Dr. Phil Snowdon, Superintendent
Cheney School District
520 Fourth Street
Cheney, WA. 99004

RE: Cheney Middle School science teacher Mr. Aaron Mason

Dear Dr. Snowdon:

I am writing to explain the concerns of the ACLU of Washington in regard to the actions taken by the school district in response to the deliberate alteration of the approved science curriculum by Aaron Mason. It is undisputed that Mr. Mason, the school's Earth Science teacher, supplemented the class instructional materials to introduce ideas that not only have no basis in science, but that also promote his own personal religious beliefs.

The essential facts surrounding this matter are very straight-forward. Mr. Mason teaches Earth Science to eighth-graders at Cheney Middle School. During the week of June to June 7, 1996, the class was studying the unit on geologic time. During this week, Mr. Mason engaged in a number of classroom activities designed to teach the students religiously-based ideas about the origin of the universe and use these religiously based ideas to cast doubt on the scientific validity of the theory of evolution.

These activities included the showing of a video featuring Dr. Robert Gentry, the author of publications which assert that the earth was formed instantaneously, less than 10,000 years ago, consistent with the biblical Genesis account. Mr. Mason also invited a guest speaker, Jim Marisch, from Creation Outreach, a Spokane organization associated with the Institute for Creation Research in California, to make a presentation to his class. In addition, students were given an in-class quiz and worksheet on the theory of evolution which contained leading questions designed to discredit the theory and to promote the religiously based views of Dr. Gentry.

The quiz contained long narratives which were more effectively indoctrination rather than questions. Numerous questions were included that asked about "evolutionists' beliefs." For example, one question asked: "If we have evolved from apes, how many fossils have scientists found that are half ape, half man?" The worksheet given to the students contained long blocks of narrative with few blanks. Many,of the fill-in blanks included a typed-in first letter to cue students about the "right" answer. The following are excerpts from the worksheet:

"But after years of vigorous experimenting and testing, there is now no doubt."[referring to Dr. Gentry's "discoveries"]

Out of the dozen journals Gentry's evidence is published in, name at least two...

What is peer review? Fellow colleagues and scientists reviewing and analyzing each others findings. Has anyone ever been able to contradict Gentry's findings? N_

Was there any evidence on the witness stand in a court of law to disprove Gentry's findings? N_."

All conventional methods of determining the age of the earth are based on an enormous assumption. ... What the polonium radiohalos demonstrate clearly is this: At some point the uniformitartian principle was B_.

Something very different happened in the past. ... Something unexplainable. These halos not only indicate that the granites in which they are found were formed almost I___ they also indicate that the process involved was significantly different from what we observe in the present.

The hard evidence of the polonium radiohalos flatly contradicts the uniformitarianism principle and thus poses a threat to the entire evolutionary framework that scientists have invested in so heavy for a century and a half. What is the reaction of the rest of the scientific community? [1/2 inch space allowed for answer]

You know what surprises me is the unwillingness of the scientific community to bring [Dr. Gentry's] work to the center of the scientific discussion.

Evolutionists would gladly have filled the pages of a scientific journals [sic] in refitting this evidence for creation if they could have done so. ... Evolutionists made a colossal mistake ....

The polonium halo tells us that granite were formed by creation, not by natural processes. ... They are a mystery only to those who are determined to stick with there [sic] theory of an earth ________ of years old.

This week-long religious indoctrination of the eighth-grade Earth science students was not the only time during the school year that Mr. Mason's religious views about creationism influenced the content of the material presented to his students. We are aware of at least one other handout given to the students which contains two handwritten alterations to the typed text. The alterations delete the ages of certain geologic events, such as the Spokane Floods which created the Spokane aquifer, and instead state that the floods happened "many, many" years ago and that they occurred during "a period of time known as the 'Ice Age'." There is no apparent reason for these revisions by the instructor except to make obscure the scientifically determined age of the event and thus make the material consistent with his religious views about the age and origin of the earth. At the same time, the students are deprived of important scientific infon-nation fundamental to their understanding of Earth Science.

It is our understanding that the above-described series of events was not the first time concerns were raised about the possibility that Mr. Mason's religious views might interfere with his secular teaching duties. We believe such concerns were voiced in the course of Mr. Mason's teaching credential program. We also have been informed that Mr. Mason has been observed wearing a shirt with a large picture representing Jesus on it during official school events where he was working as the high school wrestling coach.

We are pleased that the school district promptly investigated the complaint made by a parent after learning about Mr. Mason's actions. We are aware that Mr. Mason was disciplined. The district imposed a two-day suspension without pay and a warning that repeat violations would lead to more severe discipline.

However, based on the information available thus far, the District's response to this incident is insufficient. The nature of the conduct in quesfion requires that there be strict monitoring of Mr. Mason's teacling in the upcoming school year to assure that he is not subjecting his young students to indoctrination in religion. The monitoring should be done by a science teacher who can readily spot any deviation from the district-approved curriculum. It is not fair to place the burden of detecting major constitutional violations by their science teacher on middle school students when the district already knows that the teacher has had problems adhering to the fine between church and state.

Moreover, the school district should consider re-assigning Mr. Mason to non-science teaching duties as soon as possible. It is already apparent that there is an irreconcilable conflict between his religious beliefs and his responsibility to teach students the fundamentals of Earth Science. An understanding of the age of the earth and the amount of time involved in geological and astronomical processes is crucial to the student's understanding of the Earth Science curriculum. The very basis of each science course requires teaching facts which conflict with the religious belief that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Moreover, the middle school course goals for Earth Science in the Cheney School District state that students will "gain an understanding of the universe" and "gain an understanding of the processes by which the earth's surface has been changed." Mr. Mason's ability to satisfy these course goals is doubtful since the scientific facts contradict his religious beliefs and he has already acted to alter curriculum materials to make them consistent with his religious beliefs.

When Mr. Mason went to the lengths he did to convince his students of the validity of his religious creationist views of the age of the earth he fundamentally diminished their ability to learn earth science and also shattered the foundation for the students' further science education. Mr. Mason risked having his students irrevocably misunderstand science for the sake of promoting his religious beliefs. Dressing up religious beliefs in scientific jargon when they have no basis in empirical fact is not science. As Steve McGrew pointed out in his letter to you, Mr. Mason presented materials to his students designed to persuade them as to the validity of claims thoroughly debunked by the scientific community. These include the claims that the theory of relativity is false, that light reached the Earth from stars billions of light years away in less than 8,000 years, that the universe has undergone two episodes of divine creation in the past 8,000 years, that radioactive decay is not a reliable basis for geological dating, and that the uiiverse is less than 8,000 years old. As Mr. McGrew further noted, such conduct does not comply with the district course goal of "gaining an understanding of the universe," but instead is a concerted effort to undermine the students' understanding of science, the universe, and the processes by which the earth's surface has changed.

The law is clear that such violations of the constitutional mandate to keep religious indoctrination out of the public schools are extremely serious matters, particularly when younger children are involved. As you point out in your letter to Mr. McGrew, it is well established that teaching creationism is not permitted in the public schools. The Washington Constitution particularly emphasizes that all public schools "shall be forever free from sectarian ... influence." The Supreme Court has held unequivocally that while the belief in a divine creator of the universe is a religious belief, the scientific theory that ligher forms of life evolved from lower forms is not. See, Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. 578 (1987); Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968). The Supreme Court has left no doubt that Mr. Mason engaged in religious indoctrination of his students and did not simply present an alternative "scientific" theory. Attempts have been made for many years to introduce the teaching of creationism in the public schools under the guise of "alternative scientific theories." The courts have resoundingly rejected such attempts.

Not only has the Supreme Court ruled that the teaching of creationism in public schools violates the Constitutions, it has particularly vigilant in monitoring compliance with the Establishment Clause in elementary and secondary schools. As the Court pointed out, "families entrust public schools with the education of their children, but condition their trust on the understanding that the classroom will not purposely be used to advance religious views that may conflict with the private beliefs of the student and his or her family. Students in such institutions are impressionable and their attendance is involuntary." Edwards v. Aguillard, 482 U.S. at 583-84. The school district cannot continue to allow any teacher to violate this trust by injecting religious advocacy into a middle school science course where young impressionable students are supposed to be learning the basics of science. Mr. Mason's alteration of the middle school curriculum raises serious questions about his judgement, his respect for the law, and his ability to teach Earth Science objectively to middle school students.

Please inform us promptly about your plan for monitoring Mr. Mason's teaching in light of the concerns we have raised. We urge you to act immediately to impose a strict and effective monitoring requirement on Mr. Mason for the upcoming school year. We also request you consider re-assignment of Mr. Mason to duties where the risk of religious indoctrination is less.

I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Julya Hampton

Legal Program Director

cc: Steve McGrew

JH:dg

Return to County Map

Return to the Paranormal Northwest

Have more info? Use our feedback form.