Influences on Evolutionary Theory Acceptance Changes in Curriculum, Societal, and Traditional Values

Influences on Evolutionary Theory Acceptance Changes in Curriculum, Societal,

and Traditional Values

For over 150 years, Americans have pondered the question of whether science and

religion should interact. This thought process brings together two of the most significant

yet different intellectual forces in human culture: science and religion. Should God and

physics, spirituality, and science interact in the modern world? This debated question

caused numerous scholars to adopt the metaphor “God’s two Books,” as a means of

illuminating religious faith and science together (McGrath, 2020, p.1). This approach

looked to visualize the natural sciences and Christianity as complementary.

Subsequently, this mindset led to the understanding that science and religion are based on

two distinct aspects of human experience. Science is the way of understanding the natural

world by using empirical evidence and testable explanations, while religious faith

depends on supernatural forces or entities (Singh, 2021).

Understanding the science/religion relationship has prompted continued debate in

natural philosophy and religion, characterizing interactive typologies between science and

religion. The result of these processes is the following: first, science and religion offer

distinct perspectives on reality, which is valid yet incomplete (McGrath, 2020). Second:

Science and religion engage in distinct levels of reality, which respects the differences

between science and religion, avoiding any attempt to confuse or conflate them

(McGrath, 2020). Third: Science and religion offer distinct maps of reality. For instance,

science maps the world by explaining how it functions, while religion maps the world by

explaining what it means (McGrath, 2020). In consideration of these points of view, the

relationship between science and religion has been one of complexity, leading to the

“culture war” narrative established by John William Draper’s History of the Conflict

between Religion and Science and Andrew Dickson White’s Warfare of Science with

Theology in Christendom (McGrath, 2020, p.23). To further understand the systematic

study of science and religion, Ian Barbour’s four models of conflict, independence,

dialogue, and integration require investigation.

Barbour’s work played a paramount role in shaping and influencing the question

of whether science and religion should interact. His research suggests that the acceptance

of some combination of religion, as well as some or all the core ideas of evolutionary

theory fosters a sincere consideration of evolution amongst scientists, theologians, clergy,

and students alike. Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that epistemic and ontological

cognition, which examines the how and why of people’s perspectives predict agreement

with four science-religion points-of-view (Barbour’s Models), because scientist and

theologians claim epistemology as their theoretical argument for existence. These

perspectives are as follows: first, the conflict model argued that religion and science are

so incompatible that they cannot exist together, while the non-conflict models incorporate

the remaining three views, independence, dialogue, and integration. Second, the

independence model argued that science and religion could be separate from each other

since they stand for two exclusively distinct aspects of reality (Marin & Lindeman, 2021).

Third, the dialogue model incorporates mutual relationship building between science and

religion by assuming there is common ground between both disciplines (Marin &

Lindeman, 2021). Fourth, in the integration model, science, and religion work together to

produce a single explanation, giving the same answers to the same questions (Marin &

Lindeman, 2021). Therefore, a comprehensive review of the literature reveals that science

and religion are based on various aspects of human experience (Singh, 2021).

In consideration of the human experience, much acceptance or denial of

evolutionary theory over the past decades involves one or several of these relationships.

These evolutionary theory and biblical theology relationships are based on differences in

demographics, psychological perspectives, attitudinal dispositions, religious and

theological beliefs, and formal science education (Francis et al., 2019). Moreover, the

evolutionary theory/creation debate has become a multi-faceted challenge in both public

education and private Christian education. For instance, Coleman (2018), a Christian,

noted the following movements as instrumental to shaping the science and religion

narrative: humanism, secularism, pluralism, Post-modernism, and Darwinism. In contrast,

religious scholars like Hammond (2019), examined the denial of evolutionary theory

from the historical framework of the nineteenth-century North American revivals, the

New Evangelical Movement of Social Reform, as well as the Cold-War Era of

Evangelical Colleges. Furthermore, during this period, social challenges about

evolutionary theory and creation, litigated within the halls of the United States Supreme

Court resulted in cases such as Edwards v. Aguillard, 482, U.S. 578, ruling that teaching

Creation Science was unconstitutional in public schools (Watts & Kutschera, 2021).

Therefore, as society (academia and theology) continued to ponder the question of

whether science and religion should interact, five specific camps (thought processes)

about the topic of origins appeared.

Understanding the specific characteristics embedded in a particular science

discipline or the student’s biblical training often decides the level of buy-in students have

towards the acceptance of evolutionary theory over the account of creation. For instance,

about the biblical training aspect, Badger and Tenneson (2014) noted in their seminal

work Christian Perspectives on Origins that there are five general viewpoints about

origins. The young Earth creationists interpret the biblical account of creation as

scientifically right. Next, the old Earth creationists argue that the universe is billions of

years old, but state that God created everything. The evolutionary creationists, also

known as theistic evolutionists, agree that the universe is billions of years old, but accept

contemporary biological viewpoints regarding evolutionary theory. Deistic evolutionists

believe that God is no longer influential in the physical realm and lastly, atheistic

evolutionists deny the existence of God altogether. Of these camps, YEC, OEC, and EC

believe in the God of the Bible and the account of creation found in Genesis chapters one

and two. The deistic evolutionist and atheistic evolutionist are predisposed to the

teachings of mainstream science disciplines. In consideration of this narrative, the

conclusion reached often depends on the characteristics previously mentioned (religious

and theological beliefs, attitudinal dispositions, psychological perspectives,

demographics, etc.). These processes have had a specific impact on education through

reconciliation and coexistence, as well as the development of evolutionary measurement

instruments designed to influence science curriculum changes.

Reconciliation and coexistence along with evolution measurement instruments

have been the driving factors in the evolution/creation debate over the past 30 years. For

instance, Nelson et al. (2019) noted the infusion of religion and core science ideas as

beneficial to students potentially accepting evolutionary theory. This process was

conducted by utilizing six instructional experiences to enhance the successful teaching of

evolution: Nature of Science Teaching (NOS), NOS as a lens for evolution instruction, a

comparison of evolution to alternatives, human evolution, the power of historical

inference, and social learning. This research suggested that the acceptance of some

combination of religion, as well as some or all the core ideas of evolutionary theory

fosters a serious consideration of evolution amongst scientists, theologians, clergy, and

students alike (Marin & Lindeman, 2021). Therefore, the purpose of understanding

pedagogical approaches in the science-religion narrative is for teachers to be able to

influence student acceptance of evolutionary theory as one of several integrative

approaches.

Additionally, Bussey (2021) noted that another pedagogical approach is

understanding scientific and theological insights that can be viewed in parallel by

presuming that “God guided evolution historically and that at the same time God

intentionally created human beings in His divine image” (p. 92). Furthermore, Stump

(2020) argued that these processes are the new reality of how we as human beings

recognize science and theology, which he calls the epistemological strategy. By merging

these two thought processes, culture wars appear between science and religion and the

relationship between theistic evolution (TE) and intelligent design (ID), which is often

viewed as a battle between science and faith, Church and State, and fundamentalism and

liberalism (Leidenhag, 2019). Finally, another aspect of the evolution/creation debate has

been the introduction and implementation of evolution measurement instruments in the

science classroom.

Over the past 25 plus years, scholars have introduced numerous measurement

instruments to research potential mitigating factors in the science curriculum (evolution

vs. creation) debate. Mead et al. (2019) named the use of measurement instruments such

as the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) and the generalized

acceptance of evolution and evaluation (GAENE) to find what aspects of evolutionary

theory students readily accept and do not accept. Metzger et al. (2018), showed the need

for further research on the impact of curriculum change and how instructional approaches

affect the acceptance of evolution. Barnes et al. (2019) noted the need for further research

regarding differences in evolution measuring instruments, how they affect curriculum

change, and the acceptance of evolution in the post-secondary science classroom.

Additionally, Eichenlaub (2021) posited that societal values such as secularism would

lead to an eventual erasure of religion (traditional values) altogether. Barnes et al. (2019)

argued that religiosity was a statistically significant negative predictor of evolution

acceptance across all measurement instruments. Therefore, considering these factors, the

purpose of this qualitative descriptive study is to determine how Christian secondary

education science teachers describe changes in science curriculum, change in societal

values, and changes in traditional values as contributing to evolutionary theory

acceptance regarding the philosophy of Christian education at Southern California

Christian high schools.

This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by explicating the

impact of the material on the educational practice of Christian secondary education

science teachers when they cover the topics of evolutionary theory and creation. The

exploration and description of this phenomenon will aid in showing why one of the

foundational tenets of Judeo-Christian beliefs has increasingly changed from creationism

to accepting the theory of evolution. Moreover, examining science curriculum changes in

Christian education (addition of evolution topics) will help to decide how this

phenomenon occurred, why the negative messaging regarding evolution decreased over

the past 30 years and why Brigham Young University (BYU) and other Christian

denomination parents are more accepting of the theory of evolution.

Additionally, this research provides opportunities for dialog amongst Christian

secondary education science teachers, administrators, parents, and students in Christian

circles about fundamental biblical principles and Christian academia. By informing

Christian educators, parents, and students of the ongoing changes in evolutionary theory

acceptance within Christian academia, curriculum changes could reinforce fundamental

biblical principles of creationism. In contrast, this research provides a rich narrative about

the decades old question of whether science and religion should be integrated. Next, this

research provides Christian secondary education science teachers an understanding of

current practices (reconciliation and coexistence, as well as evolutionary measurement

instruments), and how they are implemented to influence evolutionary theory acceptance.

Finally, this research informs scholars and theologians that natural science and religion

are based on two distinct aspects of the human experience (McGrath, 2020).

Background of the Study

For the past century in a half, the question of whether science and religion should

interact has been at the forefront of academic and theological circles. This narrative has

led to an increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst secular and Christian

communities alike. An attitudinal shift has appeared over the past 30 years, creating an

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory. For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) argued

that a shift in Christian and non-Christian attitudes occurred in the international

community about this phenomenon. A survey of 34 countries in 2006 determined that

“human beings” had evolved from earlier species of animals. Of the 34 countries, the

United States ranked 33rd, whereas 80% of people in Demark, Sweden, France, and Japan

accepted evolutionary theory as fact (Bradshaw et al., 2018). A year later, creationism

was challenged and replaced for the acceptance of evolution in Europe and South

America (Bradshaw et al., 2018). According to the same research, the United States

reported a 35% national belief in “Creationism,” however, the belief in “Darwin’s theory

of evolution” acceptance increased from 42% to 47% (Bradshaw et al., 2018, p.2).

Additionally, during this time frame the practices of reconciliation and

coexistence, as well as the development of evolution measurement instruments have

influenced this narrative. For example, Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that epistemic

and ontological cognition predicted agreement with four science-religion perspectives:

conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Of the 3911 participants, 32.1% agreed

that science and religion are not in conflict with each other. Nelson et al. (2019) noted the

infusion of religion and core science ideas as beneficial to students accepting evolution.

Metzger et al. (2018) showed a high acceptance of evolution from pre and post-test

evaluations. Beggrow and Sbeglia (2019) noted how disciplinary contexts influence the

acceptance of evolution amongst anthropology and biology students by using an

openresponse instrument. Finally, in consideration of these findings, an increased

acceptance of evolutionary theory is occurring in both the Christian and non-Christian

communities. This research looks to understand the phenomenon of why this increase of

evolutionary theory is occurring in the Christian community.

There is a need to understand why there has been a steady increase in the

acceptance of evolutionary theory over the past 30 years in the Christian community. For

instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the substantial increase in the acceptance of

evolutionary theory at Brigham Young University (BYU), as well as the LDS church

community over the last three decades. In their study, Cohort I (1986-1996) showed an

increased acceptance of evolution from 12.7% to 38.3%. In Cohort II (2014-2016), the

increased acceptance grew from 39.4% to 75.4%. Moreover, this increase in evolutionary

theory acceptance attributed, in part, to three specific areas: (1) the introduction of

kindergarten to twelfth grade, science curriculum changes in biology (addition of

evolution concepts), (2) a decline in negative messaging, and (3) an increase in the

acceptance of evolution amongst the student’s parents.

Over the past 30 years, the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution also

arose in the following denominations: For example, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the

increase in evolutionary theory acceptance across a broad spectrum of main-stream

Christianity in the following manner: Mormons 48%, Jehovah’s Witnesses 26%, Mainline

Christian Denominations 70%, and Catholics 71%, showing a substantial increase in the

acceptance of evolution in the Christian community. Furthermore, Lindsay et al. (2019)

posited that an increase in the acceptance of evolution has occurred in the following

Christian denominations: Assemblies of God, Nazarenes, and other nondenominational

Christian ministries and schools, affecting the pedagogical approach and influencing the

evolution-creation narrative in Christian education. Therefore, the following is the

empirical literature supporting the problem space within this study and how it has

evolved over time, as well as a narrative of what has been discovered and what still needs

to be understood.

In consideration of knowledge about this phenomenon, the following research

exists: Over the past three decades, a substantial increase in the acceptance of

evolutionary theory has influenced the Christian education community (Bradshaw et al.,

2018). Educational practices of reconciliation, coexistence, along with the development

of evolution measurement instruments are the main causes of this change in basic

assumptions. Nelson et al. (2019) noted the infusion of religion and core science ideas as

beneficial to students accepting evolutionary theory. For instance, the acceptance of some

combination of religion with the core ideas of evolutionary theory is a widespread

practice among scientists, clergy, as well as theologians to aid students in comparing

evolution with creation. Next, scholars have introduced 13 measurement instruments to

research potential mitigating factors in the evolution-creation curriculum debate (Mead et

al., 2019). Barnes et al. (2019) noted statistically significant differences in evolution

acceptance across three student populations (Arizona, Colorado, and Utah) depending on

measurement instruments. Metzger et al. (2018) showed a high acceptance of evolution

from pre to post-test evaluations.

In concert with the 13 measurement instruments, as well as the practices of

reconciliation and coexistence, scholars have discovered predictors of perceived conflict

between science and religion, placing them in five social scientific categories (personal,

psychological, religious, theological, and attitudinal). In the personal factor, females

readily accept religious topics such as creationism, while males are more partial to a

science-based curriculum. Females are more predisposed to accepting biblical creation

over evolution by 29% to males 23% (Francis et al., 2019). Furthermore, Barnes et al.

(2019) argued that religiosity is a statistically significant negative predictor of evolution

acceptance across all measurement instruments, while Eichenlaub (2021) noted that

societal values such as secularism would lead to an eventual erasure of religion

(traditional values) altogether. Moreover, Pratt (2020) argued that societal values such as

secularism are a contemporary worldview about social change. Finally, Cooper et al.

(2019) noted that students learning evolution through “Evolving STEM” scored

significantly better on a common assessment targeted to the Next Generation Science

Standards than students taught standard curriculum, leading to what still needs to be

understood in the problem space.

The research that still needs better understanding is why there has been a steady

increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory over the past 30 years, more

specifically, in the Christian community. Therefore, research is needed to decide whether

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian secondary

education science classroom. For instance, societal values incorporate a system of values

and beliefs characteristic to that society, while traditional values are moral and ethical

principles (fidelity, faith, truth, etc.) upheld and passed on within a family to promote the

sound functioning of that family, strengthening the fabric of society. Barnes et al. (2019)

showed the need for further research regarding differences in evolution measuring

instruments, how they affect curriculum change, and the acceptance of evolution in the

post-secondary science classroom. Furrow and Hsu (2019) argued the need for further

research regarding concept inventories (Biological Concept Instruments, Conceptual

Inventory of Natural Selection, etc.), as a resource for teaching evolutionary concepts.

Metzger et al. (2018), found the need for further research about the impact of curriculum

change and how instructional approaches affect the acceptance of evolution. Nehm and

Mead (2019) showed the need for further research on the measurement of knowledge,

skills, and dispositions central to evolution education curriculum and how they mitigate

student misconceptions about the acceptance of evolution.

The third aspect of this research is how changes in traditional values influence the

acceptance of the theory of evolution. Barnes et al. (2020) noted the need for further

research on the differential impact of religious culture (traditional values) competences on

students’ perceived conflicts on the acceptance of evolution. Furthermore, Eichenlaub

(2021) noted that societal values such as secularism could lead to an eventual erasure of

religion (traditional values) altogether. Finally, various researchers have examined science

curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values using quantitative methods

(Barnes et al., 2020; Mead et al., 2019; Metzger et al., 2018). However, qualitative

research methodology is limited to comprehensive studies on science curriculum changes,

societal values, and traditional values.

Qualitative research is needed to complement the plethora of quantitative,

quasiexperimental studies, which explore science curriculum changes from a numerical

data/evolution measurement instrument perspective. Moreover, a thorough investigation

of available databases found an extremely limited number of qualitative studies related to

science curriculum changes. Subsequently, no studies specifically addressed the

phenomenon in this study. Therefore, since qualitative research is limited and no

available qualitative descriptive studies examined the changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values and how they influence the

acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian schools, this study adds to the existing

limited scholarly qualitative research.

Additionally, a review of the literature suggested a problem space (gap) exists in

understanding how science curriculum changes, societal values, and traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in science classrooms at Southern

California Christian high schools. For instance, Metzger et al. (2018), showed the need

for further research regarding the impact of curriculum change and how instructional

approaches affect the acceptance of evolution. Barnes et al. (2020) noted the need for

further research on the differential impact of religious culture (traditional values)

competences on students’ perceived conflicts on the acceptance of evolution. Eichenlaub

(2021) noted that societal values such as secularism could lead to an eventual erasure of

religion (traditional values) altogether.

This study further situates the need for this study by highlighting aspects which

predicate professional and societal contributions that can apply to both the Christian and

public-school setting. For instance, science curriculum changes can influence both

Christian education and public education. Second, the application of societal values

(driving forces) as found in today’s culture influence both Christian, as well as public

sectors of society. Third, the application of traditional values (restraining forces) to

change in society influence both the Christian, as well as the secular aspects of society.

By having a deeper understanding of the science/religion interaction, the rich historical

“isms” and movements created on both sides of the equation, and how they influence the

decision-making process in academia (public and Christian), contributes to the

professional and broader societal needs of education.

Definition of Terms

This study explores whether changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory

over the biblical account of creation. Therefore, in this study the following technical

terms, phenomenon, concepts, and terminology indigenous to science curriculum

modifications, societal values, and traditional values influence the evolutionary

theory/biblical creation debate operationally. The following terms form a greater

understanding of the definitions that influence the phenomenon researched.

Agnosticism. Agnosticism is defined as the failure to answer basic ontological

questions about the existence of God. Therefore, agnosticism is the belief or doctrine that

the existence of god(s); cannot be proven or disproven (Sexton & Finley, 2020). British

biologist Thomas H Huxley introduced agnosticism in the late nineteenth century

(Nielsen & Morch, 2021).

Atheist. Atheism, defined as the doctrine or belief that there is no God, gods, or

supreme beings. The word atheism derives from the prefix “a,” which means without, and

the root “theism,” which means a belief in God or gods (Sexton & Finley, 2020). Jonback

(2021) noted two types of atheism, negative atheism, which refers to the denial of the

existence of all gods while positive atheism refers to the state of not believing in God or

gods at all.

Christian. A Christian is a believer and follower of Jesus Christ. The phrase

“born again” in Scripture means “to be born from above” a spiritual rebirth. A Christian

is a man, woman, or child who has experienced a spiritual new birth through the

regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. Scripture says the following: “Jesus answered and

said unto him, verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see

the kingdom of God” (John 3:3, King James Version).

Christian Education. The definition of Christian education is multifaceted: (1) It

recognizes the family-centeredness of Christian nurture throughout Scripture, (2) it

reaffirms the centrality of biblical revelation in the educative process, (3) it reviews the

example of Jesus as teacher, mentor, and leader, (4) it rekindles the dynamic role of the

Holy Spirit in the teaching-learning process, (5) it responds to the Great Commission by

balancing evangelism and edification ministry and, (6) refocuses education for spiritual

growth-producing mature disciples (Clark et al., 1991).

Creationist. The creationist is a follower of the creationist movement, which

started around 1920 and placed emphasis on biblical literalism. When this movement

started, most creationists were old earth creationists. In the century that has passed, a rise

of young earth creationists and intelligent design proponents have appeared. This

movement appeared because of secular public schooling, the introduction of evolution in

public schools, and the rejection of Darwin’s concepts (Watts & Kutschera, 2021).

Darwinism. “Darwinism appoints a distinctive form of evolutionary explanation

for the history and diversity of life on earth. Its original formulation is provided in the

first edition of On the Origin of Species in 1859. This entry first formulates ‘Darwin’s

Darwinism’ in terms of five philosophically distinctive themes: (i) probability and

chance, (ii) the nature, power, and scope of selection, (iii) adaptation and teleology, (iv)

nominalism vs. essentialism about species and (v) the tempo and mode of evolutionary

change” (Lennox, 2007, p.1).

Deity of Christ. Jesus Christ is God in three ways: (1) His divine association with

the Father in being “The Word”, (2) His divine creation and salvation and (3) His divine

nature of being God. He is fully God and fully man (Erum, 2021).

Evangelicalism. Evangelicalism has a commonality centered on a threefold

commitment: a dedication to the gospel that is expressed in a personal faith in Christ as

Lord, an understanding of the gospel as defined authoritatively by Scripture, and a desire

to communicate the gospel both in evangelism and social reform (Jacobsen, 2021).

Evolutionary Theory. The explanation of how modification occurs and how

ancestors gave rise to diverse descendants makes up the theory of evolution (Futuyma &

Kirkpatrick, 2017).

Fundamentalism. Fundamentalism is the primary identifier of theologically

conservative Christians (Hammond, 2019). Fundamentalists Christians consider

themselves as a subset of evangelicals, supporting a literalist view of the Scriptures

(Watts & Kutschera, 2021).

Humanism. Humanism is a worldview, which seeks to name humans as

intrinsically good and valuable as an end to themselves and as an active, creative,

thinking, desiring, and loving force in nature (Nilsson & Jost, 2020).

Monotheism. The understanding of biblical theology (Ballentine, 2022).

Science Curriculum Change. Science curriculum change constitutes six key

factors: (1) foster a deep understanding of the Nature of Science, (2) use Nature of

Science as a lens for evolution instruction, (3) explicitly compare evolution to alternative

explanations, (4) focus on human evolution (where possible), (5) explicitly recognize the

power of historical inference, and (6) use active, social learning (Nelson et al., 2019).

Scientific Creationism. “The purpose of Scientific Creation is to treat all of the

more pertinent aspects of the subject of origins and to do this solely on a scientific basis,

with no references to the Bible or to religious doctrine” (Morris, 1974, p.3).

Secularism. Based on the ideological perspectives of philosophical, social,

political, and cultural factors, secularism influences humans in society. The word

“secularism” as coined by the British writer George Holyoake as a means of implicating

social order without the affiliation of religion (Quadri, 2021).

Societal Values. The definition of societal values is “major components of a

society’s culture consisting of the systems of values and beliefs that are characteristic

of that society” (Kumpikaitė-Valiūnienė et al., 2021, p. 35).

Traditional Values. The definition of traditional values is the moral and ethical

principles traditionally upheld and passed on within a family, such as fidelity, honesty,

truth, and faith. Traditional values follow the customs handed down by one’s religion or

family (Necati & Nurbek, 2021). Additionally, traditional biblical values hold that Jesus

Christ is the Son of an omnipotent, omnipresent God, who created the universe and who

always has and always will rule it. Satan is real and humans are sinful, but God offers

salvation through death and resurrection of Jesus. Salvation cannot be earned. The Bible

is the inspired and inerrant Word of God, and its principles are true. Finally, absolute truth

and absolute moral values exist and are found in the Bible (D’Addesi, 2022).

Anticipated Limitations

A qualitative descriptive approach was used to examine 18 Christian secondary

education science teachers (15 utilizing semi-structured interviews, and 3 additional

teachers that participated in a focus group only) to determine their understanding of how

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian education. The

researcher incorporated semi-structured interviews and focus groups to obtain data from

these teachers. The following section describes the expected limitations due to the nature

of the proposed research and data collected.

A limitation is something that is out of the researcher’s control. Additionally, a

limitation affects the study's outcome (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). The following

are the expected limitations of this research:

1. This research will be limited by a lack of funds and time to perform a longitudinal

study of the proposed phenomenon. The sampling strategy mitigates this

limitation because the data collection techniques for this study are the least

expensive, least time-consuming, and most convenient (Taherdoost, 2016).

2. Qualitative descriptive research uses coding limitations, in this case, regarding the

meanings given by Christian secondary education science teachers, which

predictably may diminish the researcher's chances of discovering unanticipated

information (Sandelowski, 2000). To mitigate this potential limitation, the

researcher will create categories of codes and develop high-level categories to

create greater understanding and meaning (Amanfi, 2019). This will be done by

linking codes together based on shared characteristics (Saldana, 2016).

3. The predicted data sources in this proposed research (semi-structured interviews

and focus groups) are self-reporting data sources. Therefore, participants will be

interviewed, and groups of teachers will be interviewed, making it difficult to

independently verify the data collected. Potential bias may exist about participant

recall of a particular event (selective memory, exaggeration, or even attribution,

etc.). For instance, Braun and Clarke (2014) posited that some data are more

variable and less transparent. This process will be mitigated by developing a

robust data collection process (fifteen semi-structured interviews and two focus

groups of four to six participants).

4. The sampling strategy is another predicted limitation in that convenience

sampling is prone to potential bias (Acharya et al., 2013). Snowball sampling, as

well as self-selecting sampling is known for potentially poor transferability of

data collection results. Mitigation will occur through the development of

wellcrafted questions, which generate specific answers to the phenomenon.

