Hong Kong Liberal Religious Forum

Scientists urge excluding God from Biology - guidelines on creationism criticised
SCMP Feb-9-2009

Leading Hong Kong scientists have criticised the Education Bureau for tacitly encouraging schools to promote creationism in biology lessons through its guidelines on teaching evolution.

Four senior scientists are calling for guidance on biology teaching in the new senior secondary curriculum launched next September to be upgraded to reflect current scientific thinking.

The University of Hong Kong's dean of science Sun Kwok, science faculty board chairman David Dudgeon, former manager of its Genome Research Centre William Mak and geologist Jason Ali, say that would leave no room for teaching about creationism and intelligent design in biology.

Schools have discretion over how they teach academic subjects under flexible bureau guidelines and at least 30 aided schools teach creationism as an "alternative explanation" for evolution within biology.

Guidelines on the topic in HKCEE and A-level syllabuses require teachers to introduce students to the idea that evolution is a scientific theory supported with evidence.

A bureau spokeswoman said both syllabuses aimed to develop students' "skills, values and attitudes related to scientific thinking" but stipulated that alternative explanations to the theory of natural selection should be discussed.

"Evolution and other explanations should be discussed constructively and impartially against the evidence available, pointing out the limitation of science to provide a complete answer," she said.

The same objective applied in the senior secondary curriculum and assessment guide for biology classes leading to the new Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education.

"In section II, genetics and evolution, students are expected to understand that evolution is a scientific theory supported with evidence and are encouraged to explore other explanations for evolution and the origins of life in addition to Darwin's theory," she said.

Professor Kwok said the advice showed a failure to understand what scientific knowledge was all about. "Science is limited to what we can observe because scientific theories have to be tested by experiment or observation. So, by definition, it is limited, but that doesn't mean that any alternative theory can be discussed in the science class. Certainly, there is no room for creationism and intelligent design. Debates within science classes should be limited to true scientific debates between competing scientific theories."

Professor Dudgeon, a freshwater ecology expert, said: "There are no substantive competing scientific explanations for evolution. Every fossil dig that people go out on essentially produces evidence that supports Darwin's theory. Each one could produce evidence that refutes Darwin's theory but it does not.

"It is ludicrous, if this theory is so important, that we are teaching alternatives. We are not still teaching students that the moon is made of green cheese or the earth is flat."

The bureau had missed a "golden opportunity" to bring the teaching of evolution up to a level that "reflects international best practice and scientific rigour" in the new senior secondary curriculum.

Noted Sars and bird flu researcher Malik Peiris, who is HKU's chair professor of microbiology, said: "In biology, we should confine ourselves to the basic philosophy of the scientific method. Creationism does not fit in that category. However, it may be discussed to illustrate the social context in which science operates."

Schools that offer creationism as an alternative to evolution in biology include 27 run by the Church of Christ in China Association.

A spokeswoman for the Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority said there were no questions on creationism or intelligent design in existing exam papers for science subjects and no plans to introduce such questions.

The big divide: fact or faith

Chan Yau-chi, principal of United Christian College in Shek Kip Mei:
"When we teach about Darwin we treat it as one part of the subject. We teach students creationism as a counterbalancing theory."

Wong Shiu-hung, principal of Kwai Chung Methodist College, said:
"Our religious belief does not approve of evolution. We organise schools upholding Christian faith. If teachers have such a religious background, we encourage them to integrate their faith into lessons."

Siu Sze-chuen, headmaster of Newman Catholic School:
There was no space for creationism because examiners did not accept it. If exam pressure was reduced, "it surely would be a good thing" to introduce creationism as an alternative.

Biology teacher Chan Hiu-ki, Yuen Long Lutheran Secondary School:
stages class debates on the subject. "One side supports the idea that evolution is the theory of the origin of living organisms and the other argues all organisms were created by God."

