Some guidance of the teaching of creationism and ID in schools

The following is adapted from the guidance given to schools in Cornwall by the advisor, David Hampshire, but will apply to most locally agreed syllabuses for RE.

In 2007 the Department for Children, Schools and Families issued guidance on the place of creationism and intelligent design in Science lessons. This was clearly in response to the concern of some in the world of Science that creationism and intelligent design were being presented as scientific theories; as opposed to philosophical or theological positions in their own right. The DCSF guidance states that there is no place for teaching about intelligent design or creationism in Science but that these theories would be covered in Religious Education, Citizenship and History, with a clear emphasis on RE as the main place for such discussions. This guidance sets out Cornwall’s SACRE’s position in relation to teaching about creationism and intelligent design in RE lessons in Cornwall’s maintained schools, particularly secondary schools.

It is important to recognise that there is no such thing as ‘religion’ per se, and in fact no such thing as ‘science’. There are people who describe themselves as religious and religions and there are scientists and scientific schools of thought. Of course religious traditions and scientific schools of thought tend to be highly complex in themselves; and, within one religion there may be significant differences, both in thought and practice, and teachers need to be clear that they do not stereotype either religion or science.

The place of science in the RE curriculum

It is quite clear that from KS1 onwards issues relating to science and scientific theory will emerge when pupils look at the creation narratives in Christianity, Judaism and other religious traditions. Questions of fact and truth often arise when discussing the Genesis narratives but it does not follow that teachers themselves are secure in their knowledge and understanding of Christian positions in relation to those texts, nor Jewish positions. Experience would tell us that many teachers present Genesis Chapters 1 and 2 as if all Christians believed that they were literally true, or even that the authors believed them to be literally true, when in fact the situation is much more complex than that.

In terms of KS3 it is the case that schools must dedicate some time to looking at the relationship between religion and science:

There are two key questions: firstly, how do teachers in RE teach about science? And secondly: how do teachers in RE teach about intelligent design and creationism?

Teaching about science in RE

The focus of teaching about science in RE is to ask the key question: can science tell us anything about the issues of truth, meaning and purpose? And if it can what can it tell us?

Truth is a complex concept often presented as a simple idea. Pupils will ask: ‘is it true?’ Intending to ask the question: ‘did it happen?’ Truth in science is often presented as ‘that which we can say is true by the power of our observations’ or ‘empirical truth’. In this way we can talk of scientific theory (theory from the Greek: what I see). Scientists put forward theories on the basis of what they can observe. These theories are open to scrutiny and challenge; science progresses by the testing of theories to see if they are supported by the evidence available.

Truth in religious traditions works in a different way. Truth is to do with experience as a whole and how we make sense of that experience, especially in the context of a community. Hence, the writer of John’s Gospel clearly encountered Jesus as Truth in a way that a scientist could not test. In many ways truth in religion is more akin to poetic truth when we are dealing with language. Of course, it is important to stress that ‘religious’ or ‘poetic’ truth is not a lesser form of truth because it cannot be scientifically validated; it is a different way of using the term ‘truth’.

Likewise meaning in religion is not co-terminus with meaning as used by scientists. Religions look for meaning in a variety of places, not least the meaning of personal existence in relation to the world around. There is a debate whether science, per se, has anything to say about meaning at all; in the sense that science is not be able to ask the question: does the universe have value and if so where does that value come from? Or, does my life have any meaning other than the meaning that I give it or those around me? Or, if I wasn’t would it matter? Often scientists who have a secularised view of the world actually talk in philosophical terms as if they were talking scientifically and this can be explored with pupils very fruitfully.

The concept of purpose is also more complex than first appears. It is obviously the case that things have purpose, such as the liver or the wasp, but can they be said to have enduring purpose? Does that question make sense for scientists? It does for religious thinkers. ‘Is there purpose beyond function?’ is a useful question when exploring the relationship between religious and scientific thinking.

From this it could be concluded that scientists and theologians are separated by a common language. They use the same words in different ways but they are often presented as using language in the same way and this leads to confusion – not least among pupils. For KS3 RE it is important to explore the relationship between science and religion as presented in the media and to ask the question: is it really so simple? It is the case that there are prominent scientists who have a profound religious faith and it is clear that there are religious education teachers who have no belief in God at all or adherence to a religious faith. The key to success in KS3 RE is to ensure that pupils realise that the world is much more complex than it first appears.

Teaching about creationism and intelligent design in RE

If it is not possible to present intelligent design or creationism as scientific theories in Science then teachers should not present them as scientific theories in religious education. When presenting these theological positions it is important to put them in the context of wider theological trends. The question here is: are creationism and the theory of intelligent design theologically credible?

Creationism is the belief that Genesis 1:1 – 2:4 describes the process by which the world came to be. In this account the world is thought to be some 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Without doubt some Christians hold this position today. Intelligent design is the belief that the world is too complex to explain by the theory of evolution alone and this complexity leads us to posit intelligence in the design of the world.

In terms of good religious education it is important that teachers do not stereotype either religious or scientific positions. For instance, it is bad religious education to say that, “Christians believe that God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh” and that, “scientists believe that the universe started with a quantum anomaly that resulted in the Big Bang”. There are scientists who clearly do believe that God created the world as described in Genesis but those beliefs would not constitute scientific beliefs as they do not follow from scientific method. Likewise there are many Christians who are not scientists who do not believe that Genesis describes how the world came to be and base their beliefs not just on modern scientific theory but also on the Christian traditions of late antiquity and the medieval period – such as the writings of St Thomas Aquinas. This would be true of Jews who follow the traditions of Rashi and Maimonides. How the world came to be is often a less important question for many Christians than how do they respond to God in the here and now and what is the meaning of the events that are going on in the world.

It is clear that pupils need to have an appreciation of both exegesis and hermeneutics when looking at religious texts. Teachers should not be presenting Biblical texts in a simplistic manner but recognising that these texts were written in particular contexts and cultures and often respond to particular questions, some of which we no longer ask. It is also true that there are questions we now ask that Biblical literature does not have the capacity to answer and that is why there are faith communities which have continuity with the Biblical tradition who have developed answers to those questions, whether Christian or Jewish.

In many ways the focus of study should not be about the relationship between religion and science but in the way that different religious traditions respond to scientific theory and scientific and technological advances. In this way stereotyping can be more easily avoided.

In conclusion

It is obvious that the so called conflict between science and religion has had a high profile in recent years, especially with the publication of books like Professor Dawkins’ The God Delusion. What is important in RE is that the theological and philosophical issues can be discussed in such a way that promotes their understanding and that teachers do not perpetuate the ‘myth’ of the necessary conflict between science and religion. In order to do this teachers have to inform themselves of the issues that lie behind some of the discussions that have taken place and have a sufficient understanding of science and the limits of scientific discourse.