Minnetonka, USA - Under a very public microscope, the Minnetonka School Board on Thursday blocked an effort by two members to change its science standards in a way that some residents fear would allow the teaching of intelligent design.
The concept suggests that the complexity of life could not have developed by chance or evolution alone, but through some unspecified "intelligent design" or creator.
The board's vote was 4 to 2 against the change and for the standards crafted by a committee of district educators.
For all the heat the issue has generated this year in Kansas, Pennsylvania and elsewhere, Thursday night's parade of about 20 speakers was respectful and civil. The audience of nearly 100 didn't applaud, cheer or boo, and there were no interruptions as parents, scientists, teachers and others made their case in three-minute snippets.
The decision finished the board's review of all its revised science standards, which cover the teaching of biology, physics, human anatomy and physiology. The effort was intended to repackage the standards in accord with more recent state standards.
Board Members David Eaton and Bill Wenmark said the proposed change would have made the district's standards conform exactly to language in the state's standards. Eaton said the intent was to teach students that evolution is not fact but theory, adding that the district's standard is "going too far" when it says that the diversity of life "is the result of evolution."
"This standard does not introduce intelligent design," he said. "That is not what's going on."
But other members said the state's requirements are contained in other parts of the district's standards, including statements about the incompleteness of some scientific ideas and the ability to explain how new evidence can challenge accepted theories, including the theory of evolution.
A group called TonkaFocus, which has monitored the debate, warned that changing the standards could lead to suits seeking to bring intelligent design to science classes.
Board clerk Carol Eastlund said she had received e-mails from around the country, some alleging that backers of intelligent design are intent on injecting religious concepts into many areas of public life.
"I believe this discussion is part of something much bigger," she said, adding that voting against Eaton's proposal could help protect what she called the basic freedom of religion.
Before the board's vote, speakers took many sides of the issue.
Kim Crockett of Deephaven said students are bright enough to participate in the debate between science and intelligent design.
"Let's not be afraid of seeking the truth and using all the tools available to us," she said.
David Paulson, also of Deephaven, said he believes in God but can "live with these tensions" between faith and science.
But several scientists and teachers said that because intelligent design questions aspects of evolution, it has no place in science class when time should be spent learning the scientific method and the findings it has produced.
The four members who defeated Eaton's amendment and adopted the unchanged standards were Judy Erdahl, Bob Quam, Peggy Stefan and Eastlund. Chairwoman Erin Adams was absent because of a family emergency.