Education Bureau needs to rethink its stance on teaching evolution

SCMP Education Mailbag - (May 8, 2009)

I was dismayed to read the Education Bureau's bizarre guidance for the teaching of biology ('Evolution advice confuses,' Education Post, May 1).

The Education Bureau states: 'In addition to Darwin's theory, students are encouraged to explore other explanations for evolution and the origins of life, to help illustrate the dynamic nature of scientific knowledge.'

There are several problems with this statement. Firstly, the modern theory of evolution is not Darwin's theory, it is a theory to which Darwin contributed. Secondly, there is no such thing as an explanation of evolution; evolution itself is an explanation.

Thirdly, there is no scientific explanation for the origin of life other than evolution, a point made clear in a joint statement by the national academies of science in 65 countries, including China, on June 21, 2006.

Sadly, the likely explanation for the Education Bureau's guidance is that the global anti-science movement has infiltrated the Education Bureau. The corruption of science education in Hong Kong is no small matter. It is to science that we must turn to fight pandemics and it is to science that we must turn to ameliorate climate change. Furthermore, children learn from the actions of their teachers. By giving dishonest guidance, the Education Bureau is teaching children to be dishonest.

That the anti-science movement has apparently been able to subvert the Education Bureau makes a mockery of the government's plans to establish Hong Kong as an education hub. It is imperative that the government strikes back to limit the damage.

Education Bureau personnel who are acting in direct contradiction of their duty should be terminated to make an example. The government should act to head off what is often the second prong of the anti-science movement's assault on an education system: attempts to lobby or pressure individual science teachers.

To safeguard against this the Education Bureau should require that science teachers explain to students why creationism and intelligent design are not science.

TORQUIL MACLEOD, The Peak