This week (February 12) marks the annual Darwin Day celebration, a holiday that all who care about the future of science should embrace.  Students and adults around the world will be celebrating in schools, universities, museums, bookstores, and elsewhere.

Contrary to what many may be inclined to believe, Darwin Day is neither a promotion of religion nor irreligion.  Rather, it “is an international celebration of science and humanity as exemplified in the life, work and influence of Charles Darwin,” explains the Darwin Day Program. “It is celebrated by people around the world who value the adventurous spirit and natural curiosity that scientists and explorers of all kinds share.”

Like many Americans, I never learned of the theory of evolution in school. I must confess my undiagnosed attention problems could have been the reason. The theory might have been briefly presented in science class while I daydreamed my way through it. 

On the other hand, given the long-time controversy brought on by creationists, it most likely was never presented in the first place.

My only recollection of coming in contact with the theory in my youth was from my fascination with Planet of the Apes—a fictitious movie that nonetheless shed light on our similarities, and also, through the reversal of roles, the barbarousness of humans. 

This brings me to an issue that at first may seem unrelated to Darwin Day, but that recently has come under hot debate, single-sex classrooms, for science in particular.  The purpose of these segregated classrooms has been to improve science education for girls by offering them an environment in which they’ll feel less self-conscious and more open to exploration and discussion in the classroom.

car So far, reports on the effectiveness are mixed.  Therefore, I’ve not yet determined where I stand.  But I can safely say from my own personal experience that if we want to make science accessible and of interest to all students of both sexes, we need to look beyond the basics of science.

That can be accomplished in part through Darwin Day by making science fun and worth celebrating. 

But also important is what Marcia Linn, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley, who was working under a National Science Foundation grant, found.  She discovered “that making science personally relevant to students contributed to sex equity.”

“Both girls and boys complain about the irrelevance of science and math in their lives,” explained Linn. “The idea is to make it so that it comes up again and again in your life.”

This can be done in a number of ways in all areas of science.  Although scientific discovery itself must be free from emotions that cause bias in conclusions, for many, myself included, it is emotion, creativity, and the right side of the brain that actually drive interest. 

Therefore, finding ways to draw on and relate science to the diverse interests and thinking patterns of students would seem the most logical way to get through to all.  For example, there are documented differences in the way that males and females think, with females more often being right-brained. 

By using a combination of approaches and relating science in more ways that appeal to females within co-ed classrooms, both sexes can benefit.  Creating an atmosphere that offers some individualized learning while at the same time giving students opportunities to work the less dominant sides of their brains, could offer huge benefits.

Had my science teachers understood this when I was growing up, I would probably have much broader knowledge and understanding in all areas of science today, even those areas that are not of particular interest.

Kimberly Blaker’s The Wall™ appears weekly. She is editor and coauthor of the The Fundamentals of Extremism: the Christian Right in America. Send your comments to Kimberly Blaker: TheWall@TheWall-OnChurchAndState.com   © 2002, Kimberly Blaker

Would you like to receive the latest column of  The Wall™ each week? Submit your email address to NotifyMe@TheWall-OnChurchAndState.com