© 2025 Iowa Public Radio
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations

From 'evolution' to 'biological change,' Iowa science standards face controversial wording changes

A teacher is in front of a class of 15 students who are sitting at tables in a classroom.
Sioux City Community School District
Third grade teacher Tracey Broughton teaches students at Perry Creek Elementary School in Sioux City.

Iowa’s current draft of its K-12 science standards, which include changing the word “evolution” to “biological change over time” drew ire from some parents, educators, students and residents across the state at a public forum held at the Grimes State Office Building in Des Moines on Jan. 23.

Residents say the current drafts downplay human impacts on climate change and water down scientific concepts by changing terms like “evolution” to “biological change over time” and “climate change” to “climate trends." The changes occurred after an advisory committee of educators, parents and professors submitted a draft with the original language in November. The Department of Education posted the revised version of the drafts on their website earlier this month.

The meeting was the Department of Education’s final public forum at the current stage of review and was attended by nearly 30 residents in person and more than 80 on Zoom.

What changes were made?

The Iowa Science Standards are based on the Next Generation Science Standards, or NGSS, a set of K-12 curriculum guidelines developed by a consortium of experts from across 26 states.

In October and November, a committee of educators, content specialists, faculty from higher education and parents collaborated on honing Iowa’s new set of standards. The final draft from the committee was submitted in November.

Since then, additional changes appeared between the submitted draft and the one posted online earlier this month for the public to review.

There were 10 instances where “human impact” or “human impacts” was changed to “impact” or “impacts.” There were also two instances where “negative impact” or “negative impacts” were changed to “impact or “impacts.” “Human activities” was also changed to “activities.”

“Evolution” referring to “biological evolution” was changed to “biological change” or “biological change over time” and “evolutionary relationships” was also changed to “relationships.”

In a description of the eighth grade standards, the following sentence was removed: “Finally, they examine climate change causes, learning to connect human activities with environmental impacts and developing strategies for sustainability."

The phrase “human activities” was also removed in the high school guidelines. Some sentences referencing human impact on biodiversity and climate change were removed from the high school standards.

One of the removed sentences included: “Human activity can have adverse effects on biodiversity; overpopulation, overexploitation, destruction of habitat, pollution, invasive species introduction, and climate change. Sustainable ecosystems rely on biodiversity to survive. Humans must also find ways to keep the biodiversity and sustain it as we rely on the resources and benefits provided by the Earth's ecosystem biodiversity.”

Community reactions

Jonnie Becker, a parent from Ames and science educator for 20 years, praised the inclusion of the NGSS performance expectations in the current draft at the forum Thursday night, but said she’s worried the language changes could muddle the core concepts surrounding climate change.

“I'm wondering, if maybe these changes are intentional to make it less obvious that we are actually still teaching the full breadth and depth of the Next Generation Standards,” Becker said. “And then my question is, why would we be trying to obfuscate that?”

Emily Young, an instructional coach and parent from North Polk, said over Zoom she thinks the wording changes could have ripple effects.

“[In] the literacy field, we talk a lot about helping kids critique, look for fake news, be able to do research really well,” she said. “By having our kids not have the proper words, you are making them susceptible to fake news and to being confused about when they're researching and looking at how their world actually works.”

Jerrid Kruse, a professor of science education at Drake University and one of the members of the standards revision committee that met in the fall, said much of the nearly 230 page draft was “really good work” and acknowledged the concepts are still in the drafts despite the language tweaks.

However, at the meeting he said he was under the impression there would only be copy editing changes to the draft.

“I guess my concern then is that I don't want to live in a state where the legislators are afraid of science words, because that's really what this comes down to,” Kruse said. “We're not changing the concepts, we're just changing the words. And if words scare us, then we do run into a slippery slope of freedom of speech and all the fascism stuff that people are talking about.”

Heather Doe, the Iowa Department of Education communications director, said the first committee that submitted a draft in November serves in an advisory capacity and does not finalize the first proposed revised draft standards.

Other changes 

Between the committee's draft and the draft released for public review, a section was added about farmland becoming scarcer and its impacts on an increasing human population.

There were also additions about antibiotic resistance and how measurements of planetary motion are used for space technologies.

How do standards work?

Doe said Iowa’s standards outline what students should be learning at each grade level but “do not prescribe or mandate a particular curriculum.” The director said it's up to the school districts to choose their own curriculum and textbooks.

Mark Dorhout, a middle school science teacher from Panorama, said he’s worked at and been a principal at both small and large schools.

He said larger schools usually have staff, like curriculum specialists, who review the standards and help teachers develop curriculum that fits. However, he said in smaller schools like his, which have only 50 or 60 kids in each grade level, teachers often have to interpret the standards for themselves.

“That ship has sailed, having quality curriculum directors, because there's no money,” Dorhout said. “That was one of the first things that, as there's been a lack of support for public education, those are some of the first things that have gone.”

Dorhout said, as a veteran teacher, the wording changes in the standards will not “significantly impact” his teaching. But he said younger or more inexperienced teachers might feel the need to stick to the standards word-for-word.

“I wonder about that rook[ie], that first year teacher, that second year teacher, where they are not quite sure how they're handling things, what they're doing and if somebody's got their back or not,” Dorhout said. “Then all of a sudden, what did they do? They shy away from it, and then things aren't taught the way they should be taught.”

Hannah Haarhues-Casey, a seventh grade science teacher at Lewis Central Middle School, said she’s concerned the changes could be a slippery slope for people working in conservative communities.

“If you're in a conservative community, there would probably be a lot of pressure teaching about climate change or evolution,” she said. “As a teacher, I can fall back on the standards and say, 'Yes, I have to teach this. This is what my standard says,' versus if it's taken out, then you don't have two legs to stand on, because it's no longer required.”

How often are science standards reviewed?

The science standards were last reviewed nearly a decade ago in 2015 and before that in 2008, when Iowa public schools and non-public accredited schools were first required to implement Iowa’s content standards, according to a Department of Education report published earlier this year.

According to the report, Iowa was the last state in the nation to adopt content standards.

Doe said, despite not being explicitly stated in the report, “each content area standard will be on a five-year regular review cycle going forward.”

What are the next steps until approval?

Next, a second standards review team — composed of educators, parents and community partners — will review public feedback and recommend changes to the standards. Doe said the second committee also serves in an advisory capacity and does not finalize the standards.

Lastly, a draft is presented to the State Board of Education for review. After the board’s first read, Doe said there will be “yet another opportunity for public feedback.” During a second read, the standards can be approved.

A representative from the Department of Education said the department plans to start the final phase in March of this year.

The DOE website says the department will also host focus groups with teachers and administrators as part of its collection of stakeholder feedback. However, the DOE has not specified when those will take place.

Isabella Luu is IPR's Central Iowa Reporter, with expertise in reporting on local and regional issues, including homelessness policy, agriculture and the environment, all in order to help Iowans better understand their communities and the state. She's covered political campaigns in Iowa, the compatibility of solar energy and crop production and youth and social services, among many more stories, for IPR, KCUR and other media organizations. Luu is a graduate of the University of Georgia.