Transferability and applicability of findings based on expected limitations is

another aspect of a robust qualitative study through rich and detailed descriptions, which

ensures credibility of the study, as well as the data collection. This researcher provided a

thick description, which defined by Denzin (2001) is a description that creates a sense of

reality, allowing the reader to feel like they engage in the event. This protocol occurs as

the researcher mines the data and methodically describes the participant’s interviews and

focus group narratives. Additionally, a sufficient sample size of participants was crucial to

data relevancy, providing a more in-depth understanding and engagement with

participants (Dworkin, 2012). Furthermore, this research reached saturation when no new

data appeared from the study (Dworkin, 2012).

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study

Since the introduction of Darwin’s theory of evolution, American’s have pondered

the question of whether science and religion should interact. Over the course of time,

scholars sought to visualize the natural sciences and Christianity as complementary

(McGrath, 2020). Subsequently, this mindset led to the understanding that science and

religion are based on two distinct aspects of the human experience. Science is the way of

understanding the natural world by using empirical evidence and testable explanations,

while religious faith depends on supernatural forces or entities (Singh, 2021). Next,

Barbour’s work played a paramount role in shaping and influencing the question of

whether science and religion should interact. His research suggests that the acceptance of

some combination of religion, as well as some or all the core ideas of evolutionary theory

fosters a thoughtful consideration of evolutionary theory amongst scientists, theologians,

clergy, and students alike (Marin & Lindeman, 2021).

These human experiences, which garnered much acceptance or denial of

evolutionary theory over the past decades involved one or several of these relationships:

differences in demographics, psychological perspectives, attitudinal dispositions,

religious and theological beliefs, and formal science education (Francis et al., 2019).

Additionally, the question of whether science and religion should interact aided in the

development of the following viewpoints on the topic of origins: young Earth

creationists, old Earth creationists, evolutionary creationists (also known as theistic

evolutionists), deistic evolutionists, and atheistic evolutionists. Finally, over the past three

decades there has been a substantial increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

both Christian and secular education communities. This increase could be due to

reconciliation and coexistence practices, as well as the use of evolution measurement

instruments.

For this reason, it is crucial to examine why this phenomenon is occurring,

providing solutions to Christian education in Southern California and the ongoing change

in one of the fundamental tenets of the faith (the belief in biblical creation). Therefore, the

researcher conducted this qualitative descriptive study to gain insights on how changes in

science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values influence

the acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian classroom. The research questions

provide breadth and depth of the characteristics about science curriculum change, societal

values, and traditional values as posited by this study.

Furthermore, this research is organized into five chapters.

This researcher organized this study into five chapters. The first chapter includes

the introduction to the study. Chapter 1 also includes a background to the study, which

briefly tells and familiarizes the reader with a history of the problem space. Next, the

chapter provides a definition of terms that may be unknown to the layperson, as well as

terms that may be ambiguous or uncommon. Additionally, Chapter 1 presents the

expected limitations indigenous to a qualitative descriptive study, as well as consequences

regarding transferability and applicability. Furthermore, Chapter 1 provides a project

timeline for the execution of the proposed research (level one prospectus to level eight

Dean’s read). Finally, Chapter 1 includes highlights to the problem space, problem

statement, purpose of the study, phenomenon, and research questions, leading to a rich

literature review in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 entails the methodology and research design of

the study. This chapter begins with an introduction, purpose of the study, the research

questions, design rationale, the population and sample, the sources of data, data

management and analysis procedures and a summary. Chapter 4 highlights the data

collection and data analysis procedures and presents the findings of how Christian

secondary education teachers describe science curriculum changes, societal values, and

traditional values as influencing the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern

California Christian high schools. Chapter 5 consists of the study’s findings, conclusions,

as well as recommendations for future research.

Chapter 2 consists of a comprehensive review of the literature on the topic of

evolutionary theory and biblical creation over the past 150 years, leading to the problem

space of how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in

traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory. The following

definitions of curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values influence this

research: The definition of curriculum change is the incorporation of an organization’s

vision and change in alignment of intended student learning goals, assessment, and

instruction (Clemmons et al., 2022). Next, the definition of societal values is “major

components of a society’s culture consisting of the systems of values and beliefs that are

characteristic of that society” (Kumpikaitė-Valiūnienė et al., 2021, p. 35). The definition

of traditional values is the moral and ethical principles traditionally upheld and passed on

within a family, such as fidelity, honesty, truth, and faith. Traditional values follow the

customs handed down by one’s religion or family (Necati & Nurbek, 2021), especially of

a traditional or conservative kind which are held to promote the sound functioning of the

family and to strengthen the fabric of society. Additionally, chapter two consists of an

introduction of the topic, a background to the problem, an identification of the problem

space, the theoretical foundation, a thorough review of the literature (historical

movements, evolution from five population perspectives, evolution instrumentation

research, and current thinking of science v. religion from a Christian perspective), the

problem space, and finally a summary of the chapter.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction to the Chapter and Background to the Problem

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study is to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian

Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes is traditional values. This

research enriches the body of knowledge that pertains to the interactions of theology and

science in general, and the evolutionary theory and creation debate, in particular,

Christian education pedagogy. Furthermore, this researcher also explored other germane

factors such as driving and restraining forces, which contribute to organizational

development and curricular change in Christian schools.

The contents of this chapter were organized in a manner indicative of scholarly

writing, with a clear and methodical organizational structure. For instance, the

background to the problem provided a narrative on the need to understand the steady

increase in the acceptance of evolution over the past three decades in the Christian

community. Moreover, the problem space found the movement to teach evolution in ways

that consider student religious concerns using pedagogical approaches such as cultural

and sensitivity teaching (Bertka et al., 2019), as well as epistemic and ontological

cognitive approaches to increase evolution understanding and even acceptance (Marin &

Lindeman, 2021). Numerous instruments to study evolution teaching effectiveness;

developed over the past 25 years have been effective. One such example is the measure of

acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) to understand what students readily accept

and reject. The religious vs. evolution sections (historical movements, events, and “isms”)

highlights the differential impact of religious culture (traditional values) competences

(Barnes et al., 2020), and secularism which leads to the erasure of traditional values

(Eichenlaub, 2021). Next, the theoretical foundation (Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum

Change) articulates the processes of unfreezing, moving, and freezing change through

driving forces (societal values), and restraining forces (traditional values) (Lewin, 1936;

Schein, 1999).

The researcher used the literature review to highlight and provide a historical

description about the major movements, events, and “isms” contributing to the

progression of the evolution/creation narrative (Watts & Kutschera, 2021), more

specifically, evolution acceptance by Christian high school students. In contrast,

Hammond (2019) examined the denial of evolution from the historical perspective of the

Nineteenth-Century North American Revivals, and the New Evangelical Movement of

Social Reform. Additionally, the science-religion debate theme examined the past 150

years of trends in evolutionary science (Smocovitis et al., 2020). Furthermore, the current

thinking on the science-religion debate from a Christian perspective theme discussed

current trends in the Christian community and addressed evolution from a demographics’

perspective (Beggrow & Sbeglia, 2019). Finally, the problem statement was told, as well

as the general population affected, and the importance and scope of the problem

addressed.

For the literature review, the researcher surveyed multiple sources in search of

empirical, peer-reviewed articles on the topic of how science curriculum change, societal

values, and traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory. This

researcher used databases such as Google Scholar, EBSCOhost, ProQuest, GCU Library,

and ERIC. Several search terms provided information for this chapter. The search terms

include evolution, creation, evolution vs. creation, Christian education, Science

curriculum changes, traditional values, societal values, evolution measurement

instruments, biological sciences, Darwinism, secularism, pluralism, Post-modernism,

agnosticism, atheist, fundamentalism, and evangelicalism. The rest of this chapter

examined the background to the problem, problem space as a means of justifying the

research, provided the theoretical foundation (Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change),

and developed an exhaustive review of the literature and stated the problem statement.

Background to the Problem

For over 150 years, Americans have pondered the question of whether science and

religion should interact. Intense debates have developed between creationists and

evolutionists, predicated on demographics, psychological perspectives, attitudinal

dispositions, religious and theological beliefs, as well as formal science education

(Francis et al., 2019). Moreover, the evolution-creation debate has been challenging to

both public and private Christian education. For instance, Coleman (2018) noted the

following movements as instrumental to shaping the evolution narrative: Darwinism,

humanism, secularism, pluralism, and postmodernism. In contrast, religious scholars like

Hammond (2019), examined the denial of evolution as highlighted in the historical

framework of the Nineteenth-Century North American Revivals, the New Evangelical

Movement of Social Reform, as well as the Cold-War Era of Evangelical Colleges.

Additionally, Numbers (2021) highlighted the denial of evolution from eight debates,

both oral and printed by evolution opponents such as William Jennings Bryan to suppress

the teaching of human evolution. Next, life-altering events and social challenges changed

the face of the evolution-creation debate, as well as the litigation of major court cases

within the halls of the United States Supreme Court.

In the 1920s, the United States public school system and mainstream academia

embraced evolutionary theory. This induced fundamentalist Christians (Creationists) to

mount a formative response to the decline of religious education in both public schools

and churches by performing a series of eight debates featuring anti evolutionary

controversies (Numbers, 2021). These debates were instrumental in regaining the biblical

voice of creationism by the 1930s and 40s. Next, the 1940s and 50s included the National

Association of Christian Schools and the Christian school movement. These revelations

prompted the U.S. Supreme Court landmark cases of Engel v. Vital and Abington v.

Schempp in 1962-1963, striking down prayer and Bible reading in public schools

(Coleman, 2018). By the 1980s, Christian rights, prayer in public schools, and the

teaching of creationism prompted faculty who teach evolution to rethink their curricula

development by incorporating the findings from studies of student knowledge, attitudes,

and beliefs about evolution. In the last three decades culturally competent or

reconciliation instructional approaches advocated to increase Christian student

understanding and acceptance of evolutionary theory.

Cultural competence and reconciliation instruction advocated over the past 30

years increase student understanding and potential acceptance of evolutionary theory. For

instance, Nelson et al. (2019) posited that the integration of religion and core science

ideas is beneficial to the likelihood of students accepting evolutionary theory. Six factors

thought to enhance the successful teaching of evolution are as follows: develop a deep

understanding about the nature of science (NOS), utilize NOS as a lens for evolution

instruction, compare evolution to other alternatives, human evolution, the power of

historical inference, and social learning. Additionally, Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted

that theories of epistemic and ontological cognition define the everyday thinking styles

that predict agreement with some combination of the following four science-religion

perspectives: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Adopting the last two can

lead to a substantial increase in the “science and religion are not in conflict with each

other” narrative (p.4). Finally, over the past twenty-five-plus years, scholars have

introduced thirteen measurement instruments to study evolution teaching effectiveness.

Thirteen-evolution measurement instruments, developed to evaluate various

instructional aspects of evolutionary theory acceptance and rejection, have been effective.

Understanding the affiliation each student had with these evolutionary concepts, and their

level of understanding attributed to four specific usage categories published between

1990 and 2016 (Mead et al., 2019). Moreover, Mead et al. (2019) placed these

instruments into the following categories: first, two instruments included the use of

multiple versions as a means of gathering information, the measure of acceptance of the

theory of evolution (MATE), and the evolutionary attitudes and literacy survey (EALS).

Second: Two of the instruments included open-ended, constructed questions by using the

assessing contextual reasoning about natural selection (ACORNS) format and the

assessment tool for evaluating evolution knowledge (ATEEK). Third: Two of the

instruments conducted their responses by using multiple-choice questions, the evolution

concept test (ECT), and the measure of understanding of macroevolution (MUM). Lastly,

the remainder of the instruments were some forms of multiple-choice/Likert scale, which

extracted information pertinent to curriculum presentation (Mead et al., 2019). The

fundamental goal of these quantitative, experimental, and quasi-experimental tools were

to gather information about the evolution debate, harness the strengths of those scientific

enterprises, and apply the appropriate modifications/designs to execute, evaluate, and

provide instructional practices in the classroom (Nehm & Mead, 2019). Table one

highlights in a color-coded manner, the 13 Evolution Measurement Instruments.

Table 1

The Thirteen Evolution Measurement Instruments

Instrument Description

ECT (Evolution Concept Test) Six item that combine open-ended and Likert-scale type on

natural selection

CINS (Concept Inventory of Natural

Selection)

Twenty multiple choice questions on natural selection

MATE (Measure of Acceptance of the

Theory of Evolution)

Twenty-five-point Likert questions about the acceptance of

evolution

MUM (Measure of Understanding of

Macroevolution)

Twenty-seven multiple choice questions and one free

response (Deep time, phylogenetic, speciation, fossils,

nature of science

KEE (Knowledge of Evolution Exam) Ten questions

EALS (Evolutionary Attitudes and

Literacy Survey)

Long form: 104 Likert-scaled questions. Short form: 64

Liker-scaled questions on science understanding and

attitudes as they relate to evolution, religiosity.

ACORNS (Assessing Contextual

Reasoning About Natural Selection)

Unlimited number of open-ended questions on natural

selection, non-adaptive change.

I-SEA (Inventory of Student Acceptance of

Evolution)

Twenty-four items on microevolution, macroevolution, and

human evolution.

EvoDevoCI Eleven multiple-choice questions on evolutionary

developmental biology.

ATEEK (Assessment Tool for Evaluating

Evolution Knowledge)

Four open-ended questions on genotype, phenotype, change

in allele frequencies.

GeDI (Genetic Drift Inventory) Twenty-two agree/disagree statements on genetic drift.

GAENE (Generalized Acceptance of

Evolution Evaluation)

Thirteen Likert items on evolutionary acceptance.

CANS (Concept Assessment of Natural

Selection)

Twenty-four multiple-choice questions on natural selection.

The fundamental goal of measurement tools was to gather information on the

level of evolutionary theory acceptance amongst students. For example, Mead et al.

(2019) described the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) and the

generalized acceptance of evolution and evaluation (GAENE) instruments as

measurement tools about the acceptance of evolutionary theory by using Likert-scale

questions. Metzger et al. (2018) argued that the ability for students to understand and

accept evolution is a positive measure for academia and the development of the scientific

voice in the undergraduate classroom. Nehm and Mead (2019) noted that the following

three measurement instruments, the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution

(MATE), the generalized acceptance of evolution and evaluation (GAENE), and the

inventory of student evolution acceptance (I-SEA) specifically focused on how to,

properly increase the acceptance of evolutionary theory among science students. Finally,

Barnes et al. (2019), specified how different evolution instruments affected research

results, how they affect curriculum change, and the acceptance of evolution in the

postsecondary science classroom.

This researcher explored, described, and evaluated how the evolution-creation

narrative has transformed over the past 150 years because of psychological perspectives,

attitudinal dispositions, religious and theological beliefs, formal science education, and

measurement instruments. However, there exists a problem space (gap) within the

literature regarding the influence of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values and the increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in the Christian community over the past three decades (Barnes et al., 2020;

Bradshaw et al., 2018; Eichenlaub, 2021). Therefore, from a reconciliation perspective,

Bertka et al. (2019) noted the need for further research regarding pedagogical approaches

(curriculum changes) and how they influence students’ perceptions of the sciencereligion

narrative; whereas Metzger et al. (2018) identified the need to understand the impact of

curriculum changes as instrumental to evolutionary theory acceptance. Next, Barnes et al.

(2019) argued for the need to research differences in measuring instruments and their

significance to evolution acceptance.

Another predictor regarding the evolutionary theory/creation debate is societal

values verses traditional values. Barnes et al. (2019) noted that religiosity (traditional

values) is a statistically significant negative predictor of evolution acceptance; while

Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as secularism would eventually lead to

an erasure of religion (traditional values) altogether. Beggrow and Sbeglia (2019) noted

the need to find whether different disciplines such as anthropology and biology associated

equally with the acceptance of evolution and Cooper et al. (2019) found the need to

determine whether STEM curriculum training increased the acceptance of evolution. For

these reasons, a problem space exists about the influence of science curriculum change,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values and the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in Christian education.

Identification of the Problem Space

There is a need to understand why there has been a steady increase in the

acceptance of evolution over the past 30 years, more specifically, in the Christian

community. For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the dramatic increase in the

acceptance of evolutionary theory at Brigham Young University (BYU), as well as the

LDS church community over the last three decades. In their study, Cohort I (1986-1996)

showed an increased acceptance of evolutionary theory from 12.7% to 38.3%. In Cohort

II (2014-2016), the increased acceptance grew from 39.4% to 75.4%. Moreover, this

increase in evolutionary theory acceptance attributed, in part, to three specific areas: the

introduction of kindergarten to twelfth grade, science curriculum changes in biology

(addition of evolution concepts), a decline in negative messaging, and an increase in the

acceptance of evolution amongst the student’s parents. Additionally, Bradshaw et al.

(2018) noted the increase in evolutionary theory acceptance across a broad spectrum of

Christianity in the following manner: Mormons 48%, Jehovah’s Witnesses 26%, Mainline

Christian Denominations 70%, and Catholics 71%, showing a significant increase in the

acceptance of evolution in the Christian community. The following is the empirical

literature supporting the problem space within this proposed study and how it has evolved

over time, as well as a narrative of what has been discovered and what still needs to be

understood.

Reconciliation, Coexistence, and Evolution

Over the last three decades, there has been a significant increase in efforts to use a

reconciliation model to teach evolutionary theory. The following observable and

measurable effects operationalize these processes: first, of particular interest, Bradshaw et

al. (2018) noted the introduction of kindergarten to twelfth grade; science curriculum

changes in biology (addition of evolution topics) from 1986 to 2016. Second: A decline in

negative messaging about the topic of evolution. Third: An increase in the acceptance of

evolution amongst the student’s parents. Furthermore, Bradshaw et al. (2018) concluded

these issues needed further research, because science and technology are synonymous in

the Latter-day Saints community, and the Brigham Young University (BYU) population

represent students of Christian faith and the Christian mainstream viewpoint.

Additionally, Lindsay et al. (2019) posited that an increase in the acceptance

of evolution has occurred in the following mainstream Christian denominations:

Assemblies of God, Nazarene, and other non-denominational Christian ministries and

schools, affecting the pedagogical approach and influencing the evolution-creation

narrative in Christian education.

Another facet of Christian, science education's reconciliation and coexistence

narrative is the pedagogical approaches adopted and how they influence creation and

evolution in the classroom. Prior research found the teaching of the following six topics

as enhancing the successful influence of evolution: nature of science (NOS), nature of

science as a lens for evolution instruction, comparing evolution to alternatives, human

evolution, the power of historical inference, and social learning (Nelson et al., 2019). By

using these processes, the combination of religion with some or all the core evolutionary

theory concepts mentioned, scientists and theologians forge common ground in teaching

students a greater understanding of evolutionary theory. In contrast, the importance of

conceptualizing the nature of science in society by using social media as another means

of mediating, mechanizing, and manipulating the evolution narrative. In other words,

media gatekeepers significantly shape the science narrative, its content, reliability, and

intelligibility (Hottecke & Allchin, 2020). By doing so, media literacy creates a greater

understanding of the nature of science and evolutionary theory as a whole before

confronting the topic in the classroom. Therefore, another point of interest in the

reconciliation and coexistence narrative is epistemic and ontological cognition.

There is a growing interest in epistemic and ontological cognition, as well as how

they predict agreement within the four science-religion perspectives of conflict,

independence, dialogue, and integration. These processes define the everyday thinking

styles, which highlight these perspectives. For example, Marin and Lindeman (2021)

posited that epistemic and ontological cognition predict agreement with four

sciencereligion perspectives: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Of the

3911 participants in this study, 32.1% agreed that science and religion are not in conflict

with each other. Within this statistic, 64.3% strongly or moderately agreed with the

independence view of science-religion, 65.6% with the dialogue view, and 16.2% with

the integration view of science and religion. Additionally, Singh (2021) argued that

science and religion make up vastly different human experiences, but common ground is

achievable by building “relationships between religion and science, logic and culture”

(p.11). Furthermore, Singh (2021) also argued for the use of Barbour’s model of

interaction (conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration) as a means of

characterizing relationship-building and interaction between the science and religious

communities. These processes strive to create a theological outlook which incorporates

both religion and science equally.

In the quest to present science and religion equally (time spent in teaching), the

following scientific and theological viewpoints appear: how might God have guided

evolution? For instance, Bussey (2021) noted that the scientific picture and theological

insights could be viewed in parallel by presuming that “God guided evolution historically

and that at the same time, God intentionally created human beings in His divine image”

(p. 92). The challenge with this thought process, as noted by Bussey (2021) is to combine

a valid interpretation of Genesis one and two (the traditional spiritual account of creation)

and a modern mainstream scientific account of evolution (change over time and common

descent). Additionally, Stump (2020) argued that these processes are the new reality of

how we as human beings recognize science and theology, which he calls the

epistemological strategy. By merging these two thought processes, the genesis to a

historically connected young Earth creation or biblical creationism viewpoint allow for

alternative explanations such as intelligent design or theistic evolution (a.k.a.

Evolutionary Creation; Leidenhag, 2019). Furthermore, in the quest of fully

understanding what knowledge already exists on reconciliation, coexistence, and

evolution, the following we do not know.

Pedagogical approaches in the science-religion narrative can have an influence on

whether students are willing to understand (have a knowledge of) and potentially accept

(believe) the account of evolutionary theory over the account of creation. For instance,

Bertka et al. (2019) found the need for further understanding of pedagogical approaches

(curriculum changes), and how they influence the tension (creation vs. evolution) in both

public and private US high school science classrooms. This process aims to minimize

differences in the creation-evolution debate by using cultural and religious sensitivity

(CRS) teaching strategies to observe and measure the differences between religious

beliefs and science (Bertka et al., 2019). Highlighted in the Teaching Evolution through

Human Example (TEtHE) project is one such strategy. Additionally, Bradshaw et al.

(2018) noted the need for further research in three general areas reflective of pedagogical

(curriculum change) approaches: first, how has the introduction of kindergarten to twelfth

grade, science curriculum (evolutionary science concepts) influenced the increase of

evolution acceptance? Second, what has contributed to the decline in negative messaging

in the LDS community, as well as mainline Christian education about evolution? Third,

why has there been an increase in evolutionary theory acceptance amongst BYU parents?

Furthermore, Lindsay et al. (2019) noted the increase of the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in other Christian denominations such as the Nazarene (Point Loma Nazarene

University), Christians identifying as non-denominational (Colorado Christian

University), and Assemblies of God (Evangel University). Finally, another factor

instrumental in this phenomenon is the development of evolution measurement

instruments and their contributions to the science-evolution partnership.

Measurement Instruments and Evolution

Over the past 25 plus years, scholars introduced 13 measurement instruments to

potentially mitigate factors in the resistance to learning about evolutionary theory. Barnes

et al. (2019) noted statistically significant differences in evolution acceptance across three

student populations (Arizona, Colorado, and Utah) depending on the measurement

instrument used (Barnes et al., 2019). For instance, when researchers used the measure of

acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE), researchers consistently found a positive

relationship between acceptance of evolution and subject matter understanding (Barnes et

al., 2019). Moreover, when researchers used the inventory of student evolution

acceptance (I-SEA), students showed greater acceptance of micro evolution, macro

evolution, and human evolution, because of a related trust in science and scientists over

biblically taught principles associated with creationism (Barnes et al., 2019). Evolution

acceptance increased after evolution was measured by the generalized acceptance of

evolution evaluation (GAENE) (Barnes et al., 2019). Additionally, Metzger et al. (2018)

found a high acceptance of evolution amongst biology students when pre and post-test

evaluations were conducted. However, Metzger et al. (2018) also showed the need to

explore whether curricular modifications affect the acceptance of evolution.

Examining and reviewing measurement instruments is paramount in

understanding how specific instruments influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory

because various instruments contribute to the topic by measuring student understanding

of evolutionary concepts, knowledge of the sciences, and attitudes towards biblical

creation and evolutionary theory. For instance, Mead et al. (2019) identified the need to

research and assess curriculum change interventions through the utilization of

measurement instruments such as the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution

(MATE) and generalized acceptance of evolution and evaluation (GAENE) to determine

what aspects of evolution students readily accept and reject. Additionally, Barnes et al.

(2019) posited that different measurement instruments, on many occasions, led to

different research results and conclusions, because of demographics, different populations

(religious/non-religious), different definitions of evolutionary theory, and other variables.

Therefore, these processes explain the 30 years of conflicting data about the relationship

between evolution acceptance and understanding. By evaluating students with various

measurement instruments, Mead et al. (2019) posited that religiosity, evolution

understanding, and the Nature of Science understanding were the greatest predictors of

evolution acceptance. Finally, understanding the strengths and limitations of each

instrument is also paramount to its effectiveness.

Understanding the strengths and limitations of each measurement instrument

predicts the proper use of instruments and the potential for reliability, as well as content

and construct validity. For example, Sbeglia and Nehm (2018), as well as Romine et al.

(2018) agreed that MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE provided individually focused outlooks

on the acceptance of evolution because they measured them from different theoretical

(instrument/construct vs. item focused) and psychometric perspectives. Next, Mead et al.

