As I described yesterday’s post, the evolution mandate is simply another antievolution ploy to influence the way teacher’s design curriculum in biology in general, and evolution specifically. Some of those who advocate this position claim that they are only protecting the science teacher from being persecuted for “critically analyzing” evolution. No evidence of such persecution has been documented. It is important to note that evolution is the only scientific theory in this bill that needs to be critically analyzed. No mention is made of any other scientific idea. This kind of thinking has permeated science education for many years, but emerged as the alternative approach for the antievolutionists after the court decision Kitzmiller v. Dover ruled that teaching intelligent design in public school biology classes violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. And indeed, the court said in its ruling that “intelligent design is not science, and cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents. So to undermine the teaching of evolution in biology class, the approach is to require the Trojan Horse of critical analysis. For more information on this, please refer to the National Center for Science Education.

But these same legislators will require that

Apparently they want history taught as if it is nothing more than factual. Yet, the Ancient Greek word historia means “inquiry, knowledge acquired by investigation.” History has a strong interpretive component, and should involve the active investigation of the past, as cited here. For example, the history of science education is not simply a list of facts or events, it is a dynamic story constantly being revisited as a true discourse of the past through the creation of narrative and past events relating to science teaching. The same is true of American history, in general. Yet, the same legislators who advocate critical thinking in science, demand that history be taught as simply factual.

Critical thinking should be a fundamental part of teaching. In my own view, critical thinking involves analysis and reflection focused on deciding an action or perspective to take. Critical thinkers in our classes have learned how to look at natural phenomena aware of their own prior knowledge, and approach the situation with an eye toward understanding and construction of new ideas. Critical thinking: It doesn’t need legislation.