Printable Version

Evolution Debate in South Carolina (2/11/05)

   

Early February, a subcommittee of the South Carolina Senate Education Committee rejected the clause in S114 that would have established a "South Carolina Standards Committee" to assess the place of evolution alternatives in public schools. A biology teacher who stood before the subcommittee testified that "there is no alternative to evolution that is science." (2/11/05)

On December 15, 2004, S 114 was introduced (by prefiling) in the South Carolina Senate and referred to the Committee on Education. In addition to revising how the state selects textbooks and other instructional materials, S 114 would, if enacted, establish a nineteen-member South Carolina Standards Committee, charged to "study standards regarding the teaching of the origin of species; determine whether there is a consensus on the definition of science; [and] determine whether alternatives to evolution as the origin of species should be offered in schools." The idea of such a committee was broached in the last legislative session, in a context that amply revealed its antievolutionist motivations. (12/23/04)

On April 29, 2003, the State Senate passed S. 153, a bill amending state approval of instructional materials and creating the South Carolina Science Standards Committee. The Committee, which includes two scientists and two physicians among the 19 members, will be charged with reviewing evolution and science education material. The legislation specifically outlines their duty to: "(1) study science standards regarding the teaching of the origin of species; (2) determine whether there is a consensus on the definition of science; (3) determine whether alternatives to evolution as the origin of species should be offered in schools." According to an alert by the American Institute of Biological Sciences, the legislation undermines South Carolina's strong science tradition and targets evolution, greatly concerning science educators and administrators around the state. The legislation is now being considered by the House Education and Public Works Committee. (5/15/03)

Sources: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, National Center for Science Education, National Science Teachers Association.

Contributed by David Applegate and Emily Lehr, AGI Government Affairs Program, 2003 AGI/AAPG Spring Semester Intern Charna Meth, 2003 AGI/AIPG Summer Intern Emily Scott, and 2005 AGI/AAPG Spring Intern Katie Ackerly.

Please send any comments or requests for information to AGI Government Affairs Program.

Last updated on February 11, 2005