Creationism and the Teaching of Evolution in Poland

Abstract

For many years, the creationist movement in Poland was so marginal that the term "creationism" and its foundations were largely unknown within society. Nevertheless, at the end of the 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, the country underwent rapid political, economic, and sociological transformation. As part of the reaction, many ideas previously censored by the Communist regime became fashionable. This was also partly true for the creationist movement. However, creationism did not gain high acceptance within society, partly because Poland is predominantly a Catholic country, and Catholic doctrine does not support literal understanding of the Bible. At the moment, Intelligent Design creationists are emerging in Poland, and numerous creationist organizations are increasing their activity. This goes together with the weakening of evolutionary teaching in Polish schools.

Accepting, understanding, teaching, and learning (human) evolution: Obstacles and opportunities

“…This has rarely been done in biological anthropology classes where presumably human evolution is a core focus (though see Cunningham and Wescott, ), and I would argue that it is not overly arduous. Borczyk () noted that while creationists are very well organized, scientists often act independently from their colleagues in other countries (and I would add in other states or even adjacent communities), leaving us to build our anti‐creationist strategies from the ground up independently rather than joining forces and using evidence‐based tactics that are successful at least on some level.…”

“…A study of elementary and secondary science teachers in Turkey, where the majority of the population is Muslim, found that those with a stronger understanding of the nature of science were more likely to both accept evolution and believe it is necessary to teach in evolution in their classrooms (Tekkaya et al, ). Anti‐evolution or intelligent design efforts relating to schools are on the rise in Northern Ireland (McCrory and Murphy, ), the United Kingdom (Williams, ), Poland (Borczyk, ), and other areas of Europe (Brem and Sinatra, ) as well as New Zealand (Campbell and Otrel‐Cass, ) and Brazil (Penteado et al, ).…”

“…Teachers respond to this pressure in a variety of ways on a spectrum which I would characterize from firm to weak—or from scientifically sound to being intentionally obfuscating, misleading, or obstructive and (sometimes) from conscious to unconscious, including: emphasizing the nature of science as a way of knowing; communicating the wide acceptance of evolution; stressing general science knowledge for an informed citizenry, including teaching real‐life applications of evolution to convey its veracity; emphasizing the focus on learning science in a science classroom; addressing the distinction and/or conflict between science and religion; noting that “alternatives” to evolution are not considered legitimate science and that evolution is the best explanation for the evidence; making explicit that they do not expect students to accept evolution, only to understand it; recognizing that students may experience conflict and inviting them to talk about it one‐on‐one; sharing their own personal views and experiences related to evolutionary conflicts; avoiding human evolution in particular; avoiding any mention of religion; teaching about evolutionary concepts without using the “e‐word”; deferring to the authority of textbooks; defending the state standards if they include evolution; failing to explain the nature of scientific inquiry; suggesting that having a thorough understanding of something is advantageous if you plan to debate it; emphasizing microevolution versus macroevolution; avoiding speciation (in general or among humans and other primates in particular); legitimizing creationist arguments; undermining the authority of established experts; or completely omitting evolution from their classes (Chuang, ; Griffith and Brem, ; Cleaves and Toplic, ; Berkman and Plutzer, 2000; Goldston and Kyzer, ; Dotger et al, ; Hermann, ; Bramschreiber, ; Berkman and Plutzer, ; Carter et al, ). Evolution is also sometimes taught at the very end of the school year, either because of an imposed syllabus or sometimes deliberately with the hopes that teachers will run out of time and not have to cover it at all (Borczyk, ; Bajd, ; personal communications with teachers).…”

Creationism in Europe: Facts, Gaps, and Prospects

“…(Szerszynski 2010: 164) Other scholars agree that education has a considerable impact on the distribution of creationist beliefs, but they sometimes differ in the type of influence it exerts. Ulrich Kutschera (2008a) and Bartosz Borczyk (2010), for instance, argue that creationism in Europe is on the rise because of the fact that religious education, which is often funded by the state and sometimes even compulsory in European countries, is provided much earlier than science education, thus shaping a receptive audience for creationist beliefs. James Williams (2008) Szerszynski (2010) in that the fact that most European education is under state control has a negative effect on the success of creationist beliefs.…”

“…Creationism in Turkey was already being discussed at length in the 1990s (Edis 1994(Edis , 1999; see also: Edis 2007;Hameed 2010;Riexinger 2008;Sayin and Kence 1999), as was creationism in the UK (Coleman and Carlin 1996). However, more detailed studies have recently become available, discussing creationism in Germany (Kutschera 2008a(Kutschera , 2008b, the United Kingdom (Williams, 2008), Russia (Levit, Hoßfeld and Olsson 2007), Poland (Borczyk 2010), Denmark (Hjermitslev 2010a) and the Netherlands (Blancke 2010, Flipse 2012.…”