You are here
Senate Bill 112, introduced in the South Dakota Senate and referred to the Senate Education Committee on January 29, 2014, would, if enacted, provide that "[n]o school board or school administrator may prohibit a teacher in public or nonpublic school from providing instruction on intelligent design or other related topics."
A sixth-grade teacher's advocacy of creationism is at the center of the complaint in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on January 22, 2014.
Virginia's House Bill 207 received extensive coverage in a hometown newspaper — The Recorder, published in the district of the bill's sponsor, Richard P. "Dickie" Bell (R-District 20). In reporting on various bills introduced by Bell, the newspaper commented (January 23, 2014), "By far, Bell's proposal for science teachers has attracted the most scrutiny."
"When public-school students enrolled in Texas’[s] largest charter program open their biology workbooks, they will read that the fossil record is 'sketchy.' That evolution is 'dogma' and an 'unproved theory' with no experimental basis. They will be told that leading scientists dispute the mechanisms of evolution and the age of the Earth," according to Zack Kopplin, writing in Slate (January 16, 2014). "These are all lies."
Senate Bill 1765 (document), styled the Oklahoma Science Education Act, is the second antiscience bill of the year. As is increasingly common with antiscience legislation, SB 1765 would, if enacted, in effect encourage science teachers with idiosyncratic opinions to teach anything they pleased — proponents of creationism and climate change denial are the usual intended beneficiaries of such bills — and discourage responsible educational authorities from intervening.
At its January 8, 2014, meeting, the South Carolina state board of education voted to adopt a new set of science standards, rejecting two different proposals that would have compromised the treatment of evolution in the process.