Designed to create controversy
(thanks to Casey Luskin for alerting me to the article. Casey was co-founder of the IDEA Center which had it’s beginnings at UCSD.)
At UCSD, which is known for its strength in science and engineering, faculty members are realizing they need to pay more attention to the controversy. Two years ago, a UCSD survey found that 40 percent of incoming freshmen to the university’s Sixth College Ã¢â‚¬â€œ geared toward educating students for a high-tech 21st century Ã¢â‚¬â€œ do not believe in evolution, said the college’s provost, Gabriele Wienhausen.
The university now requires students who major in biology to complete a course in biological evolution, Kohn said. The policy became effective with freshmen who enrolled last fall. Professors had discussed the change for years, he said, but the Sixth College poll made it more urgent.
California got an “A” (the Fordham Foundation’s top ranking) for teaching Darwinism, yet it didn’t seem to slow down the influx of ID friendly students into UCSD. That’s why I’m optimistic that what happened in Ohio and Dover are, as the article describes, a mere “bump in the road” in the way of ID’s eventual advance.
I hope the effect that these new evolution course requirements have on the students will be statistically measured. I would wager it would have only a small impact in changing student attitudes (recall the outcome of Will Provine’s courses). Perhaps the IDEA chapter at UCSD will run a poll (hint, hint).
Why is it that all of the sudden Darwinism is a requirement for biology majors at UCSD to graduate? Does it have anything to do with their science education? If Darwinism was so fundamental to biology, why wasn’t it a requirement for the last several decades in the first place?