(2019) argued that more recently developed instruments (CANS, GeDI, EvoDevoCI, and

GAENE) included numerous lines of evidence referencing strong reliability, as well as

validity. Therefore, the author recommended the use of these instruments for the

development and research of new instruments. Additionally, Mead et al. (2019) reported

that all measurement instruments except for three had evidence of both validity and

reliability about their specific measurement objectives. The knowledge of evolution exam

(KEE) reported neither evidence of validity nor reliability. The assessment tool for

evaluating evolution knowledge (ATEEK) reported evidence of reliability only, and the

evolution concept test (ECT) reported validity only. Finally, the one limitation that all

measurement instruments had was their inconsistency in researcher definition of

evolutionary theory acceptance. This is crucial to identify a singular valid and reliable

instrument to quantify evolution acceptance, so results are comparable across the myriads

of studies (Barnes et al., 2019). By finding the impact that various measurement

instruments have, instructional approaches through potential curriculum change, impact

evolutionary theory acceptance.

Instructional approaches and curriculum change can potentially increase

acceptance of evolution among science (biology) students. Metzger et al. (2018), reported

on students enrolled in a foundational introductory biology course and who received

instruction in a wide variety of biology topics including evolution. The authors found a

significant increase in the acceptance of evolution from pre to post-test evaluations.

Additionally, Branch et al. (2021) posited that States, which adopted the Next Generation

of Science Standards, were more likely to devote added time in teaching evolutionary

theory as a settled science (fact) rather than a principle or theory. Furthermore, Fackler

(2021) suggested that teachers use four epistemological approaches: first, expanding

ways of knowledge and marking boundaries between the scientific way of knowing and

other ways of knowing at the same time (evolution vs. creationism). Second, comparing

claims and arguments from different frameworks. Third, teaching about the powers and

limitations of science. Fourth, bringing both similar and different science processes to the

students’ attention. Finally, Fackler (2021) noted that by using these various instructional

approaches, the potential to combat science denial facilitates the student metacognition

and knowledge about the natural world, leading to further utilization and understanding

of conceptual inventories.

Concept inventories are programmed assessments of specific concepts or sets of

concepts administered through testing to show common misconceptions students may

have about the evolution-creation debate. For instance, Furrow and Hsu (2019) argued the

need for further research about concept inventories (Biological Concept Instruments,

Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection, etc.) as a resource for teaching evolutionary

concepts, showing key misconceptions students have in understanding curriculum

learning goals, and how these attributes may affect evolution acceptance. For instance,

Green and Delgado (2021) noted, using the Cultural Border Crossing concept inventory,

that learners experience differences between their home culture and the culture of the

science classroom, concluding that culture influences the students’ learning regarding

evolution. Therefore, understanding cultural influences and barriers (societal and

traditional values) informs approaches to teaching evolution-creation. Furthermore,

Furrow and Hsu (2019) argued that these collected data serve as an assessment tool to

decide curriculum modifications using pre- and post-testing, skills assessment, and

dispositions central to teaching the topic of evolution.

Understanding the characteristics of various measurement instruments asserts the

necessary knowledge, skills, and dispositions students need to understand and potentially

accept evolutionary theory. Nehm and Mead (2019) noted the need for further research on

the measurement and assessment of knowledge, skills, and dispositions central to the

evolutionary theory education curriculum and how they mitigate student misconceptions

about accepting evolution. Furrow and Hsu (2019) showed evolution measurement

instruments previously highlighted, which researchers used to uncover evidence-based

evolution education. Additionally, Sbeglia and Nehm (2018), Romine et al. (2018), as

well as Barnes et al. (2019) focused on the use of MATE, I-SEA, and GAENE to gather

information regarding student understanding. Furthermore, Ziadie and Andrews (2018)

noted the need for further research on Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and its

effect on teaching and learning evolutionary theory by understanding student knowledge

and thinking, knowledge assessment, instructional strategies, and knowledge of

curriculum influenced by demographics and values regarding the teaching of evolution

and its acceptance by students with various religious beliefs.

Demographics, Values, and Evolution

The level of evolution acceptance often relates to student demographics including

their level of science education. For instance, Francis et al. (2019) argued that females

had a greater tie to religious topics such as creationism, while males were more partial to

a science-based curriculum. The sample in this empirical article consisted of 11,809

participants (5,510 males and 6,216 females) with females being more predisposed to

accept biblical creation over evolutionary theory by 29% to 23%. Additionally, Barnes et

al. (2021) argued that variables such as understanding evolution concepts, age, gender,

race/ethnicity, and parent educational levels were strong predictors of evolutionary theory

acceptance. Therefore, the authors created a new measure of students’ perceived conflict

between evolution and religion (PCoRE). This instrument collected data from 26

undergraduate biology courses in eleven states. Furthermore, Sbeglia and Nehm (2018)

argued that demographics play an integral part in evolutionary theory acceptance. For

example, in their research, the GAENE measurement instrument showed white male

participants significantly associated with the acceptance of evolutionary theory over other

gender and race/ethnicity variables; however, GAENE measurements did not differ

between biology majors and non-majors. Finally, race made a much greater contribution

to MATE measurements as compared to GAENE measurements regarding the acceptance

of evolution. Therefore, religiosity (traditional values), religious affiliation, and a general

scientific understanding of evolutionary theory through the prism of societal values affirm

driving and restraining forces in this debate.

Within this sphere of influence in the evolution-creation narrative, the driving

forces (societal values) instrumental to curriculum change and the restraining forces,

(traditional values) could influence whether students simply understand the theory of

evolution or accept it as fact. For instance, Barnes et al. (2019) argued that religiosity

(traditional values) was a statistically significant negative predictor of evolution

acceptance across all measurement instruments. Additionally, Barnes et al. (2020) noted

the need for further research on the differential impact of religious culture (traditional

values) competences with students’ perceived conflicts about the acceptance of evolution.

This study conducted at a non-denominational Christian university used surveys to

determine whether religious principles influenced the university’s biology curriculum and

students’ acceptance of evolution. Moreover, Barnes et al. (2020) further argued for the

need to expand this research to other evangelical biology student populations to figure out

the level of influence garnered.

In contrast, societal values such as secularism proclaim a contemporary

worldview. Pratt, (2020) argued that secularism may be regarded as a worldview

perspective, because the term “secular” usually contrasts with the term “religious” to

stress two different spheres of human existence, also known as eschatological contrast (p.

132). Pratt (2020) noted that secularism is an ideological construct, which produces social

change, modernization, and the removal of religion from the public square. Furthermore,

Pratt (2020) noted that the emergence of secularism in society, marked by distinct

antipathy towards and antagonistic rejection of religion, poses challenges to the religious

community. Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as secularism will lead to

an eventual erasure of religion (traditional values), altogether.

Level of Science Education and Evolution Acceptance

Understanding the specific characteristics embedded in a particular science

discipline or the student’s biblical training often decides the level of buy-in students have

towards accepting evolutionary theory over the account of creation. For instance, about

the biblical training aspect, Badger and Tenneson (2014) noted in their seminal work

Christian Perspectives on Origins that there are five general viewpoints regarding

questions on origins. The young Earth creationists interpret the biblical account of

creation as scientifically right. Next, the old Earth creationists argue that the universe is

billions of years old but state that God created everything. The evolutionary creationists,

also known as theistic evolutionists, agree that the universe is billions of years old but

accept contemporary biological theories regarding evolutionary theory. Deistic

evolutionists believe that God is no longer influential in the physical realm, and lastly,

atheistic evolutionists deny the existence of God altogether. Of these camps, YEC, OEC,

and EC believe in the God of the Bible and the account of creation found in Genesis

chapters one and two. The deistic evolutionist and atheistic evolutionists are predisposed

to the teachings of mainstream science disciplines. Considering this narrative, the

following still needs understanding: the level of science education amongst students and

how that knowledge influences the acceptance of evolution.

The level of science education is influential in accepting evolutionary theory;

however, further research is needed. Beggrow and Sbeglia (2019) examined how

academic disciplinary contexts influence the acceptance of evolution by assessing

knowledge and misconceptions in anthropology and biology students using an

openresponse instrument known as the assessment of contextual reasoning about natural

selection (ACORNS). The authors noted the need to decide whether anthropology and

biology students associate at the same acceptance levels regarding evolution as a science.

This process complements the STEM curriculum to increase the understanding of

evolution in the secondary science classroom (Cooper et al., 2019). The authors studied

ninth-grade public school biology students who received firsthand training in the

evolution process vice the standard curriculum syllabus. Researchers showed the need for

further research regarding whether the STEM curriculum increases the acceptance of life

science topics as fact. Therefore, considering the research previously highlighted

regarding the acceptance of evolution, there is a need to determine how Christian

secondary education teachers describe science curriculum change, driving forces (societal

values), and restraining forces (traditional values) as contributing to and influencing the

acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian, science classroom.

The findings attributed to the research studies and progression of recent literature

on evolution and creation illuminate the parameters for the problem statement and the

proposed research. In recent years, the thought process, as well as the tactical approach in

academia, have been to institutionalize the teaching of reconciliation and coexistence

between Christian education and secular science as a means of bridging the gap in the

evolution-creation narrative (Nelson et al., 2019). By doing so, a growing interest in

epistemic and ontological cognition emerged (Marin & Lindeman, 2021), prompting the

teaching of a reconcilable interpretation of Genesis chapters one and two (the traditional

spiritual account of creation) and a modern science-based account regarding the evolution

of all living species on the Earth (Bussey, 2021). Next, the development of thirteen

evolution measurement instruments emerged to catalog what students readily accept and

reject regarding the evolutionary theory narrative (Mead et al., 2019). These processes

contributed to the body of knowledge by developing numerous measurement instruments

and concept inventories as a predicate for evolution acceptance. Additionally, earlier

research sought to understand the impact of specific demographics (age, gender,

race/ethnicity, and level of science education) on accepting the theory of evolution over

the account of creation (Barnes et al., 2021; Francis et al., 2019). Therefore, considering

earlier studies highlighted, this researcher is seeking to explore how Christian secondary

education teachers describe science curriculum changes, societal values, and traditional

values as contributing to the influence of evolutionary theory acceptance in the science

classroom in Southern California Christian high schools.

The study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by unmasking what still

needs to be understood about science curriculum change, societal values, and traditional

values, and why this phenomenon of evolution acceptance in Christian education has

increased over the last 30 years. The study, exploration, and description of this

phenomenon can help to show why one of the foundational tenets of Christianity has

increasingly changed from young Earth creationism to accepting the theory of evolution.

Moreover, the examination of science curriculum changes in Christian education

(addition of evolution topics) can help to determine how this phenomenon occurred, why

the negative messaging regarding evolutionary theory decreased over the past 30 years

and why Brigham Young University (Mormons) and Catholics, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and

mainline Christian non-denominational church parents are more accepting of evolution.

Additionally, this research will provide opportunities for dialog in Christian circles on a

balance between fundamental biblical principles and Christian academia. By uncovering

these contributions to the existing body of knowledge, practical and professional

application is achievable.

The practical and professional applications of this study are instrumental to the

propagation of fundamental Judeo-Christian principles aligned with the tenets of

Christian education. By understanding why a fundamental tenet of Christian education

(creationism) is changing amongst mainstream Christian denominations, then

understanding and perspective is achievable through the integration of religion and

science curriculum changes necessary to reestablish biblical mandates in Christian

education. The premise here is teaching core curriculum with a theological mindset and

Christian worldview. Scripture states the following: “…that we will not hide them

(scriptural knowledge) from their children, shewing to the next generation to come the

praises of the Lord, and His strength, and His wonderful works (creation) that He hath

done” (Psalm 78:4, King James Version). Additionally, understanding curriculum change

is symbiotic to organizational leadership and development, because it studies an aspect of

Christian education from an organizational, developmental, and leadership perspective so

necessary changes made are for the greater good of the organization. Finally,

understanding the gradual changes outlined in the problem space narrative, this proposed

study serves as a balancing factor in the quest for sound, biblical based Christian

education.

Theoretical Foundations

The theoretical foundation of this study is based on the phenomenon on the

substantial increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian communities

over the past three decades. The theory of evolution has existed for 150 plus years in

American culture and academia alike, but the science-religion narrative remained

segregated. However, there has been a directional change in this attitude over the past

thirty years. For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the increase in the acceptance of

evolution at Brigham Young University (BYU), as well as the LDS church community

over the last three decades. This change is reflective of three specific revelations during

this timeframe: the introduction of kindergarten to twelfth grade, science curriculum

changes in biology (addition of evolution concepts), a decline in negative messaging, and

an increase in the acceptance of evolution amongst the student’s parents, all of which

telegraph the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Christian circles.

Additionally, Lindsay et al. (2019) posited that an increase in the acceptance of evolution

has occurred in the following mainstream Christian denominations: Assemblies of God,

Nazarene, and other non-denominational Christian church ministries and schools,

affecting the pedagogical approach and influencing the evolution-creation narrative in

Christian education. Finally, the markers previously identified point to the potential

modifications of the science curriculum as a contributing factor to this phenomenon. This

study uses Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change as its theoretical foundation.

Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change, as extracted from Lewin’s Change Model

(Three-Step Model of Change), is instrumental in this research because it highlights the

processes of organizational change. For instance, Lewin’s theory highlights constructs in

the organizational change process of unfreezing, moving, and freezing. Lewin (1936)

introduced the unfreezing aspect of his theory as the challenging process of reeducation,

allowing for the fluidity necessary for change to occur. Bradshaw et al. (2018)

highlighted this process (unfreezing) by finding 30 years of a steady increase in the

acceptance of evolution (unfreezing of a biblical principle such as young Earth

creationism) in Christian education. Subsequently, the two fundamental issues faced by

Christians are how to interpret the Genesis account of creation (figurative or historical)

and how much mainstream science can contribute to the topic of origins. These processes

involve semantic redefinition and cognitive broadening of evolutionary theory in the

Christian sector. Now that this is occurring, the moving (locomotion) process is

potentially attainable.

Additionally, Lewin (1936) found the moving function of this theory as

locomotion or “a changing position within the field” (p.216). This process occurs when

driving forces pressing for change are greater than those restraining change (Lewin,

1944). Within this research, the driving forces regarding curriculum change and the

influence on the acceptance of evolutionary theory are changes in societal values, and the

restraining forces are traditional values in the Christian community (Schein, 1999).

Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted that religious objections to evolutionary theory are resistant

to change (because of traditional values), creating the restraining force articulated in

Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change. In contrast, Bradshaw et al. (2018) also noted a

large shift toward evolution acceptance at Brigham Young University (BYU), as well as

mainline Christian denominations. Lindsay et al. (2019) argued the increase in evolution

acceptance in three prominent Christian universities aside from BYU; Point Loma

Nazarene University (PLNU), Colorado Christian University (CCU), which is a

nondenominational Christian school, and Evangel University (EU), which affiliate with

the Assemblies of God. These changes in Christian students’ increased acceptance of

evolution highlight the driving force (societal values), argued in Schein’s (1999)

application of change theory in the classroom (p.1).

Finally, Lewin (1943) described the changes necessary to bring about the

permanence of the change in thinking (freezing) within the organization as the acceptance

of new behavior to be congruent and safe from regression. Therefore, refreezing is

occurring in the Christian community from the following three perspectives: the

introduction of kindergarten to twelfth grade, science curriculum changes in biology

(addition of evolution and related topics such as Intelligent Design and Theistic

Evolution). Next, a decline in negative messaging due to reconciliation and coexistence

practices such as epistemic and ontological perspectives predict an increase in the

acceptance of evolution not only with students but also amongst the students’ parents.

Cognitive redefinition processes influence feelings, values, and attributes. Schein

(1999) noted the following three tenets of cognitive restructuring: first, semantic

redefinition, which is the process of using and learning different terminology to mean the

same thing. This process occurs when epistemic and ontological perspectives influence

the reconciliation of the science-religion debate. Second, cognitive broadening is the

process of broadly interpreting an earlier concept. This is also occurring in the Christian

education community. Third, new standards of judgment or evaluation previously used

are no longer absolute as a measurement standard. This also is occurring, because science

previously defined evolution and Scripture previously defined creationism; however,

these opposing views now coexist as a reconciliation doctrine. Table two highlights the

driving and restraining forces in Lewin’s theory of curriculum change.

Table 2

Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change

Driving Forces Equilibrium Restraining Forces

Government Interventions Fear of the unknown

Society’s Values Negative Attitudes to change

Technological Changes Traditional Values

Knowledge Explosions Limited Resources

Administrative Support Obsolete Equipment

Review of the Literature

For over 150 years, Americans have pondered the question of whether science and

religion should interact on the theory of evolution and the biblical account of creation.

More specifically, the Bible highlights the creation of life by a Supreme Being (God) in

Genesis chapters one and two. This Scripture states that “in the beginning, God created

the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul, under

the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, references Romans 1:18-20 to God’s power and nature

from what He has made (created). In contrast, the evolution of life consists of biological

evolution (natural selection) through the passing of genes and their associated physical

traits from generation to generation, which cannot occur without RNA or DNA. Unlike

the Genesis account of creation, the evolution of life does not address how life came into

being from non-life (Badger & Tenneson, 2014). These narratives predicate personal

conclusions based on demographics, psychological perspectives, attitudinal dispositions,

religious and theological beliefs, and the level of formal science education one has

(Francis et al., 2019).

A comprehensive literature review reveals that much acceptance or denial of

evolution over the past decades involves one or several of these factors. For instance,

Coleman (2018) noted several movements (humanism, secularism, pluralism,

postmodernism, and Darwinism) as instrumental in shaping the evolution narrative. In

contrast, Hammond (2019) revealed the Nineteenth-Century North American Revivals

and the New England Evangelical Movement of Social Reform as formative movements

supporting biblical creationism. Additionally, Numbers (2021) highlighted the denial of

evolution from eight debates, both oral and printed by evolution opponents such as

William Jennings Bryan to suppress the teaching of human evolution. Finally,

fastforwarding to the last three decades, Ferguson (2018) addressed the science-religion

debate through the eyes of an increased growth in evolution acceptance. These events

prompted added research in the areas of demographics and population, evolution

measurement instruments, and current thinking regarding the science-creation narrative,

topics such as reconciliation and coexistence.

For the past 25 to 30 years, evolution educational research goals were to

understand why students accept or reject evolution, as well as incorporating

reconciliation and coexistence approaches. Evolution measurement instruments sought to

highlight characteristics identified in the pre- and post-testing processes to implement

modifications, which potentially increase the acceptance of evolution. For example,

Metzger et al. (2018) showed a high acceptance of evolution from pre- and post-testing

evaluations. Barnes et al. (2019) argued that statistically significant acceptance levels of

evolution, linked to various measurement instruments are as follows: the measure of

acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) and the general acceptance of evolution

evaluation (GAENE).

Additionally, within the past 30 years, significant research has existed about

reconciliation and coexistence between the religious and scientific realms. Nelson et al.

(2019) found six factors as paramount to teaching evolution to a broader student base:

Nature of Science Teaching (NOS), NOS as a lens for evolution instruction, comparing

evolution to alternatives, human evolution, the power of historical inference, and social

learning. In contrast, Marin and Lindeman (2021) argued that epistemic and ontological

cognition predict agreement with four science-religion perspectives: conflict,

independence, dialogue, and integration. Within this study, 32.1% of the participants

agreed that science and religion are not in conflict with each other. In consideration of

these thoughts, the literature review will examine a cross-section of historical

movements, scientific and theological perspectives, evolution measurement instruments,

and current thinking in the Christian community, which contribute to the proposed

phenomenon of how science curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolution.

Historical Movements, “isms” and the Theory of Evolution

Historical movements and “isms” have been instrumental in shaping the narrative

between evolutionary theory and creation over the past 150 years, because understanding

the momentum each movement and event created highlights the progression, as well as

the DNA of the phenomenon today. For these reasons, understanding the “isms” that

influence the driving (societal values) and restraining (traditional values) forces prevalent

in the evolution-creation narrative is paramount. By studying history, one can surmise

that two thought processes dictate the narrative, that of a biblical literalism, which

incorporates the major component of creationism by a divine Creator as highlighted by

YEC, OEC, EC, and the science-based theory of evolution as introduced by Charles

Darwin (Watts & Kutschera, 2021).

In contrast, Moreland (1989), in his seminal work Christianity and the Nature of

Science: A Philosophical Investigation argued that there are no “generally accepted

necessary and sufficient conditions for drawing a line of demarcation between science

and non-science” (p. 42). This line of thought suggests that both scientists and

theologians contribute to the discussion of origins. However, the gulf between

evolutionary theory and creation still divides theologians and scientists today. For

example, Scripture states that God is the Creator of both the physical realm and

everything in it.

For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth,

visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or

powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: And He is before all things,

and by Him all things consist (Colossians 1:16-17).

This account requires faith that a supreme being created the universe in seven days as the

biblical account in Genesis articulates.

Scientists believe in evidenced-based biology as proof of an evolutionary process.

The famous evolution biologist Theodosius G. Dobzhansky stated the following: Nothing

in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The modern theory of

evolution provides an explanation for the diversity (and morphological changes)

of organisms past and present. It provides a theoretical framework to understand

and tackle modern challenges such as antibiotic resistance in medicine and

pesticide resistance in farming. It is the basis for animal and plant conservation

(Betti et al., 2020).

Therefore, by understanding this great schism, one can further understand how history

introduced the following “ism” movements in the progression of evolutionary theory.

Darwinism. Darwinism is the form of evolutionary theory introduced by Charles

Darwin in his 1859 seminal work, On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural

Selection and later followed with his 1871 book The Descent of Man. Darwin wrote that

Natural Selection was developed as an explanation for the diversity and origin of

complex organisms and how they potentially work (Crouch, 2024). Additionally, Crouch

(2024) further noted that Darwin described four conditions (laws) for natural selection to

occur: (1) growth with reproduction, (2) inheritance by reproduction, (3) variability from

direct and indirect action relative to external life conditions, and (4) a ratioed increase

leading to a “Struggle for Life.” Next, Santamaria (2021) argued that the tenets of

Darwinism are variability, also known as the variability of traits. Finally, inheritance

begets like reproduction despite nominal differences, as well as death as a fundamental

part of life, and remains in balance through the processes of famine, disease, and

depredation.

The natural selection traits tied to a “survival of the fittest” narrative, allow some

populations to reproduce better than others. These processes lead to a successful and

finely tuned evolution of populations to their environment. By introducing this theory,

Darwin brought with his narrative a point of demarcation with the traditional biblical

view of creationism and ignited a deep-rooted debate between science and religion, which

still exists today. For example, Numbers (2021) noted the long history of debates

influenced by this topic. Debates such as William Jennings Bryan v. Henry Fairfield and

Edwin Grant Conklin in 1925 regarding “God and Evolution,” as well the George

McCreedy Price v. Joseph McCabe debate in 1925 to name a few. This process was

prevalent through the 1970s, with the Institute of Creation Research taking part in more

than one hundred debates and according to their records, never losing a contest

(Numbers, 2021).

Throughout history, the idea that humans seated as the crowning jewel of God’s

creation unchallenged halted when Darwin introduced his theory of evolution is a fair

statement. For this reason, Darwinism is the most historically influential “ism” movement

in the evolution-creation debate. For instance, Watts and Kutschera (2021) argued that

Darwin’s publication of On the Origins of Species was historically monumental, because

the biblical account of creation stood challenged for the first time in history. Within 50

years (1914), American high school textbooks would be teaching the theory of evolution

(Watts & Kutschera, 2021). This event was instrumental in challenging Christian

Scientists by introducing the concepts of natural law, and the testing of that law through

the eyes of a conceptual framework, coloring beliefs and guiding research (Ruse, 2021).

For the first time in history, the existence and progression of human beings centered on

an ontological and conceptual framework (Ruse, 2021). In contrast, this new narrative

challenged fundamentalist positions, because evolution is perceived as incongruent with

the literal account of creation in Genesis chapters one and two (Watts & Kutschera,

2021). By ushering in the tenets of Darwinism (theory of evolution), human beings

existed for the first time under scientific reasons. This progression created a natural

environment for materialism to thrive.

Materialism. Materialism is a theoretical paradigm common to empirical

disciplines, which include the philosophy of science, as well as all practicing sciences.

Leavitt (2021) argued that sociocultural materialism shares with other scientific strategies

an epistemology, seeking to restrict inquiry to relationships, entities, and events, which

are knowable by explicit, inductive-deductive, and quantifiable operations subject to

replication by observers. The challenge here is that natural sciences deal with physical

phenomena while social sciences regard human behavior, its ideas, and its organizations

as reality subject to scientific method (Leavitt, 2021).

In contrast, Thomas and Lerato (2020) noted that Social Darwinism appeared in

the United Kingdom, North America, and Western Europe in the 1870s because of

Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection in 1859. These phenomena

(materialism) misapplied Darwin’s biological evolutionary science language to politics,

the economy, and society (Thomas & Lerato, 2020). By doing so, Social Darwinists

adapted the “survival of the fittest” narrative to show the growing gulf between rich and

poor, as well as the many differences in cultures and societies around the world. These

processes sought to reinforce the competitive and materialistic nature of society in the

late nineteenth century, influencing another of many “isms” called humanism.

Humanism. A humanistic worldview seeks to identify humans as intrinsically good and

valuable as an end to themselves and as an active, creative, thinking, desiring, and loving

force in nature (Nilsson & Jost, 2020); whereas Scripture represents individuals after the

fall of Adam and Eve as devoid of intrinsic goodness, which the Bible calls, “sin.” For

instance, Scripture says the following: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the

world (Adam), and death by sin; and so, death passed upon all men, for that all have

sinned” (Romans 5:12). Additionally, Nilsson and Jost, (2020) argued that a humanistic

worldview upholds the intrinsic values of a human being as paramount to the greater

good in society; on the right, normative worldview (also considered a conservative

worldview) holds the worth of a human being as contingent upon conforming to a set of

rules or values. From a religious perspective, theologians view these values as

foundational to Christian living and one’s moral compass. In contrast, Darwin’s theory of

evolution argues that humans and other living primates shared a common ancestor and

asserts that religion did not create our morality (Pobiner, 2021).

Again, we see the dual-sided narrative between science-religion, and the driving and

restraining forces. By ushering in the characteristics of Darwinism, the tenets of

humanism blossom, which leads to ideological perspectives and another “ism” known as

secularism.

Secularism. Based on the ideological perspectives of philosophical, social,

political, and cultural factors, secularism influences humans in society. The word

“secularism” coined by the British writer George Holyoake as a means of implicating

social order without the affiliation of religion (Quadri, 2021). In looking more closely at

secularism, the following distinctions surface: first, a hard or programmatic secularism is

ideologically hostile to any form of religion (Wright, 2020). This definition applies to

evolutionists such as Dawkins (Pobiner, 2021). In contrast, a softer version of secularism

propagated today is procedural secularism, which is a hospitable form of secularism to

religious perspectives (Wright, 2020). Therefore, Darwin’s worldview is agreeable to

procedural secularism.

As seen in Darwin’s own family tree account, procedural secularism today seeks

to institutionalize this “ism” as a worldview perspective, because the terms “secular”

usually contrasts with the term “religious” to stress two different spheres of human

existence, also known as eschatological contrast (p. 132). Additionally, Pratt (2020) noted

that secularism is an ideological construct, which produces social change, modernization,

and the removal of religion from the public square: while Eichenlaub (2021) noted that

societal values such as secularism would lead to an eventual erasure of religion

(traditional values), altogether. In consideration of these thoughts, further research is

needed regarding societal and traditional values and whether they influence the

acceptance of evolution. Broadly speaking, the quest for diversity, reconciliation, and

coexistence amongst the science and religious communities introduces another “ism,”

pluralism.

Pluralism. In the progressive quest for diversity, reconciliation, and coexistence

amongst the science and religious sects, pluralism looks to promote inclusivism. For

instance, Pratt (2020) argued that pluralism is the stance that embraces diversity

positively, with a self-reflective edge. Moreover, from a scientific perspective, Vagelli et

al. (2021) noted that pluralism is the 21st-century watchword for the philosophical arena,

which now acknowledges ontological, ethical, and logical forms of pluralism. From a

religious perspective, Pratt (2020) argued that religious diversity seeks to homogenize

social identities, differences, diversity, and multiplicity, in whatever sphere of human life.

As pluralism occurs and the world globalizes, individuals develop ties to diverse

worldviews on the science-religion narrative, religious disaffiliation or secularization

occurs in the Christian community, and non-affiliation (decline in church attendance)

increases (Cragun et al., 2021). Therefore, by blending the science-religion debate

through the processes of reconciliation and coexistence, three artificial societies appear a

predominately religious one, a predominately secular one, and one in between (Cragun et

al., 2021). Considering these conclusions, the next “ism” ushered in by these progressions

is, post-modernism.

Post-Modernism. Post-modernism has had an incredible influence on academia

in recent years by replacing ethical choice and moral responsibility with objective truth.

Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) noted the definition of post-modernism as follows:

Post-modernism is the theory whereby society must evolve into one devoid of religion

and social ideologies. Ahmad (2021) argued that post-modernism makes up a society in

which all manner of ideas and values are equally important. In other words, if someone

rejects the spiritual realm altogether, his or her self-consciousness is believed above God

and moral values and provides an opportunity for that void to fill whatever the individual

thinks appropriate. For example, if the issue is between science and religion, religion

potentially is expunged, and science rationale is implemented in its place. By adopting

this particular “ism,” retraining forces (traditional values) are potentially replaced with

driving forces (societal values), leading to a lukewarm existence known as agnosticism.

Agnosticism. Agnosticism is the failure to answer basic ontological questions

about the existence of God. Therefore, agnosticism is the belief or doctrine that the

existence of god(s) cannot be proven or disproven (Sexton & Finley, 2020). British

biologist Thomas H. Huxley introduced agnosticism in the late nineteenth century

(Nielsen & Morch, 2021). Huxley coined this “ism” as a predicate for conceptual

disagreements, methods, and matters of the intellect where ontological questions remain.

From its ancient Greek meaning, agnostics are individuals without knowledge about God.

Wagner (2021) noted that agnosticism is the mental state of indecision based on a

commitment captured by an attitude. Jonback (2021) further argued that theists, as well as

atheists, could acknowledge agnosticism for the simple reason that believers and

unbelievers alike would not claim that they know if or how God exists; they simply could

claim they have a specific belief about the matter. This worldview has grown in recent

decades, contributing to the debate articulated within this proposed study. For instance,

according to the Pew Research Center, Americans identified as agnostics in 2018-19 rose

from 17% to 26% since 2009 (Sexton & Finley, 2020). Therefore, as said previously, the

“isms” articulated in this review create a symbiotic relationship with societal values

(driving forces), as well as religious perspectives with traditional values (restraining

forces). For these reasons, this research looks to determine whether these forces influence

the acceptance of evolution. Finally, the last “ism” discussed is atheism.

Atheism. Atheism is the final “ism” discussed within this research and predicates

the values opposite of theism. Therefore, atheism is defined as the doctrine or belief that

there is no God, gods, or supreme beings. The word atheism derives from the prefix (a),

which means without, and the root (theism), which means a belief in God or gods (Sexton

& Finley, 2020). Moreover, Jonback (2021) noted two types of atheism: negative atheism,

which refers to denying the existence of all gods, and positive atheism, which refers to

the state of not believing in God or gods at all. Atheism has existed alongside religion

throughout history.

The Greek philosopher Epicurus and Roman philosopher Lucretius wrote about

atheism, even acknowledging the potential that a Supreme Being exists (Sexton & Finley,

2020). Additionally, another interesting factor about this “ism” is the concept that atheism

presumes whether the evidence is ambiguous. For instance, Robin Le Poi Devin said the

following:

Atheism does not require defense. Rather, it is up to theists to convince us that

there is a God. Unless they can do so, we can remain comfortable in our disbelief.

Only if they produce a compelling argument in favor are we compelled to stir

ourselves and show just where the argument fails. If there’s room for doubt…then

the rational thing is to be an atheist (Jonback, 2021).

Here again lies the divide between literal faith in a divine Creator and a science-based

explanation of the world around us.

Creationists argue that evolutionary science is committed to a dogmatic

metaphysics of materialism and naturalism, based on faith rather than evidence (Boucher,

2020). The accepted thought process to this narrative has been a methodological version

of naturalism, which is a distinct and separable philosophical commitment (Gantt &

Williams, 2020). Boucher (2020) argued that the concepts of the natural and supernatural

are hopelessly ambiguous, to the point that the sciences cannot claim commitment to

methodological naturalism. In consideration of these thoughts, an important aspect of this

proposed research is gaining greater knowledge of the driving and restraining forces at

work (societal and traditional values) and deciding whether they influence the acceptance

of evolution.

Movements and “isms” have historically been instrumental in forging the

perspectives, progressions, and current narratives about evolution-creation,

sciencereligion, and acceptance or denial debate of Darwin’s theory of evolution. As

discussed, Darwinism, humanism, secularism, pluralism, post-modernism, agnosticism,

and atheism all contribute to the materialistic narrative introduced by Charles Darwin’s,

On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection. Moreover, in careful

consideration of the characteristics and attributes seen about these “isms,” a steady

progression leads man towards the conceptual framework articulated within science and

away from a faith-based account of creationism. For example, about the last “ism” seen,

atheism is gaining added acceptance. According to the Pew Research Center, 4% of

Americans identified as

Atheists in 2018-19, as compared to 2% in the 2009 Pew Research Poll (Sexton & Finley,

2020). Therefore, understanding this first theme creates a cornerstone of knowledge,

which anchors the relevance of this proposed research.

The movements and “isms” articulated in this review of literature memorializes a

foundation of knowledge and understanding central to the proposed study of whether

changes in Christian science curriculum, change societal values, and changes in

traditional values influence the acceptance of evolution within the Christian education

community. For example, within this theme, much attention to the plethora of “isms,” and

how they influence secular/societal driving forces exists. In contrast, much attention in

the next theme will address the counter restraining forces (traditional forces) found in

religious movements. Therefore, in consideration of historical movements and “isms,” the

relevancy of this theme is instrumental to the phenomenon at hand for the following

reasons: first, Pratt (2020) noted that secularism is an ideological construct, which

produces social change, modernization, and the removal of religion from the public

square. Second: Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as secularism led to an

eventual erasure of religion (traditional values), altogether. Third: Adebumiti and

Ekhareafo (2021) noted that post-modernism is the theory instrumental in creating a

society devoid of religion and social ideologies. By acknowledging this plight, the

driving forces (societal values) and restraining forces (traditional values) create a

phenomenon which requires further examination.

Creationist Movements and Events in American History

Creationist movements and events in American history influence the foundational

building blocks of biblical ideology as proven by the “isms” on the opposite side of the

evolution-religion debate, evangelicalism, and fundamentalism. Creationist movements

were active in propagating their biblical-literalist views of origin and evolution of life

since the publication of Darwin’s, On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural

Selection (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). In this theme, the focus of examination is on the

restraining forces (biblical perspectives that influence traditional values), which seek to

counterbalance the driving forces (societal values influenced by Darwinism, humanism,

etc.) discussed in the first theme. For instance, Hammond (2019) examined the denial of

evolution from the historical perspective of the Nineteenth-Century North American

Revivals, the New Evangelical Movement of Social Reform, as well as the Cold-War Era

of Evangelical Colleges, which brought to fruition events such as the inclusion of the

Bible in public schools and William Jennings Bryans’ crusades in the United States.

Therefore, this review of literature theme was chosen as a foundation to understanding

this proposed study and the future of the science-religion debate, because history is

crucial to the analytical process, as well as studying the current phenomenon. To do this

task, an understanding of fundamentalism and evangelicalism are necessary.

To understand the momentum proven in the religious community regarding the

science-religion debate and the philosophical roots of creationism in America, a greater

understanding of evangelicalism and fundamentalism is necessary. For instance, Watts

and Kutschera (2021) noted that evangelicalism is a trans-denominational movement

within Protestantism, which exercise the doctrines of salvation, the propagation of the

Gospel, and emphasis on the literal, inspired Word of God. British historian David

Bebbington named the following four qualities as markers of evangelicalism:

conversionism, biblicism, activism, and crucicentrism (Coleman, 2018). Hammond

(2019) found evangelicalism as consisting of the same four tenets: Biblicism, which

means devotion to, and literal interpretation of God’s word. Crucicentrism puts the cross

of Christ in the center of biblical teaching and preaching. Activism includes the actions of

one’s faith through the processes of good works, and conversionism highlights the

turning away from sin and belief in Christ for salvation. The term evangelicalism came

into prominence during the Second Great Awakening and the Nineteenth Century North

American Revivals (Hammond, 2019). As the turn of the century approached, liberal

churches opposed dispensationalist theology and embraced social outreach in the forms

of seminaries and higher education (Hammond, 2019).

As mainstream seminaries and institutions of higher learning gained prominence

in the early twentieth century, conservative pastors and theologians countered this with a

series of position papers entitled “Fundamentals.” These papers looked to promote

traditional biblical values (restraining forces) over social ethics (driving forces). To

mitigate these forces, fundamentalism was born as the primary identifier of theologically

conservative Christians (Hammond, 2019). For instance, fundamentalists Christians

consider themselves as a subset of evangelicals, supporting a literalist view of the

Scriptures (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). In contrast, the New Evangelical Movement of

Social Reform, led by Carl F.H. Henry looked to refocus fundamentalism towards the

embrace of society and academic rigor. Henry’s influence sought to focus on theological

issues and not engage in the social issues of the day (Hammond, 2019). Moreover, due to

the “isms” on both sides of the debate, a contentious, deep-rooted, and multifaceted

narrative of evolution-religion continues, fueled by driving forces such as secularism and

Darwinism on one side and restraining forces of evangelicalism and fundamentalism on

the other. Therefore, due to the plethora of historical information on this topic, only key

historical events comprise this theme. Considering this thought process, the theory of

evolution grew in prominence because of its inclusion in American textbooks in 1914,

and its challenge also came as society chronicled World War I and its scientific atrocities.

Evolution Challenged. Darwin’s theory of evolution influenced the minds of young

Americans as his theory of descent debuted in American high school textbooks and was

later challenged in 1917 by the advent of WWI. During WWI, the first attempt to

weaponize modern science occurred using chlorine gas on the battlefields of Europe. The

German Supreme Command’s justification for using this weaponry hinged on the

foundational principles of social-Darwinist views of natural selection (survival of the

fittest) as the principles incorporated by the German Allmacht der Naturzuchtung. For

instance, the Allmacht adopted a “live-and-let-live” philosophy garnered by the survival

of the fittest mentality highlighted in Darwin’s On the Origins of Species by Means of

Natural Selection (Watts & Kutschera, 2021, p. 18). These events prompted evangelical

pushback in the form of crusades and revivals to combat the topic of evolution.

Subsequently, revivals replaced traditional church services, and the message was clear

that Americans stood for the “top species” of creation and, as a result, God's chosen

people. This new faith in Christianity noted this claim as the “descent of atheism” (Watts

& Kutschera, 2021, p. 9). Here again, the ongoing debate between the driving forces

(societal values) of evolution and the retraining forces (traditional values) of Christianity

forge the history leading up to the phenomenon studied. Therefore, another installment to

this history is the inclusion of the Bible in public schools.

The Bible in Public Schools. As a counteraction to the addition of evolutionary

theory curriculum in public schools in 1914, fundamentalists influenced the addition of

Bible reading in public schools in 1915. For evangelicals and fundamentalists, the idea

that Darwin’s naturalistic theory of evolution contradicted the biblically taught account of

creation threatened the future existence of Christianity in America (Watts & Kutschera,

2021). This occurrence prompted political and legal action from both sides of the debate.

For instance, in Tennessee, the state legislature passed a legal statute that 10 Bible verses

“must be read in class” each day as part of the curriculum. This political action prompted

other states to seek similar laws: New Jersey in 1916 and Alabama in 1919. After 1920,

six more states passed Bible reading laws of their own: Georgia in 1921, Delaware and

Maine in 1923, Kentucky in 1924, Florida and Idaho in 1925 (Keesecker, 1930). Because

of these actions, precedence was set for states having constitutional authority in matters

of religious liberty. Therefore, due to this jurisprudence position and the actions of

activism and conversionism within the ranks of evangelical Christianity, fundamentalists

looked to remove evolution from the classroom altogether to have creationist views

promoted. These events highlighted the genesis of the creationist movement in the United

States (Watts & Kutschera, 2021), and led to political and religious actions in the Bryan

crusades.

Bryan’s Crusades. Bryan’s crusades were instrumental in the progression of

Christian influence in the evolution-creation debate because they looked to blend a

combination of political ideology, legal actions, and Christian values to the narrative.

William Jennings Bryan was a lawyer, Democratic lawmaker (progressive), and Secretary

of State to President Woodrow Wilson, who infused Christian beliefs with his political

positions (Gray, 2021). Bryan’s populist roots garnered him the title of the last standard-

bearer for the Jeffersonian Legacy. The most influential crusade that Bryan embarked

upon was litigation of the Scopes “Monkey” Trial in 1925. John Scopes, accused of

illegally teaching Darwinian evolution in public schools highlighted the ongoing debate

of evolution and creationism. Subsequently, Bryan argued in favor of biblical creationism

and the literal interpretation of the Genesis creation account. The primary target of Bryan

in this trial was social Darwinism (Marshall, 2021). The importance of this event

provided discussion on the young Earth creationism (YEC) and old Earth creationism

(OEC) narrative and ushered in the scientific creationism movement (Marshall, 2021).

Additionally, in 1922, Bryan launched a nationwide crusade to suppress the

teaching of human evolution, which prompted the New York Times to invite Bryan to

explain his disapproval of Darwinism (Numbers, 2021). Bryan replied with a rebuttal

entitled “God and Evolution,” which intrigued Henry Osborn, paleontologist and Edwin

Conklin, a biologist at Princeton University to respond to Bryan’s rebuttal. Both Osborn

and Conklin were scientists with deeply religious views, but in the end, this crusade

furthered the fundamentalist cause to drive a wedge between science and religion

(Numbers, 2021). These crusades are but a few of the many examples in the deep-rooted

debate between driving and restraining forces, which influence curriculum change and the

acceptance or denial of evolution. Through the processes of Bryan’s crusades,

fundamentalist Christians further emboldened by their narrative, continued to start the

scientific creationism movement.

Scientific Creationism. The creationist movement, which began in the 1920s,

chronicled many concepts such as old Earth creationism (OEC), young Earth creationism

(YEC), and intelligent design (ID). For example, at its start, creationists were old Earth

creationists, but experienced a rise in young Earth creationism, as well as a new influence

called intelligent design (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). As OEC views characterized a direct

rejection of Darwin’s concepts, numerous state bans surfaced on the teaching of evolution

in the classroom (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). One of these bans came in the form of a

U.S. Supreme Court decision. Subsequently, in response to these events, this anti-

evolution narrative ended by a 1968 Supreme Court ruling entitled, Epperson v.

Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97, which stated that preventing the teaching of evolution in public

schools was a violation of the US Constitution (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). However, this

legal loss would not squelch the anti-evolution movement, but usher in young Earth

creationism.

The young Earth creation movement, led by Henry M. Morris in the 1960s and

thrust on the scene by his book, The Genesis Flood, was instrumental in creating the

dispensationalists interpretation of post-Scopes, young Earth creation narrative as

essential to a Christian worldview (Marshall, 2021). Therefore, Morris argued that the

1967 edition of the Scofield Bible claimed that the gap theory agreed with a YEC stance

of creationism (Marshall, 2021). Watts and Kutschera (2021) argued that this stance

promoted by Morris understood a literal biblical truth proven using science. These ideas

promoted scientific creationism as a new means of propagating the creationist view over

those of evolution. In Morris’ view, the inadequacies of the old-earth geology and

Darwinian evolution theory found in the fossil records, creating a “missing link” between

higher and lower-developed lifeforms (Marshall, 2021, p. 6). In contrast, Morris and

Whitcomb argued that this gap in fossil records was problematic and insisted that the

Noahic flood theory created ideal conditions to preserve past flora and fauna in fossils

(Marshall, 2021). Therefore, fundamentalists lobbied for the creation of science to be

included in biology classes (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). Again, the creationist movement

saw defeat in the courts. In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in, Edwards v. Aguillard,

482, U.S. 578 stated that teaching Creation Science was unconstitutional in public

schools (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). However, this legal loss ushered in intelligent design

to the center of the debate.

The intelligent design (ID) debate, advocated by William Paley in the early 1800s

sought to explain the complexity and structure of biology as an intelligent process rather

than a random one. The oldest argument for ID gained popularity from Paley’s

watchmaker argument (Dean-Lindsey, 2021). Paley’s argument looked to explain the

existence of God in both Christianity and Deism; therefore, the complex structure of

living things, as well as the adaptations of both plants and animals must have required an

intelligent designer, thus the theory of intelligent design was born. William Paley argued

that the natural world was God’s creation and he likened this to finding a “watch on a

heath…you would naturally assume it had a designer” (Dean-Lindsey, 2021, p. 1).

Additionally, a contemporary version of the design argument involves the

bacterium flagellum cited by Dr. Michael J. Behe, biochemistry professor and author of

Darwin’s Black Box (Dean-Lindsey, 2021). In his research, Behe introduced the concept

of “irreducible complexity.” In contrast, philosophy professor Philip Kitcher argued that

Behe’s argument did not support science, because he stated there are all sorts of ways

bacteria can evolve in a flagellum. For example, Kitcher noted that bacteria evolve from a

protein inside the cell in one generation and later move from the interior of the cell to the

exterior of the cell (Dean-Lindsey, 2021). From a nonprofessional’s point of view,

Paley’s watchmaker metaphor is the clearest illustration of ID to understand, and

reciprocates the concept that God was instrumental in the universe as traditional

creationists argue.

Intelligent Design incorporated Scriptures such John 1:1, “In the beginning was

the Word and the Word was God…” as a means of infusing a broader creationist

worldview (Watts & Kutschera, 2021), in the hopes of influencing the opportunity to

equally teach creation and evolution in public schools. This religiously motivated

alternative to evolution came as another form of anti-evolutionism in the 1980s and 1990s

(Unsworth & Ecklund, 2021). Since Darwin published The Origins of Species, religious

fundamentalists sought to fit the story of Genesis with the scientific theory of origins,

which precipitated the development of the “science of creation,” better known as

“scientific creationism.” Intelligent Design was another attempt to legitimize a set of

scientific arguments from the fields of biochemistry and mathematics such as irreducible

complexity, specified complexity, a complex and orderly universe, and a finely tuned

solar system to demonstrate that the universe could not have occurred by chance,

requiring an intelligent designer (Sanchez-Sabate, 2021, p. 1).

Proponents of teaching ID and creationism in public schools projected fairness as

a common rationale for this thought process and a new narrative for the integration of ID

in the public-school classrooms began. However, ID would stand before the judicial

system in Kitzmiller v. Dover, and the judge ruled that intelligent design was equally

religious as the other forms of scientific creationism previously adopted (Watts &

Kutschera, 2021). Again, the courts ruled in favor of evolution and public-school

expansion as they had in the past 80 years.

Creationist movements, events, and “isms” have historically been instrumental in

forging the perspectives, progressions, and current narratives about evolution-creation,

science-religion, and the acceptance or denial debate. As discussed, the challenge of

evolution at the turn of the century, the addition of the Bible in public schools, William

Jennings Bryan’s crusades, and the scientific creationists movements (old Earth

creationism, young Earth creationism, and intelligent design) all contributed to the

evangelical and fundamental narrative over the past one-hundred years. In consideration

of this narrative, Watts and Kutschera (2021) suggested that the chain reaction that ignites

the rise of these creationist movements are, (1) the expansion of public schools at the turn

of the century, (2) the introduction of evolution in American high school textbooks, (3)

the dramatic militarization of neo-Darwinistic and social-Darwinistic concepts during

World War I, (4) the Bryan crusades and (5) the scientific creationist movements.

Additionally, Unsworth and Ecklund (2021) noted that according to creationist Ken Ham,

the decline of Christian beliefs in England were due to the acceptance of evolution in

academia, prompting him to embark on a prevention plan to avoid the same from

happening in the United States.

The movements, events, and “isms” articulated in this review of literature show a

foundation of knowledge and understanding central to the proposed study of whether

science curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values influence the

acceptance of evolutionary theory. For instance, within this theme, much attention is

given to the traditional biblical values (restraining forces) incorporated within the thought

processes of adding the Bible to public school curriculum, the effectiveness of the Bryan

crusades, and the scientific creationism movements, which exists in this century of

evolution-creation history. Therefore, in consideration of these creationist movements,

events, and “isms,” the relevancy of this theme is instrumental to the phenomenon that

evolution in schools proved that America was in moral decline and fewer Americans were

attending mainline Christian churches (Watts & Kutschera, 2021), fueling the driving and

restraining forces in this proposed study. Second: Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal

values such as secularism led to an eventual erasure of religion (traditional values),

altogether. Third: Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) noted that post-modernism is the

theory instrumental in creating a society devoid of religion and social ideologies. By

acknowledging this plight, the driving forces (societal values) and restraining forces

(traditional values) create a phenomenon which requires further examination.

Evolution from Five Population Perspectives

Throughout the course of history, movements, unique events, and “isms” have left

their distinguishable markers on the evolution-creation debate in both public and

Christian schools. Another such theme is the examination of evolution and its influence

from a population perspective. Francis et al. (2019) studied evolution and creation from

the following five perspectives: personal, psychological, religious, theological, and

attitudinal.

The personal marker finds potentially mitigating factors associated with

demographics such as gender, age, and ethnicity. Next, the second marker approaches the

evolution-creation debate from a psychological perspective. Heilbronner et al. (2021)

noted that personality, from a psychological view, conceptualizes thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors, which influence a person’s outlook on life, in this case, the ongoing

evolutioncreation debate. Additionally, the third marker views evolution-creation from a

biblical/values perspective, which emphasizes the importance of public worship and

personal prayer. Francis et al. (2019) argued that distinguishable aspects of this group rely

heavily on two markers, public worship attendance and the nature of private prayer.

Furthermore, the fourth marker studies theology from an exclusivism, inclusivism,

pluralism, inter religious perspectives, atheism, and agnosticism worldview. Lastly, the

fifth marker examines the evolution-creation debate from the attitudinal point-of-view.

Understanding this process relies on the philosophical, metaphysical, and ideological

positions taken by participants (Francis et al., 2019). Therefore, for these reasons, this

theme was chosen to further understand how and why aspects of personality influence

driving forces (societal values), restraining forces (traditional values), and curriculum

change in the Christian education classroom.

Personal (gender, age, ethnicity). Recent literature explored personal

demographics (gender, age, etc.) as potentially mitigating the acceptance or denial of the

theory of evolution or the biblical account of creation. For example, Francis et al. (2019)

posited in their research that females readily accepted religious topics such as

creationism, while males were more partial to a science-based curriculum. Moreover, the

data in this study consisted of 11, 809 participants (5,519 males and 6,216 females). Of

the participants, 49% declined to reveal whether they believed that science disproves the

biblical account of creation. Of the remaining 51%, females were more predisposed to

accept biblical creation over evolution by 29% to males 23% (Francis et al., 2019). This

association presumes a higher degree of acceptance amongst females on biblical

traditional values (restraining forces) than with societal values (driving forces). Next,

regarding age, Francis et al. (2019) noted that students between the ages of eight and

sixteen expressed a consistent general deterioration in attitude towards religion.

