Article Critique

Assignment # 1 (Article Critique)

Hess addressed the idea of teaching intelligent design in social studies verses science. Many critics feel teaching intelligent design gives the idea too much validity, “placing it next to science”. Many believe that intelligent design is a mask for religious pedagogy, which infringes on the separation of church and state. Some have gone as far as to call the inclusion of intelligent design in science classes the “indoctrination of religious ideals on students.” As most policymakers do, those involved in this debate wishing to please both sides have simply suggested moving the subject of intelligent design to another academic field (social studies). The article includes interviews and studies done. Simply moving intelligent design to another academic field does not solve the problem of giving it validity within public schools if indeed it is to be deemed “religious” in nature. To move intelligent design to social studies with the expectation that students will get the same lesson as if it were in science is not realistic. Those who teach science take a very different approach to how they deliver information from those who teach social studies. The scientific approach to intelligent design is much different then the societal implication of the idea. Scientist can prove or disprove parts of, if not the whole theory of intelligent design, while social studies teachers would more then likely cover the social ramifications of intelligent design within our society. One could even make the argument that it should be covered in both areas of concentration to offer the students a more complete scheme of intelligent design.

Simply moving intelligent design across academic boarders is not the answer. We as a society need to decide not even if intelligent design is religious or not, but if we can handle the idea of this being taught in schools. Whether intelligent design is religious or not is of no consequence in my mind. If explained in a cretin