Texas' school board, which has waged an ongoing battle over science education (among other topics), is back at it. In 2009, a bruising battle created science standards that questioned common descent and the age of the universe. Since then, textbook publishers have attempted to craft science texts that implement Texas' standards.

That process has reached the point where the board invited outside experts to critique the textbooks. In keeping with the school board's history, that process has also gone badly astray. Rather than choosing scientific experts and educators, the school board chose two people (Walter Bradley and Raymond Bohlin) who have been involved in the Discovery Institute, the organization that has backed the intelligent design movement. Bradley in particular was involved in crafting the wedge document, which calls for a cultural effort to get rid of science's focus on natural causes in the hope that it would advance theistic views.

Another person asked to review the texts is Ide Trotter, a retired engineer. He's a key figure in a group called Texans for Better Science Education. That group's URL, strengthsandweaknesses.org, echoes language that was specifically removed from the standards because it is used to enable religiously motivated attacks on evolution education. With the exception of two works by Darwin, the group's recommended books are all products of the Discovery Institute. (We reviewed one and found it to be largely unscientific.)

The Texas Freedom Network, which advocates for separation of church and state (among other causes), has now used the state's Public Information Act to request the results of this group's textbook reviews. And they're about what you'd expect and, most likely, what some members of the school board were hoping for.

In the evaluation of one textbook, a reviewer openly advocated for introducing religion into the science classroom. "I understand the National Academy of Science's strong support of the theory of evolution. At the same time, this is a theory. As an educator, parent, and grandparent, I feel very firmly that 'creation science' based on biblical principles should be incorporated into every biology book that is considered for adoption. Students should have the opportunity to use their critical thinking skills to weigh the evidence between evolution and 'creation science.'"

A push for creationism was also made in subtler terms. For instance, one reviewer suggests, "The fossil record can be interpreted in other ways than evolutionary with equal justification. Text should ask students to analyze and compare alternative theories." The "alternative theories" were left unstated.

The reviews also indicated some basic misunderstandings of biology. There was a suggestion that genetic drift was not a mechanism of evolution and that one standard definition of evolution (change over time) was invalid. Another questioned the existence of transitional fossils.

These reviews suggest that the battle over science education in Texas is far from over. The state is unlikely to try something as blatantly unconstitutional as demanding the teaching of creationism, but the reviews may give them another opportunity to try to undercut science education while inserting unscientific criticisms of evolution.