Amy Nip and Liz Heron

似乎需要成立「宗教濫用津貼學校科學課堂關注組」

宗旨：防止濫用由公帑支助的津貼學校科學課堂教授或討論非科學理論。

目標：政府立法或行政上禁止任何津貼學校於科學課堂教授或討論非科學理論。

解釋：

一些具基督教背景的學校及老師以討論「進化論之外的理論」為理由，在生物學課堂介紹或討論「創造論」及「智慧設計論」。事實是，目前並沒有與進化論抗衡的物種起源科學理論。「創造論」或「智慧設計論」並不是科學理論。在科學課堂介紹或討論非科學理論便是濫用。

津貼學校由公帑支助，具基督教背景的學校及老師濫用津貼學校科學課堂討論非科學的宗教理論，便構成濫用公帑，理應立法或政府行政上禁止。

原則上不反對在科學課堂教授或討論主流科學理論以外的兢爭性另類科學理論。但前提是那些另類科學理論必需是科學理論，不能以非科學理論魚目混珠。

為尊重宗教辦學團體的辦學理念，原則上不反對於宗教課堂教授及討論「創造論」或「智慧設計論」。

反濫用與信仰自由無關，沒有侵犯個人信仰自由。

工作：

搜集濫用證據，喚起媒體及公眾關注，凝聚科學界意見，向有關當局投訴，推動政府立法或行政上禁止課堂濫用。

教廷半世紀前始接受進化論
2月12日
http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/090211/4/an2o.html

【明報專訊】...若望保祿二世（John Paul II）1996年更在演講中宣稱進化論「不止是一個假設」...

相比之下，美國一些強硬派教徒提倡的「智慧設計論」（Intelligent Design），近年引起的爭議更大。「智慧設計論」中心思想是只有一個超越一切的智慧（暗指神）能夠形成地球複雜的生命形式。提倡者要求美國學校把這論調納入科學課程，以反擊早已成為課程的進化論。但羅馬教廷不接受「智慧設計論」。教廷表示，下月初有關進化論的研討會上，只會把「智慧設計論」當作文化現象討論，而非當成科學或神學議題。

泰晤士報/美聯社

SCMP: Scientist backs creationism on RTHK show
Feb 14, 2009
Physicist claims faculty vetoes topic
http://backup-atheist.xanga.com/6944801 ... rthk-show/

SCMP: Science class no place for creationist dogma
Alex Lo
Feb 19, 2009
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... ist-dogma/

SCMP: Is faith in God enough to challenge evolution?
EDUCATION MAILBAG SPECIAL
Feb 21, 2009
The fierce debate over whether intelligent design has any place in school science lessons continues
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... evolution/

SCMP: Religion and science are not enemies, so let's honour both
Kent Ewing
Feb 21, 2009
http://eulertruthbible.wordpress.com/20 ... nour-both/

My position:

Science class teaches a method---the scientific method, the method of hypothesis-experiment-theory.

Science class can teach alternative scientific theories within the scientific method.

Science class cannot teach non-scientific theories outside the scientific method.


我的立場：

科學課教授一個方法—科學方法，即假設—實驗—理論方法。

科學課可以教授科學方法內的不同科學理論。

科學課不能教授科學方法以外的非科學理論。

SCMP: No need to ban creationism
Ben Richardson, Lantau
Mar 11 2009
http://backup-atheist.xanga.com/6965670 ... eationism/

...Once you sit the crackpot theories of creationists side by side with the observable evidence of natural selection, God ends up where he belongs - with Santa Claus and the tooth fairy in the dustbin of childhood memories.


SCMP: Fix this flawed approach
Tsui Chi-yan, Tuen Mun
Mar 19, 2009
http://backup-atheist.xanga.com/6965664 ... -approach/

I refer to Will Lai's letter ("Stand firm on creationism", March 9) informing us that Hong Kong's evolution curriculum row has become internationally known, as it was reported in the science journal Nature online.

Hong Kong has become a "world-class laughing stock", as Mr Lai wrote in his letter, due to teaching of creationism in biology lessons in some schools. This follows a flawed guideline as part of the new senior science curriculum with a 3+3+4 school structure to start this year.

In the context of Hong Kong's school system reforms, Nature cited the guideline on teaching Darwin's theory of evolution that "students are encouraged to explore other explanations for evolution and origins of life, to help illustrate the dynamic nature of scientific knowledge".

I wonder why science educators in local universities and schools have not made their voices heard against this. One thing is clear. Our science teachers' body, the Hong Kong Association for Science and Mathematics Education encourages members to attend a public lecture entitled "Darwin, Science and Religion - How History Can Help?"

Other associations overseas, such as in the US and Australia, have taken a firm stance against creationism and intelligent design in science education. I am disappointed with our body, of which I have been a member for more than 30 years.

I call on all science teachers to urge the government to rectify the flawed guideline before the new system begins in September. There is no place for creationism in science education.

Group warns on biology guideline
SCMP 2009-04-18
EDU1 | EDU | By Liz Heron

A group backed by hundreds of supporters has called on legislators to press the government to scrap curriculum guidelines it says make Hong Kong "a world-class laughing stock" by condoning the teaching of creationism in biology lessons.

...Under the biology and curriculum assessment guide for the new senior secondary curriculum, students are encouraged to explore "other explanations for evolution and the origins of life", in addition to Darwin's theory, to help illustrate the dynamic nature of scientific knowledge.

At least 30 aided secondary schools already teach creationism or intelligent design as an alternative explanation for evolution in biology lessons under a similar clause in the existing curriculum guidance.

The Concern Group for Hong Kong Science Education submitted a paper to the panel on Thursday, calling on it to demand a full review of the secondary school science curriculum.

...the group's founder, Virginia Yue Wai-sin...

"They are letting go of a very important principle in education - what constitutes scientific knowledge and what doesn't. It is a dangerous direction. We are letting our education system go back at least 200 years to a time when the methods of science had so many influences from people in power."

...Ms Yue said the questions put by the group used a definition of science drawn from the National Academy of Sciences in the US and an InterAcademy Panel on International Issues statement, backed by 68 learned societies including the Chinese Academy of Sciences. ...

The bureau should also consider adopting the IAP statement and consulting the Chinese Academy of Sciences and local scientists on revising the guidelines, she added.

The groups' members include academics, teachers, professionals, university students and secondary school students. Member Adrian Mok Kwai-lung, a research assistant at the Hong Kong Institute of Education, said the guidelines would give biology teachers the false impression that creationism was a valid scientific alternative to the theory of evolution. ...

200904180270079

Concern over the Hong Kong Secondary School Biology Curriculum
To: Legislative Council - Panel on Education
Virginia Yue 虞瑋倩
Spokesperson and convener for "Concern Group for Hong Kong Science Education"

www.inmediahk.net/node/1002989

Victory for Darwin
Creationism rejected in new guidelines on the biology curriculum
Liz Heron
Jun 26, 2009
SCMP
http://hksarblog.blogspot.com/2009/06/b ... ation.html

The Education Bureau has announced that creationism and intelligent design will form no part of the senior secondary biology curriculum.

The move has been hailed as a victory by leading scientists at the University of Hong Kong, who in February called for curriculum guidance on evolution to be upgraded to reflect current scientific thinking.

...

The bureau's paper points out that the curriculum aims to strengthen students' understanding of scientific inquiry in biology and its links with technology, society and the environment.

"In the topic 'Evolution', the emphasis is put on Darwin's Theory, as it is currently the most widely accepted scientific theory on evolution," it states. "Students are expected to understand the process and mechanism of evolution based on Darwin's Theory. Students should recognise that biological knowledge and theories are developed through observations, hypotheses, experimentations and analyses and [be] aware of the dynamic nature of biological knowledge."

The paper also states: "In the biology curriculum framework, creationism or intelligent design, which was mentioned in the recent submissions to the Legislative Council panel on education concerning the biology curriculum, is not included. In addition to Darwin's Theory, students are encouraged to explore other explanations on evolution such as that of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and Sir Alfred Russel Wallace." It stresses that non-scientific explanations are not included.

...

Concern Group founder Virginia Yue Wai-sin, said the paper only partially met demands in its petition for action by the bureau. "It is moving in the right direction," she said. "They have excluded creationism and intelligent design from the curriculum and they also emphasise scientific methods in greater detail. Yet they have just failed to take the critical step of saying that intelligent design and creationism are not science. We will continue to pursue answers to these questions with the bureau."

...