Where Theory and Law Meet: Trends in establishment clause jurisprudence in the US federal courts and implications for science education

Abstract

In this study, federal court opinions and writings of legal scholars, spanning 63 years of establishment clause jurisprudence in the US federal courts were analysed in an effort to determine dominant trends in judicial philosophy that are of significance to science educators. The study's findings suggest that the dominant legal theory underpinning the adjudication of establishment clause cases on the US Supreme Court has undergone a shift from one that emphasizes separation of church and state to one that favours integration of religion in the public sphere. This development poses significant challenges to science educators who are charged with the task of teaching in accordance with state science standards that emphasize topics that are considered controversial (e.g. evolution and global climate change) by many in the faith-based community. These findings constitute a basis for forecasting future actions in US courts regarding the role of government in establishing religious practices in the public sphere—particularly where such actions intersect with the roles of teachers in the nation's public K-12 science classrooms. Finally, we argue that scientists and science educators must adopt an assertive stance in defining science in curricular frameworks, providing something for the courts to draw upon in future decisions.

Keywords:

• Nature of science
• Evolution
• Science education
• Integrationist
• Establishment clause
• Separationist