Too many students reject the theory of evolution because they view it as incompatible with their religious beliefs. Some have argued that abandoning religious belief is the only way to help religious individuals accept evolution. Conversely, our data support that highlighting faith/evolution compatibility is an effective means to increase student acceptance. We surveyed students enrolled in entry-level biology courses at four religiously affiliated institutions. At each university, teachers gave students a presentation that demonstrated potential compatibility between evolution and faith within the teachings of each university’s respective religious affiliation. Students were asked to evaluate their own beliefs about evolution both before and after this instruction. After instruction at each university, students showed significant gains in evolution acceptance without abandoning their religious beliefs. These results demonstrate that giving religious students the opportunity to reconcile their religious beliefs with the theory of evolution under the influence of intentional instruction on the compatibility of belief and evolution can lead to increased evolution acceptance among religious students.

Background: Many individuals reject evolutionary theory due to a perceived conflict with their religious beliefs. To bridge this gap, educators have attempted different approaches including approaching evolution rejection as a consequence of deficit thinking and teaching students the nature of science (including the scientific process and peer review process as well as questions that science can and cannot answer).Teaching the nature of science has shown promising gains in the acceptance of evolution, although acceptance rates remain low. We propose a further approach: the use of a reconciliatory model designed to help students accept evolution within the framework of their religious beliefs. We tested this approach in both biology and theology classrooms at a Nazarene-affiliated university. Both professors approached the subject in a reconciliatory fashion. Results: This study found that by utilizing a reconciliatory approach, the students in both classrooms saw significant gains in evolution acceptance, with gains being greatest in the biology classroom. In addition, we saw no decrease in student religiosity. Conclusions: Implications of this are discussed. The results of this study confirm the effectiveness of a reconciliatory model, which opens several avenues for further research.

No abstract

No abstract

of Virginia Press, 2012. Pp. x + 235. $29.50.Raschke's goals are as ambitious as his arguments are intricate. The primary intention of this book is to revolutionize the field of religious studies by advocating an approach that overcomes the shortcomings of methods that have been predominant for the last century. A semiotic theorizing of religion departs radically from traditional, scientific approaches to the study of religion conceived either according to German Idealism's Religionswissenschaft or Durkheimian sociology of religion. This departure hinges on conceiving a theory of religion that reflects on the question of the relation between signs and singularity. Unloosing signifiers from their referents, postmodernity embarks on "a radical exposition of the sign," resulting in an infinite number of significations, and the endless play or polymodal dance that ensues. Whirl would be king had not singularity taken the place of the referent. Described by Raschke as a "veritable black hole," it designates the generative "event horizon" initiating religious language such that "the religious is the event horizon of the signifying webwork; it is the singularity that exceeds all signs." A host of thinkers bring this complex relation of sign and singularity into view: Spinoza, Nietzsche, Bataille, Derrida, Levinas, Deleuze, Zizek, Badiou, and, theologically, Altizer. Thus, Raschke covers considerable ground, and readers should not be surprised if some areas they consider sacred are tread over lightly or perhaps stomped on, for instance, the association of Religionswissenschaft with "Aryanization" and colonialism. Nonetheless, this disruption of traditional approaches to religious studies is not mere provocation, as Raschke commends an alternate hermeneutic for interpreting the curious turn to religious signs in our postmodern times.