Additionally, Beggrow and Sbeglia (2019) noted that anthropology and biology

students displayed significantly different demographic patterns. The anthropology

population consisted of fewer females (54% male and 46% female), fewer white students,

and fewer students with English as their first language. Barnes et al. (2020) highlighted

the influence of gender and religious and cultural competencies on accepting evolution.

In this study, 1081 college biology students participated in a survey regarding religiosity

and evolution acceptance. Students with a religious background did not change their

views about evolution by 69% before attending the biology course. Furthermore, highly

religious students of Asian, Black/African American, Latino, White/European American,

and other races viewed evolution as atheistic by 56.7%, 64.3%, 60%, 41.9%, and 26.9%,

respectively. Finally, personality is also distinguished between psychological factors such

as extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism.

Psychological. Another marker instrumental in distinguishing between evolution

and creation acceptance is psychological factors. For instance, Francis et al. (2019)

examined this marker from an extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism perspective.

Eysenck’s three-dimensional model of personality operationalized this process by

developing instruments (Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and Eysenck Personality

Scale), which measure personality differences from individuals occupying extreme ends

(liberal/conservative) of the spectrum (Francis et al., 2019). For instance, Heilbronner et

al. (2021) noted that personality could conceptualize thoughts, feelings, and behaviors,

influencing a person’s perspective on life issues. Evaluations such as these are crucial, in

that they predict perceived personality conflicts between science and religion, which

further influence markers in the evolution-creation debate. For example, as part of the

evaluative process, Francis et al. (2019) examined four attitudinal measures concerning

faith (attitude towards theistic faith, rejection of religion, religious fundamentalism, and

scientific fundamentalism). Additionally, psychological factors (extraversion,

neuroticism, and psychoticism) determined the following regarding theistic faith: 33% of

the participants agreed that God means a lot to them, 34% noted that God helps them,

42% of the participants believe in a literal hell, and 19% believed that God made the

world in six, 24-hour days.

In contrast, participants of scientific fundamentalism, understood as an

exaggerated, uncritical, and unqualified belief about the inerrancy of science, projected

the following: first, 42% of participants agreed that theories in science could prove to be

true. Second, 25% believed that the laws of science could never be changed. Third, 46%

of participants from a scientific fundamentalism perspective believed that religion brings

more conflict than peace. Fourth, 21% agreed that religion is a force for evil in the world

(Francis et al., 2019). Here again, the debate between evolution and creation produces

driving and restraining forces in the influence of values in the Christian curriculum.

Finally, the next category in the evaluative process is the religious marker.

Religious. The religious marker is but another aspect of the evolution-creation

debate because it measures acceptance by traditions and conceptualizations that focus on

phenomenological aspects of religion. Distinguishable aspects of this group rely heavily

on two factors, public worship attendance and the nature of private prayer (Francis et al.,

2019). Francis et al. (2019) further noted that predictive power and social values

(biblically based traditional values) document the predictive power of personal prayer and

worship attendance on perceived conflicts between science and the biblical account of

creation in Genesis chapters one and two. For instance, participants in Francis et al.

(2019) noted that attitude toward theistic faith was instrumental in their responses to the

following questions: I find it hard to believe in God (37% said yes). Prayer helps me a lot

(27% said yes). I think going to a place of worship is a waste of time (27% said yes). I

know that God is very close to me (30% said yes). God helps me to lead a better life

(31% said yes). I know that God helps me (34% said yes). God means a lot to me (33%

said yes).

Additionally, Barnes et al. (2020) noted that 56% of students perceived that

evolution is atheistic, and Christian religiosity is associated with a lower acceptance of

evolution. In this same study, participants wrote down that to accept evolution, one would

have to reject the existence of God or reject that God managed the biblical account of

creation. Furthermore, this position garnered 40% of the participants’ views. In contrast,

all participants who accepted evolution found that one must reject all religious ideas. In

consideration of this thought process, a wider net is cast from a theological perspective.

Theological. The theological marker is distinctly different from the religious marker

because its foundations consist of empirical theology, which encompasses factors such as

exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism; inter religious perspectives, atheism, and agnosticism

(Francis et al., 2019). Empirical theology incorporates the disciplines of social scientific

studies of religion with religious phenomena, while accessing the religious beliefs of

individuals and religious communities. In other words, exclusivism expresses the view

that only one religion is true; therefore, all others are false.

Inclusivism similarly accepts one religion as true, but another religion as partially true

(Francis et al., 2019). Pratt (2020) argued that pluralism embraces diversity with a

selfreflective edge; whereas Vagelli et al. (2021) noted that pluralism is the twenty-first

century watchword for the philosophical arena, which now acknowledges ontological,

ethical, and logical forms of pluralism, making all forms of religion equally true in their

own unique ways (Francis et al., 2019). Next, the inter-religious factor claims that truth

comes from listening to all forms of religion (Francis et al., 2019).

On the opposite side of the equation, atheism derives from the prefix (a), which

means without, and the root (theism), which means a belief in God or gods (Sexton &

Finley, 2020). Therefore, atheists do not believe in God. Agnosticism is the belief or

doctrine that the existence of god(s); cannot be proven or disproven (Sexton & Finley,

2020). In consideration of these definitions, Francis et al. (2019) noted, of the participants

in the study, the following theological beliefs existed in the sample: exclusivism 6%,

inclusivism 6%, pluralism A 13%, pluralism B 26%, inter religious perspectives 7%,

atheism 10%, and agnosticism 31%. By using theological markers as a facet of the study,

attitudinal approaches are influenced.

Attitudinal. The attitudinal approach consists of the application of cognitive

supremacy and universal applicability of science, which is “scientism” and includes the

understanding of the philosophical, metaphysical, and ideological positions taken

(Francis et al., 2019, p. 191). Within this study, the attitudinal aspects of the

evolutioncreation debate, operationalized by illuminating potential tension(s) between

these two diabolically opposed scenarios. For example, when asked whether they

believed in God, 37% of the participants said yes. When asked whether they believed in

hell, 43% said yes. When asked whether the scientific theories “could be proven” as true,

42% of the participants said they could. On the rejection of religion, and whether it brings

more conflict than peace, 46% articulated that it does.

Additionally, Francis et al. (2019) argued that an attitude towards a particular

belief in science or religion usually influenced that individual’s decision-making process.

Furthermore, in their study, Barnes et al. (2021) argued that students who perceived

evolutionary theory to conflict with their religious beliefs stood for a strong predictor of

acceptance apart from a student’s religiosity, denomination, or demographic. Finally,

Barnes et al. (2020) noted that religious science teachers that accepted evolution and

taught evolution from The Language of God by Francis Collins experienced a decreased

conflict with evolution in the classroom. Therefore, in consideration of these studies,

attitude influences whether participants have a higher propensity to accept or reject

evolution in the Christian classroom.

The personal markers discussed create a greater propensity to either accept or

deny evolutionary theory in both public and Christian education, because they measure

personal functionalities, which influence the decision-making process. As discussed,

personality affects one’s propensity to either accept or reject evolution, because of

gender, age, and ethnicity. For instance, Francis et al. (2019) noted that females were

more predisposed to accept Christian/religious topics such as creationism rather than

science-based topics such as evolution. Next, psychology further emphasized the personal

marker by examining factors such as extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. This

process encapsulated processes like Eysenck’s three-dimensional model of personality,

which measures personality differences from individuals occupying extreme ends

(liberal/conservative) of the personality spectrum (Francis et al., 2019). For instance,

Heilbronner et al. (2021) noted that personality conceptualizes thoughts, feelings, and

behaviors, which influence a person’s perspective on life issues. Additionally, religious

markers focus on phenomenological aspects of religion such as public worship and

private prayer (Francis et al., 2019). Furthermore, the theological marker studied this

debate from the empirical theology perspective, analyzing exclusivism, inclusivism; inter

religious perspectives, atheism, and agnosticism. Finally, the attitudinal marker examined

the evolution-creation debate from a scientism point of view (Francis et al., 2019).

Therefore, this theme is foundational to understanding the phenomenon presented in this

proposed research.

The personal markers presented in this review of literature connote a foundation

of knowledge and understanding central to the proposed study of whether science

curriculum change, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values influence

the acceptance of evolutionary theory within the Christian education community. For

instance, within this theme, much attention to the literature, both quantitative and

qualitative, document data collected as a means of understanding what students’ regard as

acceptable in the quest for evolutionary theory acceptance, characteristics such as

demographics, psychology, religiosity, theology, and attitude.

Understanding how demographics influence the evolution-creation debate is

paramount to understanding the phenomenon experienced in Christian academia over the

past 30 years. For instance, Francis et al. (2019) noted that females were more

predisposed to accept biblical creation over evolution by 29% to males 23%, and students

with a religious background before attending a college-level biology course did not

change their views about evolution by 69% (Barnes et al., 2020). Second, psychological

evaluations are crucial; they predict perceived personality conflicts between science and

religion. Third, Francis et al. (2019) noted that predictive power and social values such as

those found in religion document the predictive power of personal prayer and worship

attendance about perceived conflicts between science and the biblical account of creation.

Fourth, empirical theology incorporates the disciplines of social scientific studies of

religion, while accessing the religious beliefs of individuals and their communities. Fifth,

attitudes make the difference when scientists interject philosophical, metaphysical, and

ideological positions (Francis et al., 2019). Therefore, in consideration of these thoughts,

personal factors influence driving forces, restraining forces, and curriculum in the

Christian secondary education science classroom by influencing values, ethics, and

protocols, leading to organizational change.

Evolution Instrumentation Research

For the past 25 years, the use of evolution measurement instruments, which

measure knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about evolution have been instrumental in the

quest to evaluate, measure, and influence how science curriculum addresses the

evolution-creation debate in the science classroom. The main reason for this venture was

to move evolution education forward for the expressed purpose of developing collective

knowledge about the best teaching approaches to evolution (Ziadie & Andrews, 2018). To

do this, scholars embarked on a developmental process of institutionalizing various

measurement instruments as a means of gathering an array of information on all aspects

of the evolutionary theory acceptance-rejection debate. For instance, Mead et al. (2019)

named 13 measurement instruments in the quest to uncover student perception on topics

such as natural selection, concept inventories of natural selection, macro evolution, micro

evolution, genetic drift, speciation, fossils, nature of science, and religiosity.

Additionally, the need to understand how these measurement instruments could

help academia craft guidelines to teach evolution was also paramount. Nehm and Mead

(2019) found the need through measurement instruments such as the measure of

acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) to create guidelines in promoting evolution

understanding among students. Finally, once understanding occurred, the ability to

mitigate current teachings with the proper modifications ensued. For example, Metzger et

al. (2018) showed the impact of curriculum change to determine if differences in

instructional approaches affect the acceptance of evolution in undergraduate health

science students. To begin this process, the development of the 13 focal instruments

necessary to do this mission became a necessity.

The Thirteen Focal Instruments. For two plus decades, scholars incorporated

measurement instruments as a tool to research and decide whether potentially mitigating

factors existed regarding the acceptance of evolution, as well as its contributions to the

science curriculum debate. These instruments operationalized the process by answering

two questions; do various evolution measurement instruments predict evolution

acceptance and what measurement format associates with acceptance or rejection of

evolution? To answer these questions, a look at the various instruments developed during

this period is paramount. Mead et al. (2019) noted the development and implementation

of these instruments occurred between 1990 and 2016. These instruments measured the

understanding and acceptance of evolution through the processes of pre-and post-testing

evaluations amongst biology students. Each of these instruments utilized various

evaluative processes to measure a biology student’s understanding of evolutionary theory

concepts (Mead et al. 2019).

Understanding the affiliation each student had with these evolutionary concepts

and their level of knowledge and understanding, the measurement instruments consisted

of four specific usage categories. Mead et al. (2019) placed these instruments into the

following categories: first, two instruments included the use of multiple versions as a

means of gathering information, the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution

(MATE) and the evolutionary attitudes and literacy survey (EALS). Second, two of the

instruments included open-ended, constructed questions by using the assessing contextual

reasoning about natural selection (ACORNS) format and the assessment tool for

evaluating evolution knowledge (ATEEK). Third, two of the instruments conducted their

responses by using multiple-choice questions, the evolution concept test (ECT) and the

measure of understanding of macro evolution (MUM). Lastly, the rest of the instruments

were some forms of multiple-choice/Likert scale, which extracted information pertinent

to curriculum presentation (Mead et al., 2019). The fundamental goal of these

quantitative, experimental, and quasi-experimental tools was to gather information about

the evolutionary theory debate, harness the strengths of those scientific enterprises, and

apply the proper modifications/designs to execute, evaluate, and provide instructional

practices in the classroom (Nehm & Mead, 2019).

By understanding the attributes of each evaluative method and its testable

parameters, scholars were able to understand what aspects of evolution students readily

accepted and rejected. For example, when researchers used the measure of acceptance of

the theory of evolution (MATE), scholars consistently found a relationship between

acceptance of evolution and subject matter understanding (Barnes et al., 2019).

Moreover, when researchers used the inventory of student evolution acceptance (I-SEA),

students showed greater acceptance of microevolution, macroevolution, and human

evolution, because of an associated trust in science and scientists, as opposed to an

affiliation with fundamentally taught biblical principles (Barnes et al., 2019). When the

generalized acceptance of evolution evaluation (GAENE) measured secondary education

students after they received evolutionary theory instruction, an increased acceptance of

evolution persisted (Barnes et al., 2019). Additionally, Metzger et al. (2018) found a high

acceptance of evolution amongst biology students when researchers conducted pre- and

post-test evaluations. Furthermore, added tools such as the conceptual inventories of

natural selection (CINS) and ACORNS extrapolated valuable information from

disciplinary affiliations with anthropology and biology. These fields of study positively

influenced the acceptance of evolution (Beggrow & Sbeglia, 2019).

In consideration of the overarching goals previously stated, the following

instruments identified by Mead et al. (2019) provide additional avenues and perspectives

to gather information regarding the rejection or acceptance of evolution: first, the

evolution concept test (ECT), which consisted of six items combined with open-ended

questions on the topic of natural selection (Mead et al., 2019). Next, concept inventories

of natural selection (CIN), which consisted of 20 multiple-choice questions on the topic

of natural selection (Mead et al., 2019). Additionally, and probably the most familiar, the

measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE), which included a 25-point

Likert-scale regarding the acceptance of evolution. Barnes et al. (2019) noted this

instrument as consisting of a positive relationship between acceptance of evolution and

subject matter understanding. The measure of understanding of macroevolution (MUM)

highlighted a 27-question multiple-choice questionnaire on deep time, phylogenetics,

speciation, fossils, and the nature of science (Mead et al., 2019). The Knowledge of

Evolution exam (KEE) consisted of ten questions (Mead et al., 2019). The Evolutionary

Attitudes and Literacy Survey (EALS), in its extended form of 104 Likert-scaled

questions, surveyed religiosity, scientific understanding, and attitudes related to evolution

(Mead et al., 2019). The EvoDevoCI had no specific title but highlighted eleven

multiplechoice questions about evolutional developmental biology (Mead et al., 2019).

The genetic drift inventory (GeDI) used twenty-two agree/disagree statements while

investigating genetic drift (Mead et al., 2019). Lastly, the concept assessment of natural

selection (CANS) addressed natural selection by using twenty-four multiple-choice

questions (Mead et al., 2019), leading scholars to a better understanding of what aspects

of evolution students readily accept and reject.

Measurement Instruments and Evolution Understanding. Understanding the

effects of specific characteristics, which potentially mitigate the acceptance of

evolutionary theory among science students, the impact of a particular measurement

instrument, in this case MATE and GAENE predicates potential instructional approaches,

as well as curriculum change. For instance, Metzger et al. (2018) found the need for

further research regarding the impact of curriculum change to determine if differences in

instructional approaches affect the acceptance of evolution in undergraduate health

science students. The 127 participants of this study (Midwest University), enrolled in a

Bachelor of Science program and 105 of these students completed all three assessments

(pre-MATE, post-MATE, and post-GAENE). The curriculum consisted of a two-section,

five-credit foundational biology course, which emphasized evolution biology concepts.

Most of these students started the study with an elevated level of acceptance, because of

their predisposition as science students; however, Metzger et al. (2018) reported a

significant increase in the acceptance of evolution from pre- to post-testing. These

processes serve as a means of discussing and issuing empirical and conceptual data in the

quest to understand the challenges educators face in teaching evolution.

Additionally, from a broader perspective, Branch et al. (2021) posited that states,

which adopted the Next Generation of Science Standards, were more likely to devote

added time in teaching evolution as a settled science and not theory. By doing so, a

students’ exposure to the theory of evolution potentially exists at a much earlier age,

increasing the acceptance of evolutionary theory in future generations. For example,

Branch et al. (2021) noted that middle school science teachers with extensive pre-service

coursework in evolution and the sciences adopted the Next Generation of Science and

Standards and spent more class time teaching evolution. This research consisted of 678

middle school science teachers, which answered questions on a variety of issues such as,

hours devoted in the classroom on the general evolutionary theory process, human

evolution, evolution is a fact, intelligent design, creationism, and whether the teacher sent

mixed-messaging in their teaching style regarding the evolution-creation debate. About

the full sample, Branch et al. (2021) findings are as follows: middle school science

teachers said that evolution was a settled science by 38.3%, teachers sending a mixed

message 15.1%, teachers that avoided the topic 39.2%, and teachers that taught

procreationism 7.4%. On the high school side, science teachers said that evolution was a

settled science by 67.3%, teachers sending a mixed message 12.3%, teachers that avoided

the topic 14.8%, and teachers that taught pro-creationism 5.7%.

Finally, Nehm and Mead (2019) showed the need for measurement instruments to

create guidelines to promote students' evolution understanding. This research sought to

evaluate seven articles predisposed to the collection of data regarding measurement

instruments and their existing assessment of evolution educators and how they utilized

the available data; evidence regarding the reliability of these measurement instruments;

analysis of the psychometric properties and functions of the instruments; and how

different instrumental contexts impact the understanding and learning of evolution.

For instance, Nehm and Mead (2019) argued that the diversity of participants

influenced the understanding of evolution by uncovering the following themes: First,

religiosity was a statistically significant negative predictor across all instruments. Second,

the strength and statistical significance of the relationship between evolutionary theory

understanding and evolutionary theory acceptance was variable depending on the

evolution measurement instrument chosen (Nehm & Mead, 2019). Third, demographics

predict evolution acceptance (Barnes et al., 2021). For example, Francis et al. (2019)

noted that females readily accepted religious topics such as creationism, while males

accepted science-based curriculum by 29% to 23%, respectively. Fourth, Beggrow and

Sbeglia (2019) noted that specific disciplines such as anthropology, biology, and zoology

influenced the acceptance of evolution over creation. Fifth, Cooper et al. (2019) posited

that STEM students scored higher on common assessments targeted to the Next

Generation of Science Standards. Lastly, Barnes et al. (2019) noted that GPA was a

positive significant factor of evolution acceptance across all measurement instruments.

By understanding the data collected in these studies, more attention to potential

instructional approaches in the science classroom is achievable.

Measurement Instruments and Instructional Approaches. Understanding the

data collected over the past 25 years is the genesis of instituting curriculum changes and

potential instructional approaches in the science classroom. For instance, Lindsay et al.

(2019) introduced the following three approaches to mitigate students’ rejection of the

theory of evolution: (1) the utilization of a “deficit model” to curtail student

misinformation, (2) a “resolution model” to educate students and teachers alike regarding

the facts of evolution, and (3) helping the students develop a clear understanding of the

nature of science. Additionally, Furrow and Hsu (2019) argued the need for further

research on concept inventories (Biological Concept Instruments, Conceptual Inventory

of Natural Selection, etc.) as a resource for teaching evolutionary theory concepts.

Furrow and Hsu (2019) said that concept inventories aided in naming key misconceptions

students held about evolutionary theory topics. They allowed students to learn about a

specific topic before a course module.

Concept inventories compare a student’s background knowledge on a topic. They

assess student learning during a course, module, or activity. Concept inventories are

instrumental in forming curriculum changes from year to year. They can inspire teachers

to create their own activities and assessments about evolutionary theory acceptance

learning. Although concept inventories aid students in understanding evolutionary

concepts, they affirm the delivery of the information from a teacher perspective as well.

For instance, Yesilyurt et al. (2021) noted in their qualitative, case study that novice

teachers mostly provided non-Darwinian explanations about evolutionary theory, while

the experienced science teachers applied natural selection concepts in the classroom.

Therefore, the administration of this learning institution was able to recommend that

teachers emphasize problematic areas such as macroevolution by using concept

inventories.

Additionally, measurement instruments, through the processes of pedagogical

content knowledge (PCK), develop an understanding of the student’s knowledge and a

teacher’s approach to evolution. For instance, Ziadie and Andrews (2018) noted the

following characteristics as instrumental in PCK development: knowledge of student

thinking, knowledge of assessment, knowledge of instructional strategies, and knowledge

of curriculum goals. Moreover, Wulandari et al. (2021) noted that content knowledge

competencies set up limitations and levels of success in the science classroom. This

qualitative, grounded theory study consisted of three elementary school teachers, three

junior high school science teachers, and three high school science teachers. The findings

concluded that: teachers who teach evolutionary theory often experience obstacles in

conveying the theory to their students because of the difficulty of the topic. Second, the

incremental environment created by schools and teachers can have a cumulative effect,

leading to conceptual change. Third, the success of learning depends on the curriculum

and teacher, the context provided by the classroom and family, and the context associated

with the school and community (Wulandari et al., 2021).

Finally, another topic crucial to the instructional approach in the science

classroom is epistemic understanding and its association with the rejection of science

evidence in the classroom. Fackler (2021) named this process as “the systematic rejection

of empirical evidence to avoid undesirable facts or conclusions” and stated that this

scenario, which is called the “backfire effect” (p. 445). Two forms of backfire effect cause

the denial of scientific knowledge, the familiarity backfire effect, which occurs when

individuals remember misinformation rather than its inaccuracy, and the overkill backfire

effect when individuals reject scientific explanations for specific phenomena that are

difficult to understand (Fackler, 2021).

Subsequently, according to this study scientific reasoning encompasses three

dimensions of scientific literacy: (1) deductive reasoning, which is logical, (2) inductive

reasoning, which highlights the fact that premise does not entail conclusion and, (3)

abduction reasoning, which provides the best logical explanation (Fackler, 2021). For

instance, de Moura Silva et al. (2023) deduced in their research that creating and

analyzing educational resources from a didactic planning perspective, the potential

existed for epistemic and pedagogical learning of evolution. Furthermore, Fackler (2021)

noted that by using various instructional approaches, the potential to combat science

denial facilitates the epistemic understanding of how we know and what we know in the

natural world around us. By understanding the use of conceptual inventories and PCKs,

scholars are influencing the narrative on the next generation of science students.

Evolution measurement instruments developed in academia have forged the

perspectives, progressions, and advancements in the evolution acceptance or denial

debate in the past 25 plus years by creating the functionalities of measurement

instruments, understanding the results of these instruments, and developing instructional

modifications to curriculum. As discussed, academia developed 13 focal measurement

instruments to evaluate every conceivable characteristic imaginable, regarding

evolutionary theory science and student acceptance. Mead et al. (2019) posited that

specific instruments provide specific results related to evolutionary theory acceptance and

what aspects of that theory students readily accept or reject. Barnes et al. (2019) noted

these specifications in the following instruments: MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA.

Additionally, measurement instrument understanding postulates the mitigation

tools necessary to actuate a greater acceptance of evolution. Branch et al. (2021) noted

that states, which adopted the Next Generation of Science Standards, were more likely to

devote added time in teaching evolution as a settled science and not theory. By

understanding characteristics of the science disciplines (Beggrow & Sbeglia, 2019), and

STEM training (Cooper et al., 2019), as well as GPA (Barnes et al., 2019), which are all

significant factors of evolutionary theory acceptance, the necessary modifications are

enacted in curriculum. Finally, after understanding the relevant factors associated with

evolutionary theory acceptance, potential modification approaches are doable with tools

such as concept inventories (Furrow & Hsu, 2019) and PCKs (Wulandari et al., 2021).

Therefore, understanding this theme creates another foundational building-block of

knowledge, which anchors the relevance of this proposed research.

The evolution measurement instruments articulated in this review of literature

predicates a foundation of knowledge and understanding central to the study of whether

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values influence the acceptance of evolution within the Christian education community.

For instance, within this theme, much attention to the numerous studies, both quantitative

and qualitative, document data collected as a means of understanding what students’

regard as acceptable in the quest for evolutionary theory acceptance, characteristics such

as demographics, religiosity, and level of education in the sciences. Therefore, in

consideration of measurement instruments, the relevancy of this theme is paramount to

the phenomenon.

The relevancy of evolution measurement instruments in relation to this

phenomenon is predicated by the following reasons: first, Metzger et al. (2018) found a

high acceptance of evolution from pre- and post-test evaluations. Second, Barnes et al.

(2019) noted a statistically significant difference in evolution acceptance in a Christian

university depending on the measurement instruments used. Third, Bradshaw et al.

(2018) noted a significant increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory over a 30year

period when biological sciences at BYU included evolution topics. Fourth, Bertka et al.

(2019) noted a need to understand why pedagogical approaches (curriculum change)

influence a student’s willingness to understand the science-religion debate. Therefore, in

consideration of the research presented, the driving forces (societal values) garnered in

Darwin’s theory of evolution as promoted in evolution measurement instruments and

restraining forces (traditional values) on the religious side of the equation, as well as the

plethora of information discussed regarding curriculum change create a phenomenon,

which requires further examination.

Current Thinking of Science vs. Religion from a Christian Perspective

The current thinking in the Christian community about the science-religion debate

is one of increased acceptance in the theory of evolution, because of a contentious,

deeprooted, and multifaceted influence over the past 150 years. These influences have

come in the form of movements (both Christian and secular), historical events, “isms,”

measurement instruments, and more recently attitudes of reconciliation and coexistence,

which look to blur the lines between the science-religion debate. In consideration of this

thought process, Marin and Lindeman (2021) argued that epistemic and ontological

cognition predict agreement with four science-religion perspectives: conflict,

independence, dialogue, and integration. Additionally, Singh (2021) further noted that the

integration aspect of epistemic and ontological cognition garners three formats: (1)

natural theology, which articulates pro arguments for the existence of God, (2) theology

of nature, which examines the religion-science framework and, (3) Whitehead’s process

philosophy, which integrates science and religion.

Regarding theoretical insights and scientific pictures, Bussey (2021) argued that

these characteristics could symbiotically presume that, God guided evolution historically

and that at the same time God intentionally created human beings in His divine image.

Therefore, by viewing this 150-year debate systematically and equitably new theories

about origins emerge such as epistemic and ontological cognition, cognitive dualism, and

models such as the semantic strategy, nomological strategy, causal point strategy, and

epistemological strategy models. For these reasons, this theme is included in this

proposed study, because it highlights current thinking on the evolution-creation debate

and further articulates the driving and restraining forces (societal and traditional values),

as well as potential curriculum modifications associated with this rationale.

Epistemic and Ontological Cognition. The relationship between science and

religion has always been influential in society because scientists and theologians alike

claim epistemology as their theoretical argument for existence. Therefore, considering

this thought, the contentious, deep-rooted, and multifaceted debate continues after more

than 150 years of existence. One area of interest now is epistemic and ontological

cognition. Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that epistemic and ontological cognition

predict agreement between the science-religion, debate by using four specific interaction

perspectives: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Singh (2021) argued for

the use of this concept as well and named it Barbour’s model of interaction. This model

used four attributes as a means of characterizing relationship building and interaction

between the scientific and religious communities. The following is an explanation of

these models:

Conflict. The conflict view argues that religion and science are so incompatible

that they cannot exist together, while the non-conflict views incorporate the remaining

three views, independence, dialogue, and integration. However, Singh (2021) noted that

the conflict model assumes that science is right, therefore, religion must be wrong. This

model’s viewpoint articulates conflict from the perspective that religion and science are

principally and perpetually in disagreement with each other and comes to this conclusion

from two historical narratives: the trial of Galileo and the reception of Darwinism (Singh,

2021). Furthermore, Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that individuals that interpreted

the Bible over science were predisposed to the following: first, religiosity and trusting the

Bible and other religious authorities that create pro-religion conflict and general

nonconflict views. Second, epistemic authority of science, uniting pro-religious conflict.

Third, religious ontology and supernatural ontology, which shape the narrative in the

general population. In contrast, pro-science conflict groups highlighted little to no

importance about religion, placing a greater level of importance on science (Marin &

Lindeman (2021).

Independence. The independence view argued that science and religion can be

separate from each other since they represent two exclusively distinct aspects of reality

(Marin & Lindeman, 2021); whereas Singh (2021) noted that, the independence model

holds that science and religion explore two completely different domains and ask distinct

questions in the process. For instance, Brother Marie-Victorin once said that religion and

science travel on parallel paths towards their own goals; therefore, individuals should not

be bogged down in attempts to find harmony between religious beliefs and scientific

discoveries (Singh, 2021). Additionally, Stephen Jay Gould once stated that religious

leaders should refrain from making factual claims about evolutionary theory and

scientists should not pontificate about moral issues (Singh, 2021).

Dialogue. The dialogue model incorporates mutual relationship building between

science and religion by assuming there is common ground between both disciplines.

Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that the dialogue model allows science and religion to

interact but remain distinctly different from each other. For instance, the following is a

well-articulated example of dialogue:

The Christian doctrine of creation may have encouraged science by assuming that

creation (being the product of a designer) is both intelligible and orderly, so one can

expect some laws to be discovered. Creation, as a product of God’s free action, is also

contingent, so the laws of nature cannot be learned through a priori thinking, which

prompts the need for empirical investigation (Singh, 2021). Therefore, in this scenario,

science and religion potentially address reality, but from different perspectives because

both scientific and theological inquiries are theory dependent. These views differ from

each other but rely on each other at the same time. Additionally, Singh (2021) posited that

when exercising dialogue, the discipline is still different, but both sides talk to each other

using common methodologies and concepts.

Integration. In the integration view, science and religion work together to

produce a single explanation, providing the same answers to the same questions (Marin &

Lindeman, 2021). By giving the same answers to the same questions, this model is more

extensive in its unification. For instance, Singh (2021) named three forms of integration:

first, natural theology, which articulate arguments for the existence of God. This format

conducts this process by using natural science as its foundation. Second, integration is

theology of nature, which develops a religious framework first and then examines how to

best enrich the findings in the science discipline. Third, Whitehead’s process philosophy,

which integrates science and religion together through the utilization of scientific

arguments.

Therefore, in consideration of Barbour’s model of interaction as highlighted in

Marin and Lindeman (2021) research, of the 3911 participants in this study, 32.1% agreed

that science and religion are not in conflict with each other. Within this statistic, 64.3%

strongly or moderately agreed with the independence view of science-religion,

65.6% with the dialogue view, and 16.2% with the integration view. Additionally, Singh

(2021) argued that science and religion make up vastly different human experiences, but

common ground is achievable by building “relationships between religion and science,

logic and culture” (p.11). These processes strive to create a theological outlook, which

incorporates both religion and science equally.

In the quest of presenting science and religion from an equal (no favoritism)

perspective, the following science and religion question appears: how did God guide

evolution, if He did? For instance, Bussey (2021) argued that theoretical insights and

scientific pictures can be viewed together by presuming that “God guided evolution

historically and that at the same time God intentionally created human beings in His

divine image” (p. 92). The challenge with this thought process is combining a reasonable

interpretation of Genesis chapters one and two (the traditional spiritual account of

creation) and a modern science-based account of evolution (Bussey, 2021). Additionally,

Stump (2020) argued that these processes are the new reality of how we as human beings

recognize science and theology, which he calls the epistemological strategy. By merging

these two thought processes, new perspectives on origins surface as defined in the

following strategies: The Semantic Strategy, The Nomological Strategy, The Causal Joint

Strategy, The Epistemological Strategy, and Cognitive Dualism (Stump, 2020).

The Semantic Strategy. The definition of the semantic strategy is in its very

name, semantics. This process seeks to avoid contradictions about the relevant terms in

which individuals refer to the same things on the scientific and religious sides of the

equation (Stump, 2020). For instance, do the terms “Homo sapiens” and “human beings”

refer to the same thing? In this scenario, a semantic strategy would address this question

in the following manner: “No, not all Homo sapiens are modern humans; there is

something else added to Homo sapiens that makes them into true humans we see today”

(Stump, 2020, p. 16). Therefore, semantic strategists would interject that Homo sapiens

have the breath of God, a soul, or even a special relationship with parents, siblings, and

ancestry in general. In this narrative, the semantics exist.

The Nomological Strategy. The thought process in nomological strategy revolves

around laws of evolution, hence the term nomological. This process considers

convergence between evolutionary theory and creationism as plausible. For instance,

Stump (2020) noted that this strategy strategically addresses the evolution-creation debate

from the perspective that God intended to create man but intentionally did not intervene

in the process, allowing physical laws to cause an evolutionary process. This thinking is

very much like Deistic Evolution, which is what Charles Darwin promoted (Stump,

2020). Nomological strategy typically portrays God as a spectator in the theory of

evolution.

The Causal Joint Strategy. The next strategy is the Casual Joint Strategy. This

process views a point of interaction. Additionally, the Casual Joint Strategy allows the

seamless integration of God’s actions in creation without overriding the processes of

natural law and best explained in this quote (Stump, 2020):

For this to work, nature itself must be such that it can provide necessary, but not

sufficient, conditions for some events. That is to say, the casual structure of nature

must not be determined. Therefore, from the perspective of science, a complete

description of the first conditions of a system along with a comprehensive

knowledge of the natural laws would still be insufficient for predicting the later

states, of the system with 100% accuracy (Stump, 2020).

For instance, Robert J. Russell names quantum indeterminacy as an example of a causal

joint in nature because quantum events do not determine the prior state of systems.

Therefore, according to (Stump, 2020), this strategy allows God to work between the

cracks in nature, allowing humans to flourish as a product of the process.

The Epistemological Strategy. The process highlighted within this strategy

specifically appears from the word “epistemology,” because it encapsulates two separate

ways of strategizing reality. Therefore, the epistemological strategy seeks to develop the

narrative that science and theology are two diverse ways of knowing or levels of

explanation (Stump, 2020). In other words, the reality is dualistic and comes from two

different discourses. For example, one could simply claim that the words “human” and

“Homo sapiens” mean something different as described from two separate aspects of

reality. For instance, science tells the story of human origins from the perspective of

evolution, while theology claims the origins of human beings from the perspective of the

biblical account of creation found in Genesis chapters one and two. Furthermore, the

epistemological strategy views these processes from its own discourse and communicates

through the lens of a particular worldview (Stump, 2020). This process is cognitive

dualism. Bussey, (2021) argued for inclusive cognitive dualism between evolution and

creationism, which promotes the thought process that creation took place in three stages:

physically with the Big Bang, then, held the seeds of life, and thereafter took many years

to evolve (p. 98). These concepts and theories encapsulate modern thinking on the

evolution-creation debate.

Modern thinking on the evolution-creation debate exemplifies new strategies in

academia on this long-standing debate between theology and science. The processes of

invoking the reconciliation and coexistence narrative looks to extinguish the inerrancy of

Scripture by blurring the lines between the Genesis account of creation in the Bible and

Darwin’s theory of evolution. By using epistemic and ontological processes, scholarly

agreement is achievable. Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that epistemic and

ontological cognition predict agreement between the science-religion debate, using four

specific perspectives: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Additionally,

from a coexistence platform, Stump (2020) argued for the significance of four strategies

explaining the relationship between science and theology: the semantic strategy, the

nomological strategy, the causal point strategy, and the epistemological strategy.

Furthermore, the theories, models, and strategies in this theme all complement each other,

because their goals look to create an atmosphere of reconciliation and coexistence

amongst Christian and secular viewpoints. Finally, the relevance of this theme highlights

the evolution of thought within the Christian community by blurring the lines of societal

values (driving forces) and traditional values (restraining forces) associated with these

concepts, affecting science curriculum in Christian education.

Finally, while examining all literature associated with this phenomenon, positive

and negative influences abound in both qualitative and quantitative methodologies,

predicated by a rich history of movements, events, evolution measurement

instrumentation, and current thinking on the proposed study. Therefore, for these reasons,

this researcher looked to investigate the phenomenon from the following perspectives:

historical movements and “isms,” which create a foundational approach by providing an

understanding of key movements and doctrines that influence society, (driving forces).

Next, from the Christian movement side, “isms” (evangelicalism and fundamentalism),

which influence the traditional values (restraining forces) espoused by Scripture (Watts &

Kutschera, 2021). Additionally, the understanding of personality markers such as

demographics, psychological, religious, theological, and attitudinal factors (Francis et al.

2019), which influence the driving and restraining forces clarify the ongoing

sciencereligion debate. Furthermore, the development and understanding of the many

measurement instruments used to gather data is conducive to science curricula change in

the classroom. Barnes et al. (2019) noted the need for research about measurement

instruments and how they affect curriculum change. Finally, the understanding of current

thinking (epistemic and ontological strategies) within the Christian educational

community (Marin and Lindeman, 2021). The themes examined within this review of

literature proclaim the foundational building blocks for the proposed study and

phenomenon of whether curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolution in Christian education.

Problem Statement

It is not known how Christian secondary education science teachers describe

increased acceptance in evolutionary theory in terms of changes is Christian science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. To achieve the

purpose of this study the population of interest are all teachers that proclaim to be

Christians educated in the biblical, Judeo-Christian tenets of the faith. One of these

foundational principles being the account of creation as highlighted in the book of

Genesis. More specifically, the target population for this research was Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools. By

conducting semi-structured interviews, as well as focus groups, Christian secondary

education science teachers participated in convenience sampling and provided diverse

perspectives on the research while reaching the point of saturation. The point of

saturation is achieved, when no new data appears from the literature (FitzPatrick, 2019),

by gathering an accurate description of the phenomenon at hand, addressing the problems

articulated within the problem statement and ensuring the research literature is

achievable.

In consideration of the problem statement, the scope and importance of addressing

the problems articulated in the research literature still need understanding. For instance,

Bradshaw et al. (2018) identified the need to understand why there has been an increase

in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian education community over the

past 30 years (BYU and mainline Christian denominations). Understanding this

phenomenon provides the following mitigating factors: first, uncovering organizational

changes (curriculum change, philosophies, attitudes, and mindsets) implemented over the

last three decades, potentially leading to the increased acceptance of evolution,

understanding, and perspective is achievable. These processes are necessary to determine

potential curriculum changes and re-establish biblical mandates in Christian education for

future generations. Second, reestablish core curriculum teaching with a theological

mindset and Christian worldview. Scripture says the following: “Study to shew thyself

approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word

of truth” (II Timothy 2:15). Third, understanding curriculum change is symbiotic to

organizational leadership and development, because it studies an aspect of Christian

education from an organizational, developmental, and leadership perspective, allowing

for necessary changes for the greater good of the organization. Fourth, understanding the

gradual changes outlined in the problem space narrative is a balancing factor in the quest

for sound, biblically-based Christian education.

Understanding the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in the Christian

education community is crucial because this increase threatens the foundational principles

of Christian education altogether. For this reason, the researcher was interested in

discovering how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes

in traditional values influenced, and to what levels, the acceptance of evolutionary theory.

Therefore, from a reconciliation perspective, Bertka et al. (2019) noted the need for

further research regarding pedagogical approaches (curriculum changes) and how they

influence students’ perceptions of the science-religion narrative.

In contrast, Metzger et al. (2018) identified the need to understand the impact of

curriculum changes as instrumental to evolutionary theory acceptance. Next, Mead et al.

(2019) noted the importance of using measurement instruments to determine levels of

acceptance amongst science students, whereas Barnes et al. (2019) argued for the need to

research differences in measuring instruments and their correlation to evolutionary theory

acceptance. Additionally, from a demographics and values perspective, Francis et al.

(2019) argued that females readily accept creation over evolution. Barnes et al. (2019)

noted that religiosity (traditional values) is a statistically significant negative predictor of

evolution acceptance; while Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as

secularism would eventually lead to an erasure of religion (traditional values) altogether.

Finally, Beggrow and Sbeglia (2019) noted the need to decide whether different

disciplines such as anthropology and biology associated equally with the acceptance of

evolution and Cooper et al. (2019) identified the need to determine whether STEM

curriculum training increased the acceptance of evolution.

Summary

Chapter 2 includes the exploration of changes in science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values, and how they potentially influence the

acceptance of evolutionary theory. The narratives in this literature review predicate

research based on demographics, psychological perspectives, attitudinal dispositions,

religious and theological beliefs, as well as the level of formal science education had

(Francis et al., 2019). A comprehensive review of the literature revealed that much

acceptance or denial of evolutionary theory over the past decades involved one or several

of these factors. For instance, Coleman (2018) noted several movements as instrumental

in shaping the evolution narrative. In contrast, Hammond (2019) revealed the

NineteenthCentury North American Revivals and the New England Evangelical

Movement of Social Reform as formative movements supporting biblical creationism.

Additionally, fast-forwarding to the last three decades, Ferguson (2018) addressed the

science-religion debate through the eyes of substantial growth in evolution acceptance.

Evolutionary theory acceptance has grown from a decade-old narrative between

science and religion to a more recent study of personality markers, evolution

measurement instrumentation, and a reconciliation/coexistence narrative of epistemic and

ontological reasoning. These thought processes, as well as the tactical approach in

academia, have institutionalized the teaching of reconciliation and coexistence as a means

of bridging the gap in the evolution-creation narrative (Nelson et al., 2019). By doing so,

a growing interest in epistemic and ontological cognition appeared (Marin and Lindeman,

2021). Therefore, for over 150 years, Americans have examined this phenomenon from

the perspectives previously highlighted, but despite the plethora of research, a substantial

increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory still exists today in Christian education.

For these reasons, Lewin’s theory in curriculum change, which examines driving and

restraining forces in curriculum change, is instrumental in this study of how curriculum

change, societal values, and traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in the Christian education community.

This researcher provided a clear description of the problem space, by exploring

how the evolution-creation narrative evolved throughout history to its current

phenomenological state. For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the substantial

increase in the acceptance of evolution at Brigham Young University (BYU), as well as

the LDS church community over the last three decades. Moreover, this increase in

evolutionary theory acceptance is attributed, in part, to three specific areas: the

introduction of kindergarten to twelfth grade, science curriculum changes in biology

(addition of evolution concepts), a decline in negative messaging, and an increase in the

acceptance of evolution amongst the student’s parents. Additionally, Bradshaw et al.

(2018) noted the increase in evolution acceptance across a broad spectrum of Christianity

in the following manner: Mormons 48%, Jehovah’s Witnesses 26%, Mainline Christian

Denominations 70%, and Catholics 71%, showing a substantial increase in the acceptance

of evolution in the Christian community. Furthermore, Lindsay et al. (2019) noted the

increase of evolutionary theory acceptance at Point Loma Nazarene University from 51%

to 83.1% (Nazarene), at Colorado Christian University, a shift in acceptance from 13% to

43.5% (non-denominational), and Evangel University a shift from 17.5% toward full

acceptance and 46% (Assemblies of God) to partial acceptance. Therefore, the

phenomenon looked to understand how the need for further research informs the problem

space.

The problem space exemplified the need for research in the following areas:

Metzger et al. (2018) found the need for further research on the impact of curriculum

change and how instructional approaches affect the acceptance of evolution. Mead et al.

(2019) showed the need to research curriculum change interventions using measurement

instruments. Additionally, Barnes et al. (2020) noted the need for further research on the

differential impact of religious culture (traditional values) competences on the acceptance

of evolutionary theory, whereas Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as

secularism would lead to an eventual erasure of religion (traditional values) altogether.

For these reasons, further research connotes understanding how curriculum change,

societal values, and traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

Christian education. Furthermore, this study developed a theoretical foundation through

the application of Lewin’s Theory of Curriculum Change.

The theory associated with the theoretical foundation of this study is Lewin’s

Theory of Curriculum Change as extracted from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step

Model of Change). In this theory, Lewin highlighted constructs in the organizational

change process of unfreezing, moving, and freezing (Lewin, 1936), using driving forces,

which in this case are societal values and restraining forces traditional values. In this

qualitative descriptive study, the research questions inform the phenomenon in the

following manner: (1) how do Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? (2)

How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high

schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution? (3) How do Christian secondary education science

teachers working in Christian high schools describe the changes in societal values, which

might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? (4) How do Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools describe the

changes in traditional values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory

of evolution? These questions further inform the relevance of this research.

The value and relevance of this study contribute to the existing body of

knowledge associated with this phenomenon by uncovering the ambiguity, which remains

concerning the growing acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian education

community. The study, exploration, and description of this phenomenon help to show

why one of the foundational tenets of Christianity has increasingly changed from the

acceptance of the biblical account of creationism to the theory of evolution. The

examination of this change in basic assumptions (science curriculum changes in Christian

education) can help to determine how this phenomenon occurred, why the negative

messaging regarding evolutionary theory decreased over the past 30 years, and why BYU

and mainline Christian parents are more accepting of evolutionary theory. Additionally,

this research provides opportunities for dialog in Christian circles on a balance between

fundamental biblical principles and Christian academia. By uncovering these

contributions to the existing body of knowledge, practical and professional application is

achievable.

In conclusion, this researcher provided clear descriptions of the phenomenon from

a historical movement and events perspective, as well as from a personality marker,

measurement instrument, and current understanding viewpoint. This study addressed the

problem space thoroughly by providing insight into why there has been a substantial

increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian community over the

past 30 years. Subsequently, this problem space explored this phenomenon from a

curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values influence perspective. Chapter

3 describes the methodology as qualitative descriptive research using a demographic

questionnaire, one-on-one, semi-structured interviews, as well as focus groups of

Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high

schools, to collect data for analysis. The research data from these interviews and focus

groups help the researcher analyze and name themes and patterns relevant to

understanding the importance of how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory

in Christian education.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Introduction

Chapter 3 holds a description of the methodology utilized in this research to

increase the understanding and awareness of how changes in science curriculum, changes

in societal values, and changes in traditional values potentially influence the acceptance

of evolutionary theory in Christian education. Therefore, the purpose of this qualitative

descriptive study was to understand how Christian secondary education science teachers

in Southern California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of

evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values,

and changes in traditional values. The following information provided is a reorientation

of the topic, problem space, and research highlighted in the literature review.

Intense debates have developed between creationists and evolutionists over the

last 150 years, which have introduced the following historical events that shaped the

current science/religion narrative: first, how demographics, psychological perspectives,

attitudinal dispositions, religious and theological beliefs, as well as formal science

education influence evolutionary theory acceptance (Francis et al., 2019). This debate has

become a multi-faceted challenge, both in public schools and private Christian education

(Francis et al., 2019). Additionally, Coleman (2018) noted the following movements as

instrumental to shaping the evolution narrative: Darwinism, humanism, secularism,

pluralism, and Post-modernism. In contrast, Hammond (2019) examined the denial of

evolutionary theory as highlighted in the historical framework of the Nineteenth-Century

North American Revivals, the New Evangelical Movement of Social Reform, as well as

the Cold-War Era of Evangelical Colleges. Next, historical events such as World War I,

the Bryan crusades, and monumental United States Supreme Court cases have further

influenced this debate (Watts & Kutschera, 2021). Over the last 25 to 30 years, 13

evolution measurement instruments such as MATE, GAENE, and I-SEA have been

instrumental in evolutionary theory acceptance (Mead et al., 2019). Finally, over the last

three decades, reconciliation and coexistence have also addressed this debate from an

epistemic and ontological viewpoint (Marin & Lindeman, 2021), allowing this concept to

be used to build relationships between science and religion.

As told previously, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the substantial increase in the

acceptance of evolutionary theory at Brigham Young University (BYU) and the LDS

church community over the last three decades. In their study, Cohort I (1986-1996)

showed an increased acceptance of evolutionary theory from 12.7% to 38.3%. In Cohort

II (2014-2016), the increased acceptance grew from 39.4% to 75.4%. This increase in

evolutionary theory acceptance is attributed, in part, to three specific areas: the

introduction of kindergarten to twelfth-grade science curriculum changes in biology

(evolutionary theory), a decline in negative messaging from Christian academia, and an

increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst the student’s parents

(Bradshaw et al., 2018). Additionally, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted the increase in

evolutionary theory acceptance across a broad spectrum of main-steam Christianity in the

following manner: Mormons 48%, Jehovah’s Witnesses 26%, Mainline Christian

Denominations 70%, and Catholics 71%, showing a substantial increase in the acceptance

of evolutionary theory in the Christian community. Similarly, Lindsay et al. (2019)

posited that an increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory has occurred in the

following mainstream Christian denominations: Assemblies of God, Nazarene, and other

non-denominational Christian ministries and schools, affecting pedagogical approach and

influencing the evolution-creation narrative in Christian education. Therefore, the

examination of this problem within the Christian community helps the understanding of

this phenomenon, leading to the methodological approach outlined in Chapter 3.

Chapter 3 holds a blueprint regarding the methodology, which allows future

researchers the opportunity to replicate this study. Chapter 3 is organized in a manner that

includes the following sections: the purpose of the study, research questions, rationale for

a qualitative methodology, rationale for a qualitative descriptive design, population and

sample selection, source of data, trustworthiness, data collection and management

process, data analysis procedures, ethical considerations, as well as the assumptions and

delimitations of the research. Moreover, Chapter 3 includes an in-depth description of the

methodology to assist readers in understanding the process in which the data collection

and analysis transpired. Additionally, Chapter 3 concludes with a discussion of the

potential ethical considerations, the potential limitations within the study, as well as a

summary.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The increased

acceptance of evolutionary theory referred to in this study are amongst Christian schools,

teachers, and students. Additionally, science curriculum change for this study refers to the

following six key factors for enhanced instructional success in teaching evolution: (1)

foster a deep understanding of the Nature of Science, (2) use Nature of Science as a lens

for evolution instruction, (3) explicitly compare evolution to alternative explanations, (4)

focus on human evolution (where possible), (5) explicitly recognize the power of

historical inherence, and (6) use active, social learning (Nelson et al., 2019). Finally, the

next definition highlighted in the purpose of this study is societal values.

Societal values are “major components of a society’s culture (in this case, today’s

societal values in Southern California). These societal values consist of the systems of

values and beliefs that are characteristic of that society” (KumpikaitėValiūnienė et al.,

2021, p. 35). The third part defined in the purpose of this study is traditional values.

Traditional values follow the customs handed down by one’s religion or family

(Necati & Nurbek, 2021), as well as traditional biblical values that Jesus Christ is the Son

of an omnipotent, omnipresent God, who created the universe and who always has and

always will rule it. That Satan is real, and humans are sinful, but God offers salvation

through death and resurrection of Jesus. Salvation cannot be earned. The Bible is the

inspired and inerrant Word of God, and its principles are true. That absolute truth and

absolute moral values exist and are found in the Bible (D’Addesi, 2022).

The population for this research was all Christian identified teachers working in

Christian schools who teach the subject of science; the target population was Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools in Southern

California. The sample was 18 Christian secondary education science teachers in 15 semi-

structured interviews and two focus groups of four to six Christian secondary education

science teachers, working in Christian high schools in Southern California, who work in

an accredited Christian high school, have two years’ experience, and are willing to answer

questions on the changes in science curriculum, the changes in societal values, and the

changes in traditional values. Subsequently, these teachers were interviewed using a

semi-structured approach, designed to encourage participants to speak freely about their

experiences and perspectives on the research topic (Braun & Clarke, 2013). The focus

groups collected data from multiple participants simultaneously, in a guided discussion

format (Braun & Clarke, 2013). Additionally, needed permissions/approvals (site

approval, GCU Chair and committee approval, and IRB approval) were obtained prior to

any data collection.

This study’s sampling strategy was convenience sampling. This sampling

technique used ease and convenience to access data, working on time and budget

constraints and considered a common approach in participant-based research (Braun &

Clarke, 2013), as well as convenience to the investigator (Acharya et al., 2013).

Furthermore, the data was stored and will be preserved on a thumb drive, protected from

unauthorized personnel for three years per federal regulations (45 CFR 46). The data

analysis consisted of an inductive thematic analysis approach (Amanfi, 2019) and a

coding system consisting of open coding, initial themes, themes, and revised themes

(Braun & Clarke, 2006).

Research Questions

This study explored whether teachers perceive changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values as influencing the acceptance

of evolutionary theory over the biblical account of creation. More research is needed to

understand why evolutionary theory acceptance is increasing dramatically in Christian

education (Bradshaw et al., 2018). Moreover, Metzger et al. (2018) posited the need for

further research regarding the impact of curriculum changes and how instructional

approaches affect the acceptance of evolutionary theory. In contrast, Bertka et al. (2019)

noted the need for further research on whether cultural and religious sensitivity (CRS)

teaching strategies (curriculum change) influence the science-religion debate and

evolution acceptance. Similarly, Barnes et al. (2020) noted the need for further research

on the differential impact of religious culture (traditional values) competencies on

students’ perceived conflicts with the acceptance of evolutionary theory, which informs

the formulation of the research questions.

The research questions for this study guided this project. The first question stands

for the Christian secondary education science teachers’ understanding and description of

the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory among high school students in Christian

education. Research question two stands for the Christian secondary education science

teachers’ understanding and description of science curriculum changes and how they

might contribute to the acceptance of evolutionary theory among high school students in

Christian education. Research question three stands for the Christian secondary education

science teachers’ understanding and description of changes in societal values and how

they might contribute to the acceptance of evolutionary theory among high school

students in Christian education. Research question four stands for the Christian secondary

education science teachers’ understanding and description of changes in traditional values

and how they might contribute to the acceptance of evolutionary theory among high

school students in Christian education.

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

described the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. This research

was further guided by four research questions, which highlighted these three tenets. The

following are the research questions.

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in societal values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in traditional values, which might explain

the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Data sources necessary for this study are semi-structured interviews and focus

groups amongst Christian secondary education science teachers. The goal of the

semistructured interview was to encourage participants (Christian secondary education

science teachers) to speak freely, in a descriptive manner, about their experiences and

perspectives on the research topic by using open-ended questions (Braun & Clarke,

2014). The focus groups were used as a secondary data source to collect data from

multiple participants simultaneously. This process was unstructured, but in guided

discussion format (Braun & Clarke, 2014). The focus groups allowed for group

participation, attitudes shared, opinions to be voiced, and personal beliefs and views to be

articulated. This process allowed robust qualitative data collection to determine how

participants feel about the research topic (Krueger, 2014). Additionally, these data sources

allowed for extensive descriptive data collection from Christian secondary education

science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools. Furthermore, the data

sources were instrumental in answering the research questions of how changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values influence and

contribute to the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian education.

Data collection methods for this study were three-fold, a demographic

questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and two focus groups. After granted site

authorization, as well as IRB approval, a recruitment letter was issued to potential

participants to decide whether they met the qualifications to participate in the sample of

Christian secondary education science teachers. Next, an Informed Consent form was

sent to potential participants about their rights and protections, as well as a signed copy

returned to the researcher. This process ensured proper notification prior to the

interviews.

At the onset of all interviews (semi-structured and focus groups), all participants

completed a demographic questionnaire. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in

person with Christian secondary education science teachers as the primary choice and via

Zoom video-conferencing software when an in-person interview was not possible. Two

focus groups of four to six Christian secondary education science teachers were

conducted. Furthermore, a qualitative descriptive approach developed a clear description

of the phenomenon. For instance, a descriptive approach studies the, who, what, and

where of a particular event to develop a clear description of the phenomenon by using

verbiage rather than numerable data (Elliott & Tamulak, 2005). Finally, a qualitative

descriptive methodology described the phenomenon in a conceptual manner. Vaismoradi

et al. (2013) posited that a qualitative descriptive design’s primary aim is to describe the

phenomenon conceptually.

Rationale for a Qualitative Methodology

A qualitative methodology was the most appropriate methodology for

understanding how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California

Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values. Qualitative methodology provides perspective to a phenomenon by approaching

research from a theoretical rigor and sound reasoning perspective, utilizing words as data

(Braun & Clarke, 2013). For instance, in its most basic form, qualitative research uses

words taken from participant descriptions as data (Braun & Clarke, 2013). This process

was best suited for this research because the goal was to interview Christian secondary

education science teachers and have them describe (provide word data) whether changes

in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high

schools. The benefits to using a qualitative methodology were as follows.

Numerous authors have named different strategies as benefits to a qualitative

methodology. For instance, Braun and Clarke (2013) argued that qualitative methodology

provides a subjective approach to the information gathering process; allowing responders

to add to their information with insight and backing (word data); encouraging the free

flow of information. The subjective approach was paramount to this research, because the

goal was to gather a participant’s personal description of the phenomenon. Similarly,

Flick (2014) noted that qualitative methodology analyzes data from a linguistic manner to

make statements of implicit and explicit dimension and structures of meaning, and what

is represented in it. The intention of this research was to generate word data that

intricately connected, and clearly detailed the descriptions of the participants.

Additionally, Braun and Clarke (2013) argued that the qualitative process seeks to

provide a far richer, deeper, fuller, and multi-faceted understanding of a phenomenon,

using words rather than numbers as data. Again, the goal of this study was to provide a

richer, deeper description of the phenomenon using word data to understand the

perceptions that Christian secondary education science teachers have regarding this topic.

Lastly, qualitative research allows for the reality, meaning, and experiences of people to

be captured, which are often messy and contradictory (Shaw et al., 2008). This facet of

discovery (one’s experiences and contradictions) was foundational to this study, because

it gathered the participant’s descriptions of the phenomenon (qualitative) rather than

numerical data (quantitative).

In contrast to the benefits of using qualitative methodology, a few challenges and

drawbacks existed. For instance, numerous scholars tell the following limitations in using

qualitative methodology: Rahman (2020), as well as Silverman (2010) argued that

qualitative research approaches often leave out contextual sensitivities, which means that

words, phrases, and sentences can receive different interpretations when used in a

different context. This process produced a focus on meanings and experiences such as in

a phenomenological approach (Wilson, 2014). However, the goal of this research was to

gather data regarding the descriptions (a participant’s own words) of Christian secondary

education science teachers and how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory

and not the meanings or experiences of the teachers.

Additionally, in terms of research methods, smaller sample sizes often raise the

issue of generalizability of the entire population (Rahman, 2020). Similarly, Lam (2015)

posited in their study on language testing assessment, that qualitative sample sizes often

create a generalizability of the population. However, generalizability is not an issue, as

noted by Darlington and Scott (2003), “If one considers the unit of attention as the

phenomenon under investigation, rather than the number of individuals; then the sample

is often much larger than it first appears” (p. 105). In consideration of this thought, using

the phenomenon studied as the unit of attention created a robust sample. Therefore, a

qualitative methodology rather than a quantitative methodology was best suited for this

study.

The quantitative approach was not the best suited methodology for this research,

because the goal was to understand how Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe what they think regarding the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution. Foundational accounts (natural settings) can best

articulate perspective to this research through a qualitative descriptive approach by using

word data rather than numerical data. In contrast, quantitative research seeks to discover

new knowledge through the processes of simplifying more complex scenarios that are

more contrived (O ‘Dwyer & Bernauer, 2013). In other words, data that is deliberately

created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously. Next, a foundational attribute of

quantitative research is predicated on single goal reality, which strives to determine

relationships between variables; whereas qualitative research contends that multiple

realities exist in constructing individual and group perceptions of a phenomenon

(Goodwin & Goodwin, 1996). The use of word data was more proper than numerical data

for this proposed research because it provided multiple realities (personal Christian

secondary education science teacher descriptions) of the phenomenon, as well as a richer,

fuller, and clearer description of the phenomenon. Additionally, the quantitative

methodology approach calls for data collection to include the analysis of numerical data

to inform a phenomenon (Atik & Celik, 2020). Again, the goal in this study was to get a

rich description of the phenomenon, not analyze numerical data.

Rationale for Research Design

A qualitative descriptive design was the most appropriate design for

understanding how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California

Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of

changes in Christian Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in

traditional values. To conduct this study, the researcher had multiple options to collect

data; however, the best approach was the qualitative descriptive approach, because it

provided perspective to the phenomenon through accountability of what existed, the

identity of new meanings, as well as the frequency in which the phenomenon takes place

in a group (Dulock, 1993), in this case Christian secondary education science teachers in

Southern California Christian high schools. The following were the benefits to using a

qualitative descriptive design.

Numerous authors have articulated various strategies as benefits to using a

qualitative descriptive design. For example, Merriam (2002) argued that a rich, as well as

detailed accumulation of information from questionnaires and interviews is paramount in

understanding the descriptions of individual participants in a study. The goal of this

research was to accumulate word data using semi-structured interviews and focus groups,

producing a rich, as well as detailed accumulation of information. Moreover, Vaismoradi

et al. (2013) noted that exact and vivid descriptions of a phenomenon with the primary

aim being a conceptual description is instrumental in a qualitative descriptive approach

such as this. Similarly, Dulock (1993) noted this characteristic as a systematic and exact

description of the phenomenon, which again was the intent of this research by collecting

a rich, detailed, and informative account of the phenomenon being studied. Next, the

opportunity to study the, who, what, and where of the event (Elliott & Tamulak, 2005),

which provides a description for a newly identified phenomenon or phenomena (Dulock,

1993) will provide a rich, detailed, and accumulative process, because simple descriptions

of a phenomenon are paramount (Lambert & Lambert, 2012) to a qualitative descriptive

design. For these reasons, a qualitative descriptive design was best suited for this

research.

In contrast to the benefits of using a qualitative descriptive design, a few

challenges and drawbacks existed. For instance, Neergaard et al. (2009) argued that a

qualitative descriptive approach is limited and is often criticized for its simplicity and

lack of rigor. This criticism is based on the feelings, sensitivities, sensibilities, as well as

inclinations of the participant describer (Neergaard et al., 2009) but does not consider the

simplicity of a rich, detailed, and accumulative, qualitative descriptive design (Dulock,

1993). Next, in terms of analysis, a qualitative descriptive design imposes limitations

because the low-inference approach reduces the ability to speak in general terms

(Neergaard et al., 2009). Again, the goal here was to see and hear what the participants

described about the phenomenon. Lastly, the qualitative descriptive design is often

criticized for being neither clear nor theory-based in its approach (Neergaard et al., 2009).

In consideration of these qualitative descriptive design limitations, it was still the most

appropriate design for understanding how Christian secondary education science teachers

in Southern California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of

evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values, because the goal was to collect rich,

detailed, accurate, and vivid descriptions of this phenomenon.

The researcher considered other qualitative designs including narrative,

phenomenological, and grounded theory. In the narrative approach, the researcher strives

to show events of a significant nature and structure them in a temporal manner to report

the details of said events in a thematic sequence (Sandelowski, 1991). Next, narrative

inquires can be divided into two groups, paradigmatic and narrative-type narrative

inquires (Polkinghorne, 1995). The paradigmatic approach gathers stories for its data,

using paradigmatic analysis to produce categories of the elements across the database,

whereas narrative-type narrative inquiry gathers specific events and happenings as data,

using narrative analytic procedures in developing and explaining stories (Polkinghorne,

1995). The goal of this research was not to develop categories of the elements and

explanatory stories. Additionally, in a narrative design, the researcher’s goal is to center

the study on the experiences of the participants highlighted in a specific narrative

(Sandelowski, 1991), which was not the intent of this study. Therefore, the narrative

approach was not considered for this research because the purpose of the research was to

understand how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California

Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values.

The researcher also considered the phenomenological design as a potential

research design for this study. The phenomenological approach seeks to focus on the

lived experiences of individuals, allowing participants to share their inner thoughts and

feelings (Moustakas, 1994). For instance, phenomenology focuses on the essence of

meaning within a study rather than the quantification of an experience (Moustakas, 1994).

The goal in this study was not to show the lived experiences of the participants, but to

have the participants give an accurate and vivid description of the phenomenon.

Similarly, Cypress (2015) noted that phenomenology is the most inductive of all

qualitative methods and its philosophical assumptions rest on the following grounds: the

study of lived experiences of others, the view that these lived experiences are conscious

ones, and the development of descriptions regarding the essence of these lived

experiences, and not the explanations and analysis of them. Again, the goal of this

research was to accumulate word data using interviews and focus groups, producing a

rich, as well as detailed accumulation of information. For these reasons, the

phenomenological approach was not considered for this research because the purpose of

the research was to understand how Christian secondary education science teachers in

Southern California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in terms of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes

in traditional values.

Finally, the other research design considered was the grounded theory approach.

Grounded theory focuses on collecting and synthesizing data to construct a theory of a

study through analysis (Henwood & Pidgeon, 2006), whereas Frick (2014) noted that

grounded theory is a design approach, which data collection and analysis take place

simultaneously and provide rigorous yet flexible guidelines while developing a theory

grounded in data. The goal of this study was not to construct a theory grounded in data,

but the development of a clear description of the phenomenon by using verbiage (word

data) (Elliott & Tamulak, 2005). Additionally, Cypress (2015) argued that the grounded

theory approach has the intent to move beyond description and generate a theory, an

abstract analytical scheme of the process, as well as interaction shaped by the views of

large numbers of participants. This design was not suitable, because the goal was not to

develop a theory, concept, or an abstract analytical scheme of the process, but simply to

collect a clear description of the phenomenon using word data (Elliott & Tamulak, 2005).

Therefore, the grounded theory approach was not considered for this research because the

purpose of the research was to understand how Christian secondary education science

teachers in Southern California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of

evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values,

and changes in traditional values.

Population and Sample Selection

The setting for this study was 10, Christian high schools in Southern California.

The general population for this research were all Christian identified teachers working in

Christian schools who taught the subject of science in the United States. The population

is the group (gender, age, work role, work experience, level of schooling, or

demographic) targeted for a study (Levy & Lemeshow, 2013). The target population was

all secondary education, Christian identified science teachers working in Christian high

schools in Southern California. The target population, by definition, was the group of

participants about whom the search will extrapolate findings and draw conclusions once

the study is completed (Levy & Lemeshow, 2013). Additionally, the participants were

asked whether they were willing to volunteer for both semi-structured interviews, as well

as focus groups during the informed consent process. The sample was made up of

secondary education science teachers that identified as Christian, were teaching in an

accredited Christian high school, with two years’ experience, and were willing to answer

questions pertaining to changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values.

Qualitative Sample Size

An adequate sample size is paramount to qualitative research involving

semistructured interviews and focus groups, because collecting the necessary amount of

data for a robust study is crucial. Although experts often say that there is no specific

number of interviews for meaningful research, saturation occurs when no new data

emerges within the investigative phase of the study (Vasileious et al., 2018). Therefore, to

account for attrition, this researcher identified 18 Christian secondary education science

teachers to ensure the 15 teachers needed for the interview process, as well as one

additional focus group above the two focus groups needed. By using a sample of 18

Christian secondary education science teachers, this researcher sought to reach saturation

of data through semi-structured interviews of Christian secondary education science

teachers. The sample size for the second source of data came from two focus groups of

four to six Christian secondary education science teachers.

Recruiting and Sampling Strategy

During recruitment, as well as the beginning of each semi-structured interview

and focus group, the researcher explained science curriculum change, societal values, and

traditional values and provided definitions for each of these characteristics to ensure the

participants’ understanding aligned with this study. The sample was drawn from 18

Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high

schools for the semi-structured interview phase of the data collection and 10 teachers for

the focus groups. The teachers selected were from Christian high schools that were

mainstream evangelical, fundamental, and Catholic denominations. Additionally, this

sample was convenience sampling, because the sample was based on the convenience to

the investigator (Acharya et al., 2013). The researcher selected Christian secondary

education science teachers that identified as Christian, teaching in an accredited Christian

high school, with two years’ experience, and were willing to answer questions about

science curriculum changes, societal values, and traditional values. During the site

authorization process, the researcher spoke with school principals to secure permission

while seeking site authorization before Grand Canyon University (GCU), Institutional

Review Board (IRB) approval was granted. During the site authorization process with

potential schools, the researcher discussed the participative process to ensure potential

participants understood the recruitment process if chosen.

Site authorization from high school principals in Southern California Christian

high schools (Appendix B) was paramount prior to data collection. Once IRB approval

was granted, recruitment materials were emailed or personally delivered to potential

participants with the participation criteria attached. Prior to the commencement of

interviews, participants provided a signed informed consent to participate in the research.

This form was sent ahead of time to allow participants time to read, understand, and

consider whether they wished to participate in the study. Additionally, participants were

informed they could withdraw from the study at any time. Next, recruitment materials

informed all participants about the nature of the research, how their privacy was

maintained, of the potential risks associated with research participation, and that the

interviews and focus groups were to be audio and video recorded. Furthermore, included

within this communicative process was the purpose of the study, how the data was

digitally recorded, and how the data and individual participants remained anonymous.

Interview notes were taken by the interviewer to document nuances such as specific body

language and long pauses on the audiotape of the interview sessions. Finally, the rationale

for sampling strategy was as follows.

The primary sample strategy was convenience sampling. This sampling technique

used ease and convenience to access data, operating on time and budget constraints and is

considered a common approach in participant-based research (Braun & Clarke, 2013).

Convenience sampling is also considered a non-random sampling strategy. Acharya et al.

(2013) noted that convenience sampling is chosen based on convenience to the

investigator. Additionally, Taherdoost, (2016) argued that the convenience approach is a

favored technique among students because of its inexpensive and easy approach and its

ability to overcome limitations associated with qualitative research.

The convenience sample criteria consisted of 18 Christian secondary education

science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools who identified as

Christian, worked in an accredited Christian high school, had two years of experience,

and were willing to answer questions regarding changes in science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values. Once these criteria were met, informed

consent was acquired before participation in the study. Furthermore, the adequate sample

size for qualitative research involving semi-structured interviews and focus groups was

crucial. Even though qualitative research experts often show no agreedupon number

regarding the minimal number of interviews, the consensus of saturation occurs when no

new data emerges during the investigative process (Vasileious et al., 2018). To account

for attrition, the researcher recruited 18 Christian secondary education science teachers

for semi-structured interviews and 12 teachers for two focus groups.

The Plan B sampling strategy was the referral or snowball approach. Snowball

sampling is also a non-random sampling method and is applied when it is difficult to

access subjects with the target characteristics (Naderifar et al., 2017). In this strategy,

participants are recruited from existing participants already recruited for the research.

Braun and Clarke (2014) noted snowball sampling as friendship pyramid and commonly

used to build up a network for the researcher and the participants by asking current

participants to identify potential candidates for the study. Additionally, Naderifar et al.

(2017) argued that snowball samples usually continue until data saturation is achieved. In

this sample strategy, existing study subjects recruit future subjects (Ghaljaie et al., 2017).

This plan will not be used unless convenience sampling does not achieve the required

number of interviews or focus groups necessary for a robust qualitative descriptive data

collection.

If this approach is implemented, existing study subjects will recruit future subjects

from their acquaintances. Once existing participants find these potential participants, the

researcher will contact the potential participants and determine whether they meet the

criteria of the target population, given information about the study and whether they are

interested in the topic. The researcher ensured that this sample approach consisted of

Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California high schools that

identified as Christian, had at least two years’ experience, worked in an accredited

Christian high school, and were willing to answer questions pertaining to changes in

science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. Once

these criteria were met, informed consent was acquired before participation in the study.

This sample was based on a specific purpose, with specific inclusion and exclusion

criteria (Braun & Clarke, 2014).

The Plan C sampling strategy was the self-selection approach. Self-selection is

also a non-random sampling method and is applied when individuals choose to take part

in research of their own accord (Sharma, 2017). Therefore, this approach further

complements the processes of convenience, time, and accessibility to potential

participants. The key components to self-selection sampling are (1) subject volunteerism,

(2) inexpensive, (3) less time consuming, (4) it allows for the gathering of large amounts

of data in a short period of time and, (5) there is little effort in searching for participants

(Alvi, 2016). In contrast, self-selection drawbacks are as follows: (1) there is likely to be

a degree of self-selection bias, and (2) this process can lead to the sample not being

representative of the population being studied (Sharma, 2017). Therefore, this plan was

an alternative to convenience and referral (snowball) approaches.

This strategy will not be used unless the convenience and referral (snowball)

sampling approaches are not adequate to meet the necessary data collection for this

qualitative descriptive study. If Plan C is needed, the researcher will approach current

site-authorized schools, as well as add Christian high schools in Southern California to

present the study and get site authorization from the new schools and principals. The

principals will issue the information to their Christian secondary education science

teachers via a recruitment letter (Appendix J) provided by the researcher. This process

will encourage science teachers to self-select based on (1) receiving mass-distributed

information regarding the study, (2) self-identifying with the target population, and (3)

responding to the researcher with an expressed interest in participating in the study.

Furthermore, the researcher ensured that this sample approach consisted of Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools who

identified as Christian, had at least two years’ experience, worked in an accredited

Christian high school, and were willing to answer questions regarding changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. Once these

criteria were met, informed consent was acquired before participation in the study.

Sources of Data

In this study, the purpose of the research was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. Qualitative

descriptive studies use various sources of data for the development of credibility and

trustworthiness of the research (Yin, 2014). A robust qualitative study is methodical,

iterative, and comprehensive, because it uses coding, tables, as well as notes from the

researcher. The two primary sources of data for this study came from Christian secondary

education science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups from the Christian

high schools found in Southern California. These teachers took part in the research

process by providing a detailed description, and from as many angles as possible, about

the phenomenon. A sampling strategy comprised of secondary education science teachers

that identified as Christian, were teaching in an accredited Christian high school, with

two years’ experience, and were willing to answer questions pertaining to changes in

science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values.

Research Data

Gaining trustworthy data in qualitative research relies upon robust researcher

protocols. This process showed the purpose of a qualitative study, which is to achieve

depth of understanding of a particular situation and provide context, understanding,

meaning, as well as specific social attributes of a phenomenon researched (Cypress,

2015). The following protocols were proven as a chronological approach to the sources of

data development:

Semi-Structured Interviews. The goal of the semi-structured interview was to

get participants to speak freely about their experiences and perspectives on the research

topic using open-ended questions. This process allowed participants to raise issues not

expected (Braun & Clarke, 2014). The first semi-structured interview questions came

from existing literature on the potential influence of changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values regarding the acceptance of

evolutionary theory amongst Christians in Christian education (Barnes et al., 2020;

Bertka et al., 2019; Bradshaw et al., 2018; Metzger et al., 2018). Semi-structured

interviews are considered a primary source of data for qualitative methodology (Yin,

2014).

The researcher developed 16 open-ended questions (Appendix E) to allow

participants to speak freely from multiple levels of understanding, as well as levels of

perceptions regarding the influence of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values and how they affect the acceptance of

evolutionary theory. The formulation of these questions (Appendix E) operationalized the

phenomenon through distinguishable, understandable, and empirical teacher observations.

Finally, the data sources focused on “how” questions to gather information from

participants (Braun & Clarke, 2014).

Expert panels provide strategies to name, develop, and test implementation of

instruments (Waltz et al., 2015), in this case the identity, development, and testing of the

researcher’s sources of data. The researcher used an expert panel of three individuals in

the education field with terminal degrees to ease the effectiveness of the questions. These

individuals were named via college or university websites and then solicited via email.

The experts were asked to review the semi-structured interview questions and provide

feedback to the researcher about needed modifications to make the existing questions

more suitable for the study. The researcher recruited three professors, one from a

Christian University and two from a Christian College in Southern California. The expert

panel feedback consensus was as follows: (1) questions asked should reflect teacher

training and education background in science, (2) questions asked should reflect the

influence of a teacher’s post-secondary education training on the topic of evolutionary

theory, and (3) what is the participants’ school policy regarding the teaching of

evolutionary theory and biblical creation? Based on the expert panel's feedback, questions

were added, dropped, combined, or edited. Finally, after the expert panel data was

implemented in developing the semi-structured interview questions, participants were

looked for to complete field testing.

