Kimpatsu

Hard to believe we live in the 21st century. They sound like they'd be more at home in the 14th century...

RufusAtticus

The best way to deal with such situation, in my view, is to ask test questions which require the students to think. Challenge the students to address evolution denial claims on the test. Since I will probably have to teach evolutionary biology or introductory biology at some time in the future, I'd probably like to use something similar to the followin test. (It's a repost.)

==========================================
I’ve been thinking recently how to best incorporate creationism into biology classrooms. I have decided on the following technique.

BIOL 3600 FINAL EXAM

This is your final exam. It consists of five short answer questions. For each question, explain what scientific evidence and research invalidates the comments. If no scientific evidence invalidates the points please indicate what scientific evidence validates them. References to studies mentioned in class discussion, lecture, and the textbook will get you extra points.

1. “A kind may be defined as a generally interfertile group of organisms that possesses variant genes for a common set of traits but that does not interbreed with other groups of organisms under normal circumstances. Any evolutionary change between kinds (necessary for the emergence of complex from simple organisms) would require addition of entirely new traits to the common set and enormous expansion of the gene pool over time, and could not occur from mere ecologically adaptive variations of a given trait set. . . .”

2. “Natural selection is a tautologous concept (circular reasoning), because it simply requires the fittest organisms to leave the most offspring and at the same time it identifies the fittest organisms as those that leave the most offspring. Thus natural selection seemingly does not provide a testable explanation of how mutations would produce more fit organisms.”

3. “The scientific method traditionally has required experimental observation and replication. The fact that macroevolution (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science.”

4. “The entire history of evolution from the evolution of life from non-life to the evolution of vertebrates from invertebrates to the evolution of man from the ape is strikingly devoid of intermediates: the links are all missing in the fossil record, just as they are in the present world.”

5. “Similarities—whether of DNA, anatomy, embryonic development, or anything else—are better explained in terms of creation by a common Designer than by evolutionary relationship. The great differences between organisms are of greater significance than the similarities, and evolutionism has no explanation for these if they all are assumed to have had the same ancestor. How could these great gaps between kinds ever arise at all, by any natural process?”

------------------------------------------
References for you Infidels.
1-2. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-095.htm
3-4. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-330.htm
5. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-331.htm

Roland98

That's a great idea. If it was more of an intro/evolutionary principles course, I probably could have. But it was an upper-level class (elective for bio majors, required for science ed. majors), so the emphasis in my case had to be on more of the zoology part as was emphasized in the text. Plus I had to have the exams approved by the dept. chair and I'm sure a test like that would have been disallowed (I had to fight to keep K-questions because she thought they were "a bit unfair.")

RufusAtticus

Surely there could be similar questions that are restricted to vertebrate zoology? Origin of vertebrates? Transitional fossils? Etc.