Topeka ? Proposed Kansas science standards that criticize evolution have one more stop before a final showdown in front of the State Board of Education.

The standards, which will be used to help assess students’ mastery of science on statewide tests, are going through an “external expert” review by Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning.

The Aurora, Colo., company, McREL for short, is nationally known for helping design student performance standards. The board hired the group for an amount not to exceed $22,425, and the review is due back to Kansas education leaders this week.

State officials say it is standard practice to have subject standards reviewed by outside consultants.

A final vote on the controversial science standards, which have drawn international attention, is tentatively scheduled during the board’s November meeting.

Hoping for debunkers

Those upset with conservatives on the Board of Education who placed criticism of evolution in the standards are hoping that McREL will provide an objective debunking of that effort.

“They will pick up on the content that we rejected,” said Kansas University scientist Steve Case.

Case led a committee that put together science standards that supported evolution and were ultimately changed by conservatives on the Education Board under the guidance of intelligent design proponents who believe the complexities of nature provide scientific evidence of the existence of a supernatural creator.

“The review will come back and be critical of those changes,” Case predicted.

McREL’s John Kendall, who is directing the review, declined to comment, saying the Board of Education had requested he defer all questions to Kansas officials.

Education Board Chairman Steve Abrams, a Republican from Arkansas City who supports the questioning of evolution, said he had no idea what McREL would recommend nor how the board would respond.

“Sometimes the board has accepted suggestions from outside reviewers, sometimes it hasn’t. I would want to see what they suggested before I can say” how the board would respond, Abrams said.

The reviewers are charged with examining and critiquing the standards, according to the state.

In its response to the state’s request for a review, McREL wrote that it would determine whether the standards were clear, concise and complete. They also would judge the standards on whether they reflected high measures of academic content and included essential content to help students attain high levels of academic achievement.

Comparative standards

In its proposal, McREL said it would compare the standards’ content with content selected in a number of “comparison documents,” including “Benchmarks for Science Literacy” by the American Association for the Advancement for Science.

This association is the largest general scientific society and has been critical of the proposed standards, saying portions of them are inaccurate, irrelevant and misleading.

“The cumulative effect of the proposed standards is to confuse students about the nature of science,” the association said in a statement to the Education Board.

But Case said he doubted the 6-4 conservative majority for the standards that criticize evolution will change regardless of what McREL says.

“My prediction is that the board will ignore it,” he said.

Board member Bill Wagnon, a Democrat from Topeka, whose district includes Lawrence and who supports the teaching of evolution, agreed with Case. “They have made up their minds,” he said of the conservatives.