When data collection began, the researcher selected the field test participants in

conjunction with the target population to resemble recruit-able participants. The target

population consisted of Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern

California Christian high schools who identified as Christian, worked in an accredited

Christian high school, had two years of experience, and were willing to answer questions

pertaining to changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in

traditional values. The participants were recruited via school websites and contact was

made via email. Field test one occurred on June 7th, 2022, at 1000, and field test two on

June 13th, 2022, at 0900, utilizing in-person interview protocols. Before the interview

began, the researcher administered the demographic questionnaire (Appendix I) to the

field test volunteer as part of the interview protocol. Next, the researcher read the

definitions of science curriculum change, societal values, and traditional values, which

drive this study.

Additionally, the purpose of the field tests was to make the researcher aware of

potential challenges, obstacles, and biases that could influence the research, check for

richness of data, and decide the sufficiency and number of questions. The FT-1 interview

duration was 1:10:50 and FT-2 interview duration was 00:55:57 respectively. Finally, the

semi-structured interviews were recorded using the researcher’s iPhone 13, as well as

Xupurtlk, S01 digital voice recorder w/audio to text transcription capabilities. The

transcripts were imported from these audio recordings into a Word document.

A comparison of test output was seen from the transcripts for both FTV-1 and

FTV-2 to determine potential codes, how the instrument protocols were modified, as well

as an explanation of how the direct feedback from the test volunteers prompted

modifications. FT-1 produced 42 codes and 19 single-spaced typed pages of narrative.

FT-2 produced 37 codes and 17 single-spaced typed pages of narrative. After the word

data was analyzed, the final explanations regarding instrument/protocol modifications

were identified as follows: (1) an extra, final open-ended question was added to

determine whether there was anything else that should have been discussed, (2) questions

were organized in a more logical progression; (3) technical terms were removed to

simplify the questions, (4) questions were rewritten in a more simplified, flowing manner

for greater understanding.

Additionally, participant feedback from the volunteers prompted the following

modifications: (1) a question was added pertaining to school boards/administrations and

what they allow and do not allow to be taught regarding the topics of evolutionary theory

and biblical creation, (2) participants requested clarification of terms; therefore, technical

terms and simplicity were incorporated in the revision of the questions. The researcher

formulated an expert panel, and semi-structured interview questions are listed in

Appendix E. The new questions produced from the field tests are shown in Appendix H.

Finally, these field tests were not used as part of the data collection process because site

authorization and informed consent were not needed for instrument testing. Table three

highlights the results of the field test interviews.

Table 3

Interview Field Testing

Field Test

Volunteer Test Setting Test Duration

(00:00:00)

Transcribed Pages

(Single-spaced

typed)

# Codes

FTV-1 Admin. Office 01:10:50 19 42

FTV-2 Conference Room 00:55:57 17 37

Average 01:03:04 18 39.5

Total 02:10:17 36 79

Focus Groups. The goal of the focus group was to collect data from multiple

participants simultaneously, allowing for clear and conversational responses from

participants. The protocol was unstructured, but guided by a discussion format, which

allowed for the focus to center around the research topic (Braun & Clarke, 2014).

Additionally, the focus group allowed for group participation, participant attitudes to

prevail, opinions expressed, beliefs, and views, as well as member reactions to be part of

the qualitative data collected to decide how participants felt about a specific topic

(Krueger, 2014). Furthermore, the focus group prompts were formulated from existing

literature regarding the potential influence of changes in science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values on the acceptance of evolutionary theory

amongst Christians in Christian education (Barnes et al., 2020; Bertka et al., 2019;

Bradshaw et al., 2018; Metzger et al., 2018).

The focus groups were the second research data source for this dissertation.

Subsequently, the researcher developed six open-ended prompts to allow participants to

speak freely from multiple levels of understanding, as well as levels of belief regarding

the influence of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in

traditional values and how they affect the acceptance of evolutionary theory. The prompts

were formulated in the following categories for form and flow: (1) the opening prompt

(not data gathering) was designed to introduce participants to their commonalities and

make them feel comfortable; (2) three key prompts on science curriculum change; (3)

three key prompts on societal and traditional values were instrumental in the focus group;

and (4) an ending prompt created effective sequencing to end the focus group. The

formulation of these prompts operationalized the phenomenon through clearly

distinguishable, measurable, and understandable, empirical teacher observations. Finally,

the focus group prompts changed or experienced the iterative process as data was

collected from the semi-structured interviews to strengthen the data collection process.

Additional Data Source

The demographic questionnaire (Appendix I) was developed to fully contextualize

the sample by collecting data on participants, which potentially influenced their views on

the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian high schools in Southern California.

Personal markers previously discussed created a greater propensity to either accept or

deny evolutionary theory in both public and Christian education, because they measured

personal functionalities, which influenced the decision-making process (Francis et al.,

2019). For instance, (Francis et al., 2019) posited that debates between creationists and

evolutionists predicated on demographic, psychological perspective, attitudinal

disposition, religious and theological beliefs, as well as formal science education

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory. Therefore, personality, upbringing,

gender, age, and ethnicity potentially affect evolutionary theory acceptance (Francis et al.,

2019). Additionally, Francis et al. (2019) noted that females were more predisposed to

accept Christian/religious topics such as creationism rather than sciencebased topics such

as evolutionary theory. For these reasons it was crucial to gather this information,

creating another layer of data to analyze the phenomenon. The demographic

questionnaire consisted of ten questions ranging from age and ethnicity to the type of

post-secondary education training received and type of school the participant was

employed at (Appendix I).

Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness is paramount to the qualitative research process. Guba (1981)

named the four criteria that provide a foundation for trustworthiness in a qualitative study

as credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Similarly, Whittemore et

al. (2001) defined these characteristics as essential criteria in the qualitative research

process. In consideration of these criteria, the qualitative researcher should use these tools

as a means of ensuring the trustworthiness essential to a robust research process. Guba

(1981) posited that these four criteria have stood the test of time for qualitative research

and will provide the basis for this researcher’s study. Therefore, this researcher ensured

trustworthiness by employing credibility, dependability, transferability, and confirmability

strategies. Each element about trustworthiness is discussed in the following subsections.

Credibility

Credibility refers to the first element of trustworthiness and includes the assurance

that individuals taking part in research are identified and described accurately using

various strategies (Elo et al., 2014). Moreover, credibility provides confidence in the

research findings and establishes whether the findings represent plausible information

drawn from the participants’ data as an original interpretation of the participants’ views

(Korstjens & Moser, 2018). The following strategies ensured credibility.

The adoption of a well-established data collection plan is paramount to credibility.

The execution of the following steps operationalized the credibility process: the receipt of

Site Authorization (Appendix B); Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval (Appendix

C); recruitment letters sent to participants (Appendix J); signed informed consent

received from participants (Appendix D); the formulation of an interview guide to

organize the interviews; the administration of the demographic questionnaires to all

participants; the execution of the semi-structured interviews; the execution of the focus

groups at the teachers school for familiarity; researcher-secured rooms for comfort and

convenience; Zoom video conferencing calls if in-person interviews were not possible;

and transcripts produced from the audio records using the audio to text transcription

device (Xupurtlk, S01). Once these protocols were carried out, member-checking further

provided credibility.

In conjunction with the data collection strategy, member-checking provided

credibility by certifying accuracy of the data. For instance, member-checking is a

customary practice in qualitative methodology to verify the accuracy and authenticity of

the interview intent and content (Candela, 2019). This process occurred following the

previously mentioned data collection protocols by allowing participants to read the

interview transcript to verify the accuracy of the data. All participants were given two

weeks to verify the accuracy and authenticity of the data provided on the semi-structured

interview and focus group transcripts. Once the participants had time to review the

transcripts, a follow-up meeting was scheduled, enabling them to correct the

interpretation and challenge what they perceived as “wrong” interpretations (Kortsjens &

Moser, 2018, p.122). Finally, another strategy used in the credibility criteria was

triangulation.

Triangulation refers to using multiple methods or data sources in qualitative

research to comprehensively understand a phenomenon (Carter et al., 2014). Similarly,

Flick (2004) noted triangulation as a strategy in which data is drawn from various

sources, at separate times, and from various places. More specifically, Kortsjens and

Moser (2018) noted that methodological triangulation is used to gather data by different

data collection methods, such as semi-structured interviews and focus groups, which is

the triangulation method this researcher used. Therefore, for this research, the execution

of semi-structured interviews and the execution of focus groups with different Christian

secondary education science teachers from six Christian high schools in Southern

California (San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles Counties) was used to triangulate the

findings.

Dependability

Dependability refers to the stability of data over time, as well as under various

conditions (Elo et al., 2014), which includes the aspect of consistency. For example,

dependability in qualitative research allows other researchers to potentially replicate a

study (similar scenarios, techniques, participants), and produce comparable results

(Shenton, 2004). The following strategies developed stability (dependability) of data. A

clear alignment approach was used to establish what needed to be understood about the

phenomenon. This was operationalized by ensuring that the problem statement, research

questions, methodology, and design all aligned within the study. After clear alignment

was developed, a physical audit trail was used.

In conjunction with the clear alignment approach, a physical audit trail was

implemented to further create dependability. A physical audit trail documents the stages

of a research study (Carcary, 2009), and transparently describes the research steps taken

from the start of a research project to the development and reporting of findings

(Kortsjens & Moser, 2018). This researcher named the research problem from which the

proposal was developed, reviewed the literature, established a research framework,

developed semi-structured interview, developed focus group protocols, and evidence was

analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. This data (evidence) included transcripts,

documentation of data gathering sessions, audio recordings, and video recordings to

document the audit process. In addition to these processes, an in-depth methodological

description further strategized dependability.

Another strategy used in research to ensure dependability is an in-depth

methodological description, which provides a comprehensive documentation of how data

were collected and analyzed, because description increases soundness of study for future

researchers to replicate (Shenton, 2004). This researcher incorporated Braun and Clarke’s

six phase inductive thematic analysis to provide comprehensive documentation of the

study. Furthermore, the researcher used complete records of data analysis strategy to

include semi-structured interview and focus group transcripts, interview notes, codebook,

coding scheme, initial codes, initial themes, and themes to develop an in-depth

methodological description. Finally, peer debriefing occurred throughout the research

using the Grand Canyon University iterative process (dissertation committee, peer review,

dissertation defense, etc.). The next criterion to contribute to trustworthiness was

transferability.

Transferability

Transferability refers to the potential for extrapolation and relies on the reasoning

that findings can be generalized or transferred to other groups or settings (Elo et al.,

2014). The following strategy ensured transferability: Sampling sufficiency incorporated

both sample size and the appropriateness of the sample, providing insight into the

phenomenon. Vassileiou et al. (2018) argued that sample size determination is guided by

the informational redundancy (saturation) criterion when no added information can be

extrapolated through sampling more units. Therefore, the researcher aimed to obtain

saturation by ensuring that no new data emerged from the study (Dworkin, 2012). To

accomplish this goal, the researcher, through the inductive thematic analysis process,

actively searched for code saturation (the point at which no additional issues are

identified), meaning saturation (the point at which no further dimensions, nuances, and

issues are identified), and theme saturation, comparing each new interview with the

themes that had already surfaced (Vassileiou et al., 2018). Finally, trustworthiness in

qualitative research is predicated on one last criterion: confirmability.

Confirmability

Confirmability refers to the objectivity or the ability of others to confirm or

corroborate findings while cutting the subjectivity of researchers by verifying data and

providing input about the findings (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). For instance,

confirmability entails ensuring that the research results explicitly represent the

participants' experiences and not the researcher's assumptions (Shenton, 2004). The

following strategies ensured confirmability: Coding methods, which included showing

patterns and categories derived from the transcripts by documenting familiar words,

terms, and phrases to develop themes (Saldana, 2016). This researcher utilized a

codebook to develop a clear record of all codes, presenting this data in a Chapter 4 table,

presenting the initial themes and the logic of how the codes were coalesced into initial

themes and presenting the themes and the logic of how the initial themes were coalesced

into themes.

In addition to coding, an in-depth methodological description strategy was used.

In-depth methodological description provides comprehensive documentation of how data

were collected and analyzed because description increases the soundness of the study for

future researchers to replicate (Shenton, 2004). The researcher became familiarized with

the transcripts (interview and focus group transcripts, interview notes, etc.), gaining

overview of the collected data by listening to digital and video recordings, and

developing codes and recurring themes (Srivastava & Thomson, 2009). Therefore,

trustworthiness incorporated credibility and transferability, as well as confirmability and

dependability, which provided the research dynamic necessary within the qualitative

methodology process.

Data Collection and Management

This study's data collection and management protocols included protecting all

research data collected, including emails, recruitment materials, transcripts, video

recordings, audio recordings, and interview notes. The data collection procedures focused

on answering the research questions until saturation (no more patterns, phrases, or

themes) appeared (Twining et al., 2017). The digital data was stored on an external hard

drive and personal computer as needed for three years after the completion of the

research as per GCU standards. After the three years, the researcher will remove all data

stored on the researcher’s hard drive, external hard drive, and any other device storing

data (USB drives, etc.). The following is a chronological narrative of data collection for

this research:

The researcher in this study used a qualitative descriptive approach with a detailed

and systematic protocol for data collection. The data collection started with site

authorization from six Christian high schools in Southern California. Site authorization

(Appendix B) for this research was reached in the following manner: first, the researcher

performed a Google search of Christian high schools in Southern California. Second, the

researcher examined the websites of the schools selected for accreditation, teacher

population, science department, and location (two schools from San Diego County, two

schools from Orange County, and two schools from Los Angeles County). Third, the

researcher made initial contact by sending introductory emails or made telephone calls to

the principals, superintendents, or head-of-schools of the Christian schools chosen to

determine who had site authorization authority. Once contact was made, the researcher

explained the purpose of the study and requested a brief in-person meeting (10 minutes)

to discuss the research topic. Once the meeting was scheduled, the researcher prepared a

site authorization form with all the pertinent school information to include the person

with site authorization authority (principal, superintendent, or head-of-schools) for the

meeting. Fourth, the researcher met at the scheduled meeting time with the authorized

person to answer any questions before securing site authorization (Appendix B). Once

site authorization was secured, the researcher prepared for levels two and three in the

GCU dissertation process. Once the researcher successfully reached level two peer

review and level three proposal defense, level four Institutional Review Board (IRB)

approval was necessary.

Once IRB approval was secured, the researcher contacted the principals,

supervisors, or heads of schools that signed the site authorization forms to arrange an

inperson meeting with their Christian secondary education science teachers. The purpose

of this meeting was to provide formal introductions between the teachers and the

researcher. At this time, the researcher introduced the research topic and answered any

questions potential participants may have had by presenting a clear criterion of the

sample needed for the study. If the teachers showed interest in the study, the researcher

requested the teacher’s participation. If a formal introduction by the site authorization

official was not possible, the names of potential participants were requested by the

researcher from the site authorization officials. Next, these potential participants were

contacted via email and a formal letter of recruitment sent to individuals that meet the

sample of Christian secondary education science teachers, teaching in accredited

Christian high schools in Southern California, with two years’ experience, and willing to

answer questions about changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values. Once the emails/letters of recruitment were sent, teachers

self-identified if they were interested in participating in the study. Once participants self-

identified, the researcher sought participant commitment. Once the participants were

recruited for the study, informed consent was necessary before data collection began.

A signed informed consent form (Appendix D) was crucial prior to data collection

because the participant’s consent legally authorized the researcher to collect data from the

participant. During the formal introduction meeting between the site authorization

official, the teacher(s), and the researcher, and if the teacher(s) agreed to participate,

informed consent was secured at that time. If informed consent was not secured at the

time of the introductory meeting, or an introductory meeting was not possible due to

scheduling conflicts, the researcher contacted the participant later via email or telephone

to discuss the requirement of informed consent prior to data collection. Once the potential

participant was contacted and a commitment was secured, the researcher sent an email

with an electronic DocuSign of the informed consent. This document was retrieved via

email communication. Finally, after participant recruitment and informed consent were

secured, the researcher worked with the authorization official to secure a comfortable

location for participant interviews and focus groups. Once the researcher and site official

agreed on an on-site location (room), the researcher contacted participants via telephone

or email to arrange for a time and date of primary source of data collection

(semistructured interviews) and secondary source of data collection (focus groups) to

occur. If a Zoom conferencing call was requested for convenience, the researcher

contacted the participant via email or telephone and arranged for a time and date for the

interview.

Once a time and date were scheduled, the researcher sent the participant a Zoom meeting

invitation to participate in the meeting.

Once site approval was granted, IRB approval was given, recruitment occurred,

participants were secured with a signed informed consent form, and data collection

began. Data collection consisted of a demographic questionnaire. Once the demographic

questionnaire was completed, the researcher ensured that semi-structured interview

protocols and focus group protocols were implemented, depending on the data source, to

ensure a consistent data collection process.

The semi-structured interview protocols included the utilization of an interview

guide to facilitate the professional administration of the interview. The researcher used

two audio-recording devices. A Xupurtlk S01 digital voice recorder with w/audio text

transcription capabilities was the primary device, and the researcher’s iPhone 13 video

feature was the secondary or backup digital recording device. Once the semi-structured

interview began, the interviewer greeted and welcomed participants, thanking them for

their willingness to take part. This process allowed the researcher to build rapport,

creating the intended goal: open-ended questioning and free-flowing descriptions of the

phenomenon. Additionally, all participants were informed of their rights according to

federal regulations (Belmont Report), ensuring that all participants understood they

would be treated with respect, beneficence, and justice. The participants were also

informed that they had the right to terminate the interview at any time and that their data

would not be utilized. Finally, the researcher provided an explanation of what the study

hoped to accomplish, leading to the questioning phase of the semi-structured interviews.

The semi-structured interviews consisted of question sequencing, careful wording

and construction of the questions, as well as prompts and probes (Braun & Clarke, 2013).

This process aided the researcher in avoiding interjection and perspective on the research

topic (Creswell & Poth, 2018). The semi-structured interviews should take approximately

60 minutes from start to finish (Braun & Clarke, 2014). To generate a richer, more

detailed response, the researcher asked other follow-up questions to the initially asked

questions (Braun & Clarke, 2014). During this process, the researcher showed interest

and appeared non-judgmental about the responses delivered. Once the questioning was

complete, the researcher informed the participant that a transcript of the interview would

be provided to ensure the accuracy of the interview (member-checking).

The focus group protocols included the use of an interview guide to facilitate the

professional administration of the focus group. The researcher used two audio-recording

devices. A Xupurtlk S01 digital voice recorder with w/audio text transcription capabilities

was the primary device, and the researcher’s iPhone 13 video feature was the secondary

or backup digital recording device. Once the focus group began, the interviewer greeted

and welcomed participants, thanking them for their willingness to take part. This process

allowed the researcher to build rapport, creating the intended goal: open-ended

questioning and free-flowing descriptions of the phenomenon. Additionally, all

participants were informed of their rights according to federal regulations (Belmont

Report), ensuring that all participants understood they would be treated with respect,

beneficence, and justice. The participants were also informed that they had the right to

stop participation in the focus group at any time and their data would not be used. Finally,

the researcher provided an explanation of what the study hoped to conduct, leading to the

start of the discussion phase of the focus group.

The guiding principles of the discussion phase of the focus group entailed a

conversational, clear, direct, forthright, comfortable, and simple approach to participants

(Krueger, 1998). The protocols followed a four-phase discussion sequence for form and

flow: (1) the opening prompt (not collected as data) was designed to introduce

participants to their commonalities and make them feel comfortable, (2) three key

prompts on Christian science curriculum changes were discussed, (3) a transition to three

key prompts regarding societal and traditional values further facilitated the focus group,

and (4) an ending prompt created an effective sequencing to end the focus group. The

focus groups should also range from 60-90 minutes from start to finish (Krueger, 2014).

During this process, the researcher showed interest, appeared non-judgmental, and

engaged in the process. Once the focus group was completed, all interview files were

downloaded to the researcher’s personal computer and external hard drive for safe

storage, and transcripts were produced and shared with the focus group participants to

ensure accuracy (member-checking).

After the semi-structured interviews and focus groups were completed, the

researcher produced transcripts by using the audio-to-text transcription capabilities of the

Xupurtlk S01 digital voice recorder. Once the transcripts were imported to a Word file the

editing process began. After reading and re-reading the transcripts, the researcher

supported the integrity of the transcripts by making minimal clean-up changes. This

process entailed fixing typos and other data formatting issues (repeated words,

incomplete words, and missing or misplaced words and punctuation). The researcher

ensured that the participants’ statements were not changed to fit the views or ideas of the

researcher as this is a serious breach of ethical conduct. After the transcript process was

completed, the researcher assigned pseudonyms to provide confidentiality for each

participant for the duration of the study. Finally, member-checking was used to ensure the

credibility of the data collected.

Member-checking is a technique used to explore the trustworthiness and

credibility of results in the data collection process (Birt et al., 2016). After the

transcription procedures were complete, the data (results) was returned to the participants

of all semi-structured interviews and focus groups to check for accurate information

captured in the generated transcripts. This process allowed participants to engage with

and add to the transcripts produced from their semi-structured interview or focus group.

The participants had two weeks to review the transcripts. Data management protocols

protected all participants, and research data was collected throughout these processes.

Data Analysis Procedures

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The researcher

intended to conduct semi-structured interviews and focus groups to explore what

Christian secondary education science teachers understand about this phenomenon. The

following questions guided this qualitative descriptive study:

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increase acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the

increase acceptance of the theory of evolution?

The data analysis protocols incorporated in this research consisted of an inductive

thematic analysis, because the aim was for the analysis to be grounded in the data (Clarke

et al., 2015). This process (inductive thematic analysis) was used to identify, analyze, and

formulate themes from the participant’s semi-structured interviews and focus groups

(Clarke et al., 2015). Moreover, Christian secondary education science teacher

descriptions of the phenomenon in an accredited Christian high school in Southern

California was instrumental in providing the data, as well as ensuring that data was

achieved properly, prepared for analysis, and securely kept.

During the data collection, management, and analysis processes, protocols

included the protection of all research data collected to include emails, recruitment

materials, transcripts, video recordings, audio recordings, and interview notes. The digital

data was stored on an external hard drive and personal computer as needed for three years

after the completion of the research as per GCU standards. After the three-year period is

over, the researcher will remove all data stored on the researcher’s hard drive, external

hard drive, and any other device storing data (USB drives, etc.). Finally, as a means of

properly preparing the data for analysis, the researcher produced transcripts from the

recordings.

The researcher continued to prepare the data for analysis by producing transcripts.

The researcher used the audio to text transcription capabilities of the Xupurtlk S01 digital

voice recorder. Once the transcripts were imported to a Word file the editing process

began. After reading and re-reading the transcripts, the researcher maintained the integrity

of the transcripts by making minimal clean-up changes. This process entailed fixing typos

and other data formatting issues (repeated words, incomplete words, and missing or

misplaced words and punctuation). The researcher ensured that participant statements

were not changed to fit the views or ideas of the researcher as this is a serious breach of

ethical conduct. After the transcript process was complete, member-checking was used to

ensure the credibility of the data collected.

Member-checking is a technique used to explore the trustworthiness and

credibility of results in the data collection process (Birt et al., 2016). After the

transcription procedures were complete, the data (results) were returned to the

participants of all semi-structured interviews and focus groups to check for accuracy of

information captured in the generated transcripts. This process provided participants with

the opportunity to engage with, and add to, the transcripts produced from their

semistructured interview or focus group. The participants had two weeks to review the

transcripts. Finally, throughout these processes, data collection, management of that data,

as well as analysis (no new themes emerge) protocols further prepared the data by

ensuring data saturation had occurred.

In the research process, there are numerous methods to reach data saturation. Data

saturation occurs when no new data or themes emerge (Fusch & Ness, 2015). Therefore,

paramount to this process was not how saturation occurred, but that it did occur. One such

method to ensure the researcher achieved data saturation was to construct a saturation

grid, which entailed listing major topics on a vertical axis and interviews on the

horizontal axis (Guest et al., 2020). Once data saturation had occurred, no new data was

collected, and the existing data was transcribed and member-checked; the data was ready

for the analysis process. The following six-phase, inductive thematic analysis procedures

by (Clarke et al., 2015) were used.

Familiarization. The first step in data analysis is becoming familiar with the data

collected, which is helped by an in-depth knowledge of and engagement with the data set

(Clarke et al., 2015). This was accomplished through reading and familiarization and

taking note of items of potential interest (Braun & Clarke, 2014). After the learner

transcribed all words recorded from the semi-structured interviews and focus groups by

using a Xupurtlk S01 digital voice recorder, audio to text digital transcription devise,

familiarization occurred through multiple readings. The secondary recording source was

the researcher’s iPhone 13 video recording feature. Once transcription was conducted, the

researcher saved the transcript on a Word document file. At this point, the researcher was

familiar with the word data, because the data was read and re-read, making notes of any

analytic observations (Clarke et al., 2015). For instance, Braun and Clarke (2014) noted

that familiarization is not a passive process of just understanding words, it is about

starting to read the data, as data. Finally, once the familiarization process was completed,

the researcher began the coding process.

Coding. Coding is a systematic process of identifying and labeling relevant

features of data in relation to the research questions within the study (Clark et al., 2015).

Additionally, systematic, and rigorous coding builds a solid foundation for theme

development (Clarke et al., 2015). This researcher conducted open coding, identifying all

aspects of interest or relevance to the research questions (Braun & Clarke, 2014). This

provided a label per feature of