Most GOP candidates for top Arizona schools post support teaching creationism

Ricardo Cano | The Republic | azcentral.com

Four out of the five Republican candidates running for state superintendent of public instruction said they believe Arizona students should be taught creationism and intelligent design as part of science learning requirements.

The candidates' comments came during Wednesday night's debate hosted by The Arizona Republic and azcentral.com.

Jonathan Gelbart was the sole Republican candidate who opposed teaching students creationism and intelligent design. He is joined by Democrats Kathy Hoffman and David Schapira.

The four others — Bob Branch, Frank Riggs, Tracy Livingston and incumbent Diane Douglas — each said they believed students should be taught those topics in some capacity.

The state will likely decide on new science standards later this year.

MORE: GOP candidates for Arizona’s top schools post debate taxes, vouchers

What the candidates said at debate

Republican candidates were asked by moderator and Republic reporter Richard Ruelas whether they were in favor of teaching accepted science, including climate change and evolution.

The question morphed into a broader discussion over the teachings of creationism and intelligent design in Arizona public schools.

Gelbart, 29, a former director of charter development for BASIS.ed, touted that he is the only Republican candidate to say that he "absolutely (does) not support" including the teachings of creationism and intelligent design as part of the science standards they are required to learn.

"It's not science," Gelbart said.

Branch, 60, a professor and Maricopa County Parks and Recreation commissioner, is running on a pro-President Trump platform, emphasizing Christian conservative values.

His stance contrasted Gelbart's.

Republican debate for Superintendent of Public Instruction: Science standards in schools Republican candidates for Superintendent of Public Instruction debate about science standards in schools.

“I believe in intelligent design — I don’t believe it’s mutually exclusive from evolution," Branch said. "I believe that there is a science behind intelligent design, so where Mr. Gelbart said science should be left to science, I believe in the science of intelligent design.”

Livingston, 55, a Maricopa Community College board member and former classroom teacher, said that while she supports creationism, "it's just a no-no" for teachers to bring it up in front of students.

Multiple candidates accused her of backtracking from an earlier stance at a previous debate.

“Schools don’t even allow Merry Christmas anymore," Livingston said. "I wish we could say something (that) there is creationism, there are these things. We can’t say it. There’s one thing to want it, there’s another thing to actually do it.”

Riggs, 67, a former U.S. congressman who ran for Arizona governor in 2014, said he believes older students in high school are "perfectly capable of looking at the arguments of both sides of evolution."

Riggs said older students "should know what our founding fathers believed and put in our founding documents,” referencing part of the Declaration of Independence that states, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."

"... We can’t skip over that, or we do a huge disservice to our students."

RELATED: What to know about education issues on the ballot

Douglas, who is running for re-election, said she "absolutely" believes that creationism and intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution because "they should be brought all sides of an argument."

Douglas reasoned that this would help make students critical thinkers.

"The courts have ruled very strongly for whatever reason that creationism and intelligent design is not allowed in our school. I vehemently disagree with that," Douglas said.

"The tact that we're taking in the current standards is creation of the universe will be in our history standards so that our students can learn the beliefs of all the different value systems."

Democrats oppose the idea

Both Democrats disagreed with the four Republicans.

Hoffman, an educator, said Thursday that "it’s critically important that the science taught in our schools is research based and evidence based.”

She said creationism and intelligent design are "religious concepts."

"I believe in keeping our schools secular. We have students of all faith backgrounds, and we need to be respectful of that,” Hoffman said.

MORE: Dem candidates for schools chief agree on issues, diverge on background

Schapira, a Tempe Councilman, said those topics should be taught in a religious studies class, not as a part of science. He also said the state superintendent shouldn't be the one to decide what standards students are required to learn, saying "it should be left to the professionals.

“We cannot handicap our students by having state standards that reflect a certain ideological belief,” Schapira said.

READ: -6% to 19%: Teachers are getting raises, although they aren't all 10 percent

The Arizona State Board of Education is set to decide on revisions to the state's science learning standards later this year.

The revision process — typically a dull affair — drew public scrutiny from many science educators because a draft of the standards released by the Arizona Department of Education appeared to cross out the word "evolution" multiple times and replace with other phrases.

The state superintendent of public instruction, alone, cannot overhaul the standards public-school students are required to learn. However, they do oversee the Arizona Department of Education, which facilitates the revision process.

MORE ON ARIZONA ELECTIONS 2018: