SUMMARY

The "Learning Unity and Diversity in Alabama" (LUDA) five-year exploratory research and development project was funded by National Science Foundation (NSF) Discovery Research K-12 grant #1621194. The project developed and field tested two curriculum units on the topic of evolution for high school general biology courses, with one unit focusing primarily on human case studies (the "Eagle" unit) and one unit focusing primarily on case studies of evolution in other species (the "Elephant" unit) to teach evolution. The two units were compared to examine how different approaches to teaching evolution affected students understanding and acceptance of evolution. The project also developed and field tested a CRS (Cultural and Religious Sensitivity) Teaching Strategies Resource to provide teachers with strategies for creating supportive learning environments where understanding of the scientific account of evolution is aided while also acknowledging the cultural controversy associated with learning about evolution. More information about the project and outcomes can be found on the NSF website. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

All of our resources are downloadable here for free!

Click on this link: https://bit.ly/TeachLUDA 

You can also read a research article in the journal Evolution: Education and Outreach published in August 2025 about the effectiveness of these materials. 

CURRICULUM UNITS

The Eagle and Elephant curriculum units are each divided into three chapters which each contain 5-6 lessons aligned to the 5E learning model. The whole unit is designed to be taught over 3-4 weeks. Each chapter has an accompanying powerpoint file for teaching purposes, a teacher guide with masters, and a student workbook where all student handouts are collated.

CRS (CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS SENSITIVITY) TEACHING STRATEGIES RESOURCE

The purpose of Cultural and Religious Sensitivity (CRS) Teaching Strategies Resource is to encourage and help equip high school teachers to promote positive  dialogue around the topic of evolution in their classrooms. The primary goal is to create an environment that allows for a greater understanding of science by helping teachers both acknowledge and respond to cultural and religious objections, as needed, should they arise in the classroom. However, the information and suggestions provided in this resource will also be useful for facilitating positive dialogue among teachers, administrators, parents, and the public. 

This resource provides aids for responding to potential conflicts in the classroom and portrays the variety of possible relationships between science and religion that are beyond conflict. It also uses an  understanding of the nature of science to both illustrate the parameters within  which science operates and illuminate the capacity of science to inspire and expand our understanding of the natural world.

To inspire confidence in teachers' ability to respond to questions about cultural and religious controversies, Part 1 provides concise foundational information. The topics covered are (1) the nature of science, (2) the range of creationist views, (3) the variety of possible relationships between science and religion, (4) scientists’ views on science and religion, and (5) the historical context and background of legal cases dealing with the teaching of evolution. 

Teachers seeking a proactive approach that acknowledges the cultural and religious controversies and encourages a  classroom exploration of the impact of these controversies on the understanding of evolution can use Part 2’s classroom activity to engage students in a directed classroom discussion. This classroom activity is designed to be completed just before the start of instruction on evolutionary theory. 

RESEARCH AND IMPLEMENTATION SUMMARY

The curriculum units were reviewed by teachers, other educators, and scientists. The Eagle unit was pilot tested by 14 teachers and revised, and the Elephant unit was polit tested by 12 teachers and then revised. The final field test included data collected 736 students in 15 teachers' classes in Alabama.  

Feedback from students on the curriculum units was overwhelmingly positive. About 70% of the responding students found the unit interesting and agreed that it made them think about new things and questions. Over 70% of students who took evolution understanding assessments improved their scores from pre- to post-test. The curriculum units also generally increased students' acceptance of evolution. The human examples curriculum did a better job than the non-human examples curriculum of helping students to understand and accept the concept of common ancestry, including the concept that humans share common ancestry with other organisms. Both the human and non-human examples appeared to increase students' rejection of concepts inconsistent with an evolutionary framework and students' understanding and acceptance of the concept of variation as it relates to change over time, including the evolution of new species. Student focus group data indicate that the project was successful in positively framing a topic that, for many students and their communities, evokes concern. None of the focus group students openly voiced feeling concerns or fears at the end of the project compared to what they experienced before the project began.

Both student and teacher written feedback on the CRS in-class exercises indicate that this activity was received overwhelmingly positively by nearly all students. All of the focus group teachers who used the CRS concluded that the exercises encouraged a respectful classroom environment and found that the background material provided helpful information inspiring teacher confidence to be able to respond to cultural concerns about evolution should they arise in the classroom. One of the main goals and design criteria of the CRS activities was to create an opportunity for students to feel that their views on evolution, and the views of their classmates, were acknowledged and respected. Judging from the responses of the students, this goal was met for 90% of the students. Well over 80% of the students also recognized that conflict is not the only possible relationship between science and religion. Over two thirds of the students agreed that they were offered different options for responding to conflicts that might arise between science and religion. Likewise, two thirds of the students felt the exercises helped with their understanding of the nature of science. 

We are very grateful to our Alabama field test teachers and their students! Thanks to: Heather Arias, Amanda Bloomer, Synauri Boykin, Chenein Compton, Mandy Ennis, Peggy Harris, Lauren Howell, Kurt Kristensen, Scott Lawrence, Karla McInnis, Yvette Nicholson, Patrice Peterson, Amanda Pickens, Angelin Ponraj, Stacy Pugh, and Emily Smith.

PROJECT PERSONNEL

Project PI is Briana Pobiner (Smithsonian Institution).

Senior Personnel are: Paul Beardsley (Cal Poly Pomona - author of curriculum units), Connie Bertka (Science and Society Resources - author of CRS Resource), Lee Meadows (Alabama STEM Council - education researcher), Amanda Townley (National Center for Science Education - education reseacher), Bill Watson (Diocese of Camden Office of Catholic Schools - education researcher), Ella Beaudoin (Cambridge University - project manager), and Rachel Cochran and Jason Fulmore (project evaluators).

Advisory Board members are: Evolution Content - Holly Dunsworth (University of Rhode Island), T. Ryan Gregory (University of Guelph), Rick Potts (Smithsonian Human Origins Program), Donald Prothero (Natural History Museum of L.A. County); Teaching - Tammy Dunn (Hoover City Schools), Wes McCoy (Georgia Public Broadcasting), Mark Terry (The Northwest School); Education Research - Ronald Hermann (Towson University), David Long (Morehead State University), Gale Sinatra (UCLA); and Curriculum and Teacher Professional Development - Jennifer Bricken (HHMI), Dee Goldston (University of Alabama), Madelene Loftin (HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology).