The Emmanuel Foundation are lying to us

The following (yellow) quotes are from a 2002 press release offered by Emmanuel College in defence of the lecture given by their own head of science, one Steven Layfield! The original release may be found here.

Note:

The National Curriculum on Science (Key Stage 4: Single and Double Science) reads

SC1 Scientific Enquiry:Ideas and evidence in Science

1. Pupils should be taught:

b. how scientific controversies can arise from different ways of interpreting empirical evidence [for example, Darwin's theory of evolution]
c. ways in which scientific work may be affected by the contexts in which it takes place [for example, social, historical, moral, spiritual], and how these contexts may affect whether or not ideas are accepted
d. to consider the power and limitations of science in addressing industrial, social and environmental questions, including the kinds of questions science can and cannot answer, uncertainties in scientific knowledge, and the ethical issues involved

This document can be viewed in full in www.nc.uk.net . Key Stage 4 Science.

Now maybe you can read some possible problems there, but the meaning from the notes (below) is quite clear to anyone except Emmanuel College that is:

Emmanuel College views these statements as indicating that the discussion of the scientific evidences in the Creation/Evolution debate, amongst other things, must form part of all pupils' education in England and Wales.

Here are the accompanying notes:

During key stage 4 pupils learn about a wider range of scientific ideas and consider them in greater depth, laying the foundations for further study. They explore how technological advances relate to the scientific ideas underpinning them. They consider the power and limitations of science in addressing industrial, ethical and environmental issues, and how different groups have different views about the role of science. When they carry out investigations they use a range of approaches and select appropriate reference sources, working on their own and with others. They do more quantitative work and evaluate critically the evidence collected and conclusions drawn. They communicate their ideas clearly and precisely in a variety of ways. They see how scientists work together to develop new ideas, how new theories may, at first, give rise to controversy and how social and cultural contexts may affect the extent to which theories are accepted.

Key stage 4 is for kids of around 14.

This, to me, clarifies the position somewhat, although it still leaves room for slippery manoeuvre. I do wonder what the author of the earlier text was thinking when they threw Darwin's theory in. Few scientific theories have been subjected to such sustained attacks from all comers, yet continue to prove themselves. Maybe now is the time to think of a better word than theory to describe Darwin's argument. There isn't a scientific controversy surrounding Darwin - there's a theological one; and some scientists are debating very subtle, even microscopic nuances, but there's no question that evolution happened.

Even if we can't think of a better word than theory, these paragraphs in KS4 that Emmanuel holds in such high regard demand immediate revision and clarification for everyone's sake. Write to the the press and your MP; anyone who'll listen. But get this nod to lunacy out of mainstream education.