Font ResizeIn accordance with federal Judge John E. Jones III's decision last month that intelligent design could not be in science class, board members rescinded the curriculum change from Oct. 18, 2004.
Board members voted 7-1 against appealing Jones' decision.
In 2004, the board, led by then-board president Alan Bonsell, added the following statement to the ninth-grade biology curriculum: "Students will be made aware of gaps/problems in Darwin's Theory and of other theories of evolution including, but not limited to, intelligent design. Note: Origins of life will not be taught."
The board later agreed to have a four-paragraph statement read to students that mentioned intelligent design and the pro-intelligent-design book "Of Pandas and People."
Eleven parents sued the district and school board in federal court, saying the curriculum change violated the separation of church and state.
Board member Heather Geesey, who voted for the curriculum change and is the only current board member who was in office in 2004, voted against not appealing.
During discussions, Geesey suggested the board should appeal because it might not have to pay court costs, depending on the outcomes of other court cases.
Geesey remained quiet during the vote to rescind the policy, and her actions counted as a vote
Most members of the board, which includes seven newly elected members who took office Dec. 5, opposed intelligent design in science class but wanted to wait for Jones' decision before making a curriculum change.
During public comment, former board member Jeff Brown said he tried hard but should have pushed more in opposition to adding intelligent design when it was considered.
"I feel like I failed," he said. "I will probably feel that way for the rest of my life."
Plaintiff Steve Stough said though some have talked about intelligent design being incorporated into other classes, it doesn't belong in comparative religion or philosophy classes. He said it might be appropriate in an American government class to examine the current culture climate, or a philosophy of science class so students could learn what is considered science.
"Please allow intelligent design to die the noble death that it has earned in Dover," Stough said.
Former board member Sheila Harkins said that, when she inquired about the legality of mentioning intelligent design in science class, the advice she received from the district's attorney Stephen Russell was that it wouldn't be a problem.
She received no response from the board.
Court testimony showed Russell warned board members about potential liability.
Brett Miller, who disagreed with Jones' ruling, said he prayed for a day when school vouchers would become a reality so he can choose how to have his children taught.
Keith DiGiovanni suggested each side believe the other had the best intentions and try to move forward. He also put the blame on Thomas More Law Center.
"It's widely held that the Thomas More Law Center was shopping around for an intelligent design case," he said. "The Thomas More Law Center made certain this case became a media circus. It is my belief that the actions of the Thomas More Law Center rise to the level of malpractice.
"I feel it would be poetic justice for this board to send a bill to the Thomas More Law Center," he said.
The next action from the board concerning the biology curriculum will be a proposed revision.
Asst. Supt. Michael Baksa said a copy is available on the district's Web site, http://www.dover.k12.pa.us.
The words "intelligent design" are not in the revision.
On Tuesday, board member Rob McIlvaine said the new curriculum will be revisited Feb. 6 after a 30-day review period.
Jen Miller, a senior biology teacher who opposed the curriculum change, said Tuesday that the department started reworking the curriculum at the end of last school year, long before the federal trial in U.S. Middle District Court, so it would more accurately reflect the number of days devoted to each topic and textbook information.
Days after testimony at the trial finished in November, seven school board members who supported intelligent design were voted out of office. One seat that had been in dispute because of a voting machine malfunction went to Bryan Rehm, a challenger, after a revote Tuesday.
Jen Miller said after the judge's ruling she will stress to her students what qualifies as science.
She also might bring back some lessons on evolution that she discontinued after the board's 2004 curriculum change.
She used to have students trace the Earth's history as a timeline on paper rolled out in a hallway.
"That would definitely be something that I'd put back in if time permits," she said.
