonathan Wells (who’s misapprehensions of Junk DNA he frequently parrots), and secondly, how he presents his belief system while at university.

So, Merry Kitzmas to my American colleagues.  Not such a Merry Kitzmas over the pond in Blighty, where an entrenched faith school system coupled with ideologically driven educational policies leave British kids vulnerable to being taught bullshit as an alternative to evolution.  With any luck, the C4ID crew will botch things as badly as did the defendants back in 2005.

Update: I forgot to include this link to an article in the New York Times revealing how the Thomas More Law Center sought a case like this.  The article (In Intelligent Design Case, a Cause in Search of a Lawsuit) begins…

For years, a lawyer for the Thomas More Law Center in Michigan visited school boards around the country searching for one willing to challenge evolution by teaching intelligent design, and to face a risky, high-profile trial.

It’s worth a read.

Bookmark It

The British Humanist Association alerts those concerned about such matters to further attempts by creationists to attain free school status (Another creationist Free School proposed for 2013):

A creationist Free School, Sheffield Christian Free School, has been proposed to open in 2013, and last week held a public meeting to gauge parent support. The British Humanist Association (BHA), which recently worked with other groups to launch a new campaign website, ‘Teach evolution, not creationism!’, has expressed concern at the continuing confidence of creationist groups in applying to open Free Schools, and disappointment that the Department for Education (DfE) hasn’t taken firmer steps to discourage such applications.

Sheffield Christian Free School will be run by Christian Family Schools Limited, who already run two private schools in Sheffield, including Bethany School. Both are members of the Christian Schools’ Trust, a network of over 40 private schools founded by creationist Sylvia Baker, author of Bone of Contention, who was the guest speaker at the public meeting. Sheffield Christian Free School’s curriculum policy will be ‘broadly based on nine themes found in the early chapters of the book of Genesis.’ Bethany School’s science curriculum is all about God’s role in creation, and creation appears throughout the school’s curriculum grid.

Presumably Michael Gove’s response to the Everyday Champions Church proposal will be repeated for this case.  The danger is that the Sheffield Christian Free School will succeed in pulling the wool over regulators’ eyes, unlike the Everyday Champions Church, which openly espoused the teaching of creationism.  Until they tried to deny it that is (Why the Everyday Champions Church’s Free School bid was rejected).  Going on the evidence of Bethany School cited by the BHA above, the Sheffield Christian Free School proposal is something to be worried about.  Interestingly, the Sheffield Christian Free School makes the astonishing claim that (my emphasis):

Professor Francis, based on extensive research carried out in the 1990’s, found that teenagers in the new Christian schools were spiritually and psychologically healthy. They were less superstitious, less racist, less likely to be bullied and more concerned about global issues than their counterparts in secular schools.

The claim that kids attending a school with a deeply religious focus are less superstitious than those attending other schools is quite interesting.  Perhaps faith schools breed atheists?  Or maybe the survey was carried out by people who don’t class christian belief as superstitious!  If you go here, you find a bit more information, such as the proud claim that only 7% of kids at Christian schools agree with the statement “I believe in evolution creating all things over millions of years“.  Ho hum.

Bookmark It

The British Humanist Association reveals why the Everyday Champions Church’s bid for a Free School was rejected (Everyday Champions Church Free School bid rejected due to creationism).  As the title of that blog article indicates, it was pretty much down to the ECC’s stance on creationism.  The Church’s leader, Pastor Gareth Morgan, made it pretty clear how the school planned to present creationism:

“Creationism will be taught as the belief of the leadership of the school,” Pastor Morgan said. “It will not be taught exclusively in the sciences, for example. At the same time, evolution will be taught as a theory.”

According to the BHA’s report:

The school’s bid was rejected on Monday, and the reason is now known. In having their bid rejected, the Church was told by the Department for Education that ‘The Secretary of State carefully considered your application, the views and beliefs of your organisation as set out in your application, your responses at interview and information about your organisation available in the public domain. He was unable to accept that an organisation with creationist beliefs could prevent these views being reflected in the teaching in the school and in its other activities. It is his firm view that the teaching of creationist views as a potentially valid alternative theory is not acceptable in a 21st century state funded school.’ The Church is now planning to re-apply for 2013, and is adamant that they would only teach the story of creation in RE.

It’s a little disheartening to hear that this bunch who clearly read the much (mis-) translated writings of a gang of bronze-age nomads as the literal truth of a supernatural entity are going to make a second bid to be allowed to interfere with the education of children.  Hopefully the next attempt won’t gain much more traction in the DfE.

Of course the wider issue here is that too many schools are faith schools of one kind or another.  I strongly support the BHA’s campaign against faith schools, though I fear in the current reactionary and socially conservative political scene it’s going to be an uphill battle.  See also the campaign to strengthen the prohibition of the teaching of creationism in science classes (Teach Evolution not Creationism).  In my view, the place for creationism  has its place in the curriculum: in Religious Education classes along with all the other creation myths that have been claimed over the millennia.

And as a postscript, the so-called Intelligent Design form of creationism is also not science.  It can propose no hypotheses, makes no testable predictions, and merely claims to infer the existence of an unproven supernatural entity.

Bookmark It

The British Humanist Association has some news on the latest tranche of Free Schools.

The headline news is that the Everyday Champions Church bid for a free school appears to have been rejected.  You may recall that the ECC is an avowedly creationist crew, which would not sit well with Michael Gove’s public statements that creationism is not to be taught as science. Indeed, Gove referred to creationism as ‘wackoidal’ in one recent statement.

Of the 55 schools given the go-ahead, 11 have an essentially religious character.  While this is actually rather fewer than anticipated, I would agree with the BHA that is remains an issue:

The 11 ‘faith’ schools include three Anglican schools, a Catholic school, three other Christian schools, a Jewish school, a Sikh school, a Hindu school and a Muslim school. Additionally, Frome Steiner Academy, a second state-funded Steiner school, is due to open. Steiner schools are not formally designated with a religious character, but still have complete control over their own curriculum.

The BHA also says:

One of the schools that progressed to interview stage, but has now been rejected, is Everyday Champions Academy, proposed by Everyday Champions Church. In February, church leader Pastor Gareth Morgan stated that ‘Creationism will be taught as the belief of the leadership of the school. It will not be taught exclusively in the sciences, for example. At the same time, evolution will be taught as a theory.’

I don’t know what the grounds for refusing the ECC bid for a Free School, but that statement from the church leader must have rung alarm bells up and down the corridors of power.  On the other hand, David Colquhoun (the well-known campaigner against teaching quack medicine and other non-science in Universities) has posted a set of three articles outlining why he believes Rudolf Steiner education to be ‘mystical barmpottery’ (The true nature of Steiner (Waldorf) education. Mystical barmpottery at taxpayers’ expense).

Bookmark It

C4ID’s Director Alastair Noble has come out fighting against proposals to legally prevent creationism in its many varieties being taught in school science classes.  His campaign, as ever, revolves around contributions to a variety of christian organs.  In the online christian magazine, Inspire, he has an article protesting against the proposal (Centre for Intelligent Design rejects ‘false claims’ of Dawkins and Attenborough).  [Note that while I can open that link using Firefox, Google Chrome cannot - at least on my computer]. As with many a christian website, commenting doesn’t appear to be possible.

With what appears to be a complete irony failure, Noble says:

“If this was about the integrity of science education,” says Dr Alastair Noble [...], director of the Centre, “then they would be campaigning for students to have access to all the scientific evidence about evolution and origins – including the positive evidence for design in nature and the evidence both for and against evolution.

“Scientific theories are only credible if they take account of all the evidence. Science always moves on. The 30 scientists who have signed up to the ‘Evolution not Creationism’ statement are attempting to prevent students from hearing the rational, well-evidenced arguments that cast doubt on neo-Darwinism.”

Dr Noble is always portrayed as a scientist (he has a PhD in chemistry rather than a biological discipline), yet he appears not to understand how science works. Intelligent Design creationism is not a scientific approach.  It has no explanatory power.  It makes no testable predictions.  It fails at all points of a definition of a scientific activity.  He does say:

“Students also need to understand the provisional nature of the scientific consensus. Science is not done by consensus. Indeed, students should be aware that some crucial scientific discoveries were made by individuals who challenged the consensus. The reality of science is that one individual scientist with sound evidence can trump the consensus.”

Intelligent Design creationism has no scientific approach of collecting evidence and interpreting it in a way that generates explanatory hypotheses for further testing.  Its sole approach seems to be to identify specific individual cases where an ID proponent cannot see an evolutionary explanation, then proudly proclaiming that it must have been designed – “God did it” rephrased as “the Designer did it”. Unfortunately for Intelligent Design creationism, each and every case where such claims inferring design have ben debunked using evolutionary mechanisms to explain their origin, supported by a wealth of comparative biological data.

Another chemist (again, not a biologist) is quoted:

John Walton, Professor of Reactive Chemistry at the University of St Andrews, agrees: “There are many doubtful passages and leaps of faith in the molecules-to-man evolutionary narrative scenario. The authoritarian attempts by old generation scientists to suppress discussion of alternatives are ill-advised and go against the open spirit of enquiry science should foster.”

Leaps of faith!  My irony meter just leapt off scale. Walton’s language is amusing – he’s using the language of church here.  Yes, there are gaps in our understanding of the pre-biotic world (which actually doesn’t really fall within the purview of evolutionary biology).  But at least some scientists are trying to construct hypotheses that offer an investigative route into understanding chemical events that may have occurred billions of years in Earth’s history.  What do the likes of Noble and Walton offer?  Merely intellectual cowardice and a desire to invoke a supernatural entity.  And as an aside, who, or what is that entity?  It’s notable that with very rare exceptions, ID supporters are fervent christians.  Noble and his C4ID triumvirate are clearly active christians (Noble is a lay preacher) – why don’t they come off the fence and identify their god as the designer?

Noble’s closing line is

“Dawkins argues that ID should not be taken seriously because its main protagonists are theists,” says Dr Noble. “But we don’t hear him arguing that by the same token evolution should not be taken seriously because its main protagonists are atheists.”

I would strongly suggest Dawkins’ position is really that ID creationism should not be taken seriously because it is an entirely unscientific enterprise. One might recommend that those persuaded that ID creationism is science might take a look at Why Intelligent Design doesn’t cut it: A Primer.  Again in this context, there’s an interesting article by James Williams (a Lecturer in Science Education), written following what sounds like an exhausting series of interviews alongside Alastair Noble for BBC local radio (Intelligent Design Creationism is not Science ).  I strongly recommend this account of the interview and Noble’s failure to grasp the objectives of the Intelligent Design Wedge Strategy.

Footnote: Personally, I am uncomfortable with the notion of legal prohibition of the teaching of anti-science in science classes, but frankly the disinenguity of proponents of ID creationism makes such a proposition increasingly attractive.

Bookmark It

Michael Gove: "no wackoidal theories"

Here’s a bizarre story from the Daily Express (Express.co.uk – Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Ex-spies to root out fanatics in classroom).  Seems as though Michael Gove is sufficiently worried about Islamic extremists that he’s established a gang of ex-MI5 agents to keep tabs on some of the products of his stupid Free Schools policy.

“I’ve been crystal clear we should not have schools set up by extremists whether they’re Christian fundamentalists,Islamic fundamentalists or any other sort of outrageous and beyond-the-pale organisation.  We’ve set up a unit within the Department explicitly to monitor anyone who comes forward with a proposal for extremism.  It’s more rigorous in the allocation of public money than any previous government department.  In the last government, we had money going to extremist groups that was supposed to go to fight terrorism. Now we have a unit in place to prevent that.”

I wonder how he classes the Everyday Champions; proposal for a Free School?  You know, the church that plans to run a school with seriously defective science education…

Mr Gove also said believers in fringe scientific movements such as “creationism” which rejects Darwin’s theory of evolution were banned from setting up schools.  He said: “I’m passionate about science and I’m determined to make sure our country becomes more cohesive. I’ve said we will not sign any funding agreements with these organisations.  More than that, we are reviewing the science curriculum, the national curriculum overall, to make sure there’s no space for the teaching of wackoidal theories.”

Mind you, the article does read more like a spoof news site than a national newspaper…what’s with the “…anyone who comes forward with a proposal for extremism” and “…there’s no space for the teaching of wackoidal theories”?  Did a Government minister really use the phrase “wackoidal theories?  And if that’s true, how come the Everyday Champions’ proposal got as far as an interview?

Bookmark It

The Christian Today website reports somewhat breathlessly that the creationist school proposed by the Everyday Champions Church in Newark has got the go-ahead from our somewhat underwhelming Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove (Evangelical school gets the go ahead in Nottingham | Christian News on Christian Today).  This appears to be another of the hopefully over-optimistic articles from the christian lobbies.  It begins

A school that will teach that God created the world has been given approval to open in Nottinghamshire.

An application by the Everyday Champions Church, based in Newark, has been accepted by the Department for Education.

But then later in the article says:

Now it has emerged that a panel of civil servants interviewed Everyday Champions Church leaders last week after their initial application was approved. It is not known if they agreed to drop plans to teach creationism.

So what gives?  If Michael Gove has approved an application from these nutters, where will it end?  Why should the nation fund schools run by idiots who say

“Creationism will be embodied as a belief at the Everyday Champions Academy but will not be taught in the sciences. Similarly, evolution will be taught as a theory.”

Doesn’t our foolish Secretary of State for Education realise this is creationist code?  I do wonder whether they will teach some alternative to the Theory of Gravity – perhaps while the teachers are all bouncing off the ceiling.  To hand education of our nation’s children to evangelical buffoons could be seen as sanctioning child abuse.

Update:  Visiting the Everyday Champions Academy website, one can see the following text in big bold letters:

Contrary to press coverage ECA has NOT been given approval to open by the DfE and will not receive an update on its progress to pre-opening stage until late September/early October. If the proposal is successful the Academy will NOT be teaching ‘creationism’ or ‘intelligent design’ in any science lesson in line with national curriculum guidelines.

So there is hope yet…

Bookmark It