Intelligent design: a Trojan horse?

In Dover, Pa., eight school board members were voted out of office after requiring that teachers discuss intelligent design in their classes. A Bush-appointed judge further slammed the door on ID, referring to the board’s “breathtaking inanity” as he ruled against their proposal in court. In Kansas, however, the board of ed prevailed, and K-12 students will learn about intelligent design along with evolution.

Intelligent design, the theory that the origin of life is so complex it cannot be explained solely through Darwinian science but must be credited to an intelligent designer, has now found a place at some universities as well. At Iowa State, the work of a physics professor who supports the theory prompted more than 120 faculty members to publish a statement distancing themselves from his views. At Lehigh University, biochemistry professor Michael Behe, an unofficial media spokesperson for the ID cause, prompted his own department to proclaim firm disagreement with his ideas—but support for his freedom to express them.

At the University of Kansas, a course grouping intelligent design with other religious “myths” was cancelled after controversial remarks by the professor who proposed teaching it (in a supposedly closed Web discussion he described the class as a “nice slap in their big fat face,” referring to “fundies,” or fundamentalists). A handful of colleges and high schools (35 to 45) are building student support through Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness (IDEA) clubs.

It’s not a groundswell, but it’s enough to create concern among some academics. “Those of us in AFT higher education unions ... see it as an extension of the movement to restrict and monitor higher education curricula,” says Patty Bentley, a United University Professions/AFT member and librarian at the State University of New York-Plattsburgh. “There’s clearly a connection to the same kind of people who are trying to impose language and processes to guarantee some equity in the classroom,” she adds, a group identified with the “academic bill of rights” movement (see News & Trends, December 2005-January 2006 AFT On Campus).

“There’s no immediate threat posed by intelligent design, but it is part of the conservative agenda,” agrees William Cutler, president of the Temple Association of University Professionals/AFT. In Pennsylvania, where TAUP is watching a legislative committee set up to study the academic bill of rights, Cutler sees a direct connection between legislative oversight and intelligent design.

Dan Kerr, a teaching assistant and media rep for the Graduate Teaching Assistants Coalition/AFT at the beleaguered University of Kansas, says faculty are concerned that the hoopla about intelligent design will affect their prospects in a highly competitive job market. With Paul Mirecki, the professor who proposed intelligent design as myth, garnering so much attention, “The university has again become a front in ongoing cultural wars.”

At SUNY-Plattsburgh, the controversy is playing out in lecture halls. “Intelligent design is a Trojan horse, and the citadel is science itself,” says UUP member Mark Cohen, a distinguished professor of anthropology, who with colleague Richard Robinson has given public lectures on the subject. The two will publish a collection of perspectives on intelligent design next fall.

After debunking the idea as devoid of scientific method, Cohen says resorting to “magic” explanations over scientific examination throws the concept right out of the field. “Anything that claims a miracle is inherently not science,” he says; rather, it could fall under hope, faith and morality.

In other words, intelligent design might deserve recognition—but not as science. Cutler, for example, could see it in a history or religion class.

“Intelligent design is not stupid,” says Cohen. “We have to be less arrogant and more understanding.” Of course, he says, “We must teach science ... undiluted by all of this nonsense. That’s the responsibility that I’ve always felt and have always acted on. But now there’s a new responsibility: I also have to recognize the different validity of the things people need.”

Recognize it, and then move on.

If Lonnie Chu taught Turkish or Hebrew, she would get benefits. But Chu, an adjunct at Syracuse University, teaches Spanish, and she has no benefits at all. “I go day by day wondering if a truck is going to hit me,” she says, hoping she’ll never have catastrophic healthcare costs and a ruined career.

This is one of the more glaring discrepancies at Syracuse, where adjuncts voted to affiliate with New York State United Teachers/AFT on Dec. 22. The vote, 182 to 122, reflects frustration with uneven or nonexistent benefits, huge salary discrepancies, heavy course loads, uncompensated committee work and little job security for about 650 adjuncts. Syracuse is the fifth private university to become home to faculty represented by NYSUT; others are Long Island University, Dowling, Pace and C.W. Post.

“So many people are piecing together a living on maybe three or four courses at different universities, and running themselves ragged,” says Diane Swords, an adjunct sociology professor. Sometimes they don’t know if they’re teaching until a week before class begins, and pay is so low that Swords has dipped into savings to stay afloat.

Chu supplements her pay, but there’s a catch: To qualify for mortgages on the small Syracuse homes she buys and renovates for additional income, she must show steady income to begin with—and she can’t. With just a semester contract, “What bank is going to want to help me out?” She uses her husband’s steadier employment to qualify.

But she loves teaching: “The thing I love most is watching the light bulb go on over the students’ heads,” she says. Her innovative approach links first-year Spanish students to native speakers for online chat sessions, but she hasn’t developed the idea into a program because she’s never sure she’ll have the job long enough to see it through. She hopes the union will negotiate three-year contracts, so adjuncts can develop such programs. Currently, says Chu, “Most undergraduates at Syracuse University get a teacher who doesn’t know if she’ll have a job next semester.”

Now that the vote to affiliate with NYSUT/AFT has been certified by the National Labor Relations Board, members are working on their bargaining strategy and putting together a team of negotiators.