Less than four months into 2011, lawmakers in seven states have proposed nine pieces of legislation designed to undermine public science education. It's a record-breaking pace on schedule to eclipse 11 similar bills proposed in 2009. "There's been a rising tide of not just evolution denial, but science denial all the way around," Robert Luhn of the National Center for Science Education wrote in an e-mail to Wired.com. "Creationists and their kin are attacking global-warming science, plate tectonics, the Big Bang and on and on." Most of the new proposals aren't explicit attacks on the separation of church and state. Rather, they tend to emulate the Louisiana Science Education Act, an anti-science education law passed in 2008. Such "academic freedom" measures are stuffed with agreeable language, yet contain wording that may shield instructors who bring religious doctrine into public school science classrooms. Passages that at first seem to prohibit faith-based teachings don't actually exclude the practice. Some of this year's bills have already perished in procedural limbo, but new and harder-to-vote-down bills are likely to emerge. If passed as laws, they could lead to expensive and drawn-out legal battles while undermining science education — which, ultimately, isn't just about conveying facts, but teaching a process of applied rationality. And even if they don't pass, they create an atmosphere in which science teachers may feel reluctant to support science. Starting with Tennessee, where an anti-evolution bill passed the state House of Representatives on April 7, we review seven of this year's science education battlegrounds. Image: K-Bot/Flickr

Tennessee The same state that hosted the famous Scopes Monkey trial in 1925 has a fresh anti-science education act. On April 7, a Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed House Bill 368, which is now in debate by the senate's education committee as Senate Bill 893. Most paragraphs in the proposed legislation outline protections for teachers who wish to help "students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in the course being taught." "Strengths and weaknesses" sounds innocuous, but it's the latest anti-evolution education tactic, replacing scientifically and legally unfeasible creation science and intelligent design. According the the National Center for Science Education, HB 368 sponsor and state representative Bill Dunn (R) claimed that teaching intelligent design wouldn't be protected — but the bill's chief lobbyist at the conservative Family Action Council of Tennessee says otherwise. Of all the current science education-eroding bills, Dunn’s has made the most progress. The senate version is due for a vote in late April. Bill: HB 368/SB 893 (PDF) Image: Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan, key figures in the Scopes Trial of 1925, sit in the courtroom together. (Wikipedia)

Florida The sunshine state's latest anti-science bill singles out evolution amid more general topics such as politics, history and the "character development" of students. Senate Bill 1854 states instructors will "faithfully teach … [a] thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution." Senator Stephen Wise (R), who sponsored the bill, has allegedly suggested "nonevolution" be taught alongside the scientific theory of evolution. The bill has met fierce opposition. Howard Simon of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida went so far as to tell the St. Augustine Record that the bill would "entice local county school boards into violating the [C]onstitution." The bill is currently in committee. Bill: SB 1854 (PDF) Image: Florida's senate chambers. (j.s. clark/Flickr)

Texas Texas' new House Bill 2454 uses language similar to Lousiana's 2008 law and Tennessee's "academic freedom" bill, but specifies intelligent design as a supposed "alternate theory" to evolution. It states that schools can't punish "a faculty member or student based on the faculty member's or student's conduct of research relating to the theory of intelligent design or other alternate theories of the origination and development of organisms." The bill was filed by Bill Zedler (R) on March 8, 2011 and has four large hurdles to overcome — including house committee review, where it is now — before the state's governor decides whether or not to sign it into law. Many anti-science bills, however, die in committee before legislators can cast a vote. Bill: HB 2454 (PDF) Image: Colin Purrington/Flickr

Missouri House Bill 195 is nearly identical to failed legislation proposed last January. Like its predecessor, HB 1651, HB 195 plays the "academic freedom" card and calls for protection of teachers that "help students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of the theory of biological and hypotheses of chemical evolution." Representative Andrew Koenig (R) proposed the new bill, but it hasn't yet been assigned to a committee. Bill: HB 195 (PDF) Image: The dome in the rotunda of Missouri's capitol building. (david_shane/Flickr)

Kentucky Like other "academic freedom" bills proposed by legislators across the country, House Bill 169 tried a teach-the-controversy approach to wedge non-scientific material into public science classrooms. After teachers finish their on-paper curriculum, reads the bill, they "may use, as permitted by the local school board, other instructional materials to help students understand, analyze, critique, and review scientific theories in an objective manner." Representative Tim Moore (R), the primary sponsor of the bill, proposed the legislation on January 4, 2011. It later died in committee. Bill: HB 169 (DOC) Image: A creation museum sign on a stretch of interstate highway in Kentucky. (rauchdickson/Flickr)

Oklahoma Two bills appeared in the Oklahoma legislature earlier this year: Senate Bill 554, introduced January 19, 2011, and House Bill 1551 a day later. Senator Josh Brecheen (R) sponsored the senate version, which states that schools “shall not prohibit any teacher from informing students about relevant scientific information regarding either the scientific strengths or scientific weaknesses of controversial topics in sciences" — language that may have provided a protected route for non-scientific material into classrooms. The bill died in committee in late February. Representative Sally Kern (R) sponsored the house version, which took a similar approach under the guise of supporting critical thinking skills in students. It faltered when the house education committee rejected it in February. Bills: SB 554 (DOC), HB 1551 (DOC) Image: amy_b/Flickr