Educators of Prospective Teachers Hesitate to Embrace 5 Evolution Due to Deficient Understanding 6 of Science / Evolution and High Religiosity

10 11 Abstract Acceptance of evolution by educators of prospec12 tive teachers remains superficially studied despite their role 13 in having mentored school teachers whose weak support to 14 evolution is known. Here, we contrast the views of New 15 England educators of prospective teachers (n062; 87% Ph. 16 D./doctorate holders in 32 specializations) with those of the 17 general faculty (n0244; 93% Ph.D./doctorate holders in 40 18 disciplines), both members of 35 colleges and universities, 19 and with college students (n0827; subsample of the 35 20 institutions) who were polled on: (1) the controversy evolu21 tion vs. creationism vs. intelligent design (ID), (2) their 22 understanding of how science/evolution works, and (3) their 23 religiosity. The educators held intermediate positions in 24 respect to the general faculty and the students: 94% of the 25 general faculty, 75% of the educators, and 63% of the 26 students admitted to accept evolution openly; and 82% of 27 the general faculty, 71% of the educators, and 58% of the 28 students thought that evolution is definitely true. Only 3% of 29 the general faculty in comparison to 19% of the educators 30 and 24% of the students thought that evolution and crea31 tionism are in harmony. Although 93% of the general fac32 ulty, educators, and students knew that evolution relies on 33 common ancestry, 26% of the general faculty, 45% of the 34 educators, and 35% of the students did not know that 35 humans are apes. Remarkably, 15% of the general faculty, 36 32% of the educators, and 35% of the students believed, 37 incorrectly, that the origin of the human mind cannot be 38 explained by evolution; and 30% of the general faculty, 59% 39 of the educators, and 75% of the students were Lamarckian 40 (0believed in inheritance of acquired traits). For science 41 education: 96% of the general faculty, 86% of the educators, 42 and 71% of the students supported the exclusive teaching of 43 evolution, while 4% of the general faculty, 14% of the 44 educators, and 29% of the students favored equal time to 45 evolution, creationism and ID; note that 92% of the general 46 faculty, 82% of the educators, and 50% of the students 47 perceived ID as either not scientific and proposed to counter 48 evolution based on false claims or as religious doctrine 49 consistent with creationism. The general faculty were the 50 most knowledgeable about science/evolution and the least 51 religious (science index, SI02.49; evolution index, EI0 52 2.49; and religiosity index, RI00.49); the educators reached 53 lower science/evolution but higher religiosity indexes than 54 the general faculty (SI01.96, EI01.96, and RI00.83); and 55 the students were the least knowledgeable about science/ 56 evolution and the most religious (SI01.80, EI01.60, and 57 RI00.89). Understanding of science and evolution were 58 inversely correlated with level of religiosity, and under59 standing of evolution increased with increasing science 60 literacy. Interestingly, ≈36% of the general faculty, edu61 cators and students considered religion to be very impor62 tant in their lives, and 17% of the general faculty, 34% 63 of the educators, and 28% of the students confessed to 64 pray daily. Assessing the perception of evolution by 65 educators of prospective teachers vs. the general faculty 66 and the students of New England, one of the historically 67 most progressive regions in the U.S., is crucial for de68 termining the magnitude of the impact of creationism and Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12052-011-0383-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.