Letters

If you teach introductory biology, you've probably heard this refrain at least once: 'I had to learn it, but I don't believe it.' The 'it,' of course, is evolution. The admission usually comes at the end of the semester, when grades are safely in. Invariably, when you ask why, the student cites religious belief. Somebody once said, if you're not prepared to have your basic ideas challenged, you don't belong in college. I don't expect students to accept everything they learn, but in this case, I'd like to think the logic of evolution is as simple as apples falling from trees. Yet, despite my best efforts at marshalling mountains of hard data and explaining the consistency in scientific reasoning between disciplines--be it chemistry, biology, or geology--some students simply won't accept Darwin. The germ theory of disease and the cell theory are okay, but evolution is still "just a theory." Evolution deniers are frustrating, even maddening, especially when they're so young and should be open to new ideas. But what should I do when one of them asks for a letter of recommendation to medical school, graduate school, or worse--a preparatory program in science education? Sure she got an A in the course, but by denying evolution in the face of all the evidence, the student fails a much more important test--a fundamental understanding of the nature of science and the standards by which it operates. Michael Dini, Texas Tech University biologist and reportedly devout Christian, agrees, so he refuses to write letters in behalf of such students. Dini isn't sneaky about his policy, by waiting to decline after students finish the course. No, Dini posts it on his Web site, so students can decide not to take intro biology or drop the course after the first class. Dini's reasons are as much philosophical as they are scientific. "How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology expect to properly practice in a field that is so heavily based on biology?" he asks on his Web site. "Such an individual has committed malpractice regarding the method of science, for good scientists would never throw out data that do not conform to their expectations or beliefs." Dini actually sets three criteria for writing recommendations: his charges must also get an A in one of his courses, and they have to get to know him. Dini's teaching philosophy--also on the web--states that students "will base their actions on what they know to be true, rather than what they wish to be true." Now Dini's in trouble with the Plano, Texas-based Liberty Legal Institute, which complained to the US Justice Department that the professor's policy--and therefore the publicly funded Texas Tech--is denying students' First Amendment right to religious freedom. "No professor has the academic freedom to discriminate against students on the basis of their race, sex or religious beliefs," says Kelly Shackelford of Liberty Legal in a press release. The Justice Department has launched an inquiry, asking Texas Tech to clarify its policy on letters of recommendation. Texas Tech says it doesn't have a policy--recommendations are a matter of personal discretion. What would you do in Dini's place? So far, Texas Tech is standing by their man, and Dini refuses to give in. Does he have the right to deny students his imprimatur if they don't accept evolution? The Lubbock chapter of American Association of University Professors (AAUP) unanimously backs Dini. According to chapter president Marc Giaccardo, the group voted to petition the university administration in Dini's behalf "based on academic freedom and his right to write recommendations according to personal criteria." Giaccardo also applauded Dini for being upfront about the policy: "Here's a faculty member who's communicating with his students. We should stand right by him in that regard." Dini wouldn't comment directly to The Scientist on advice of his department head. B. Robert Kreiser, associate secretary of academic freedom in AAUP's national office, has a different take on the issue. Dini's decision "is difficult to justify," he says. While a professor can determine criteria for recommendations, Kreiser insists it's not an absolute right. If a student gets an A in the course, he clearly understands the material, so he "has to expect that the faculty member would attest to his performance," Kreiser maintains. In other words, Dini should stick to the subject matter and forget other considerations. One of my colleagues at the University of Georgia would agree. When interviewing students before writing recommendations, professors should limit the conversation to things like career goals, he insists. Personal opinions about sensitive subjects related to religion are off limits. Kreiser makes another point: a lot of Dini's students are probably premeds. What difference does evolution make to a physician? On the other hand, he admits that Dini would be right to deny a recommendation for an anti-Darwin student applying to graduate school, say, in evolutionary biology. But is the line between med school and grad school that distinct? Dini asks, "Can a physician ignore data that he or she does not like and remain a physician for long?" He thinks not, and supplies a list of articles to show how modern medicine depends on evolutionary principles, including the origin of infectious agents like HIV. For me, much of the argument comes down to our profession as biologists. Do we as scientists and educators have a responsibility to society beyond transmitting facts and awarding grades? I think we do. Should we knowingly support the advancement of students who, when in a position of authority--whether as physicians or research chemists--will ignore the weight of evidence undergirding evolution just because of subjective belief, thereby undermining our profession and the standards of science? Should we support teachers in training who, despite their college education and our best efforts, will pass along personal biases instead of an accurate, objective reading of biology to a new generation of students? The answer to these questions is clear, at least to me. A lot more is at stake than a semester's worth of lectures. Barry A. Palevitz (palevitz@plantbio.uga.edu) is a contributing editor.

Letters

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of