Usage Information

Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action
Alan D. Attie, … , Thomas Powell, Michael M. Cox
Alan D. Attie, … , Thomas Powell, Michael M. Cox
Published May 1, 2006
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2006;116(5):1134-1138. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI28449.
View: Text | PDF
Science and Society Article has an altmetric score of 33

Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action

Abstract

We review here the current political landscape and our own efforts to address the attempts to undermine science education in Wisconsin. To mount an effective response, expertise in evolutionary biology and in the history of the public controversy is useful but not essential. However, entering the fray requires a minimal tool kit of information. Here, we summarize some of the scientific and legal history of this issue and list a series of actions that scientists can take to help facilitate good science education and an improved atmosphere for the scientific enterprise nationally. Finally, we provide some model legislation that has been introduced in Wisconsin to strengthen the teaching of science.

Authors

Alan D. Attie, Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, Richard M. Amasino, Beth Cox, Terese Berceau, Thomas Powell, Michael M. Cox

×

Usage data is cumulative from April 2024 through April 2025.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 854 426
PDF 166 28
Figure 50 1
Table 74 0
Citation downloads 110 0
Totals 1,254 455
Total Views 1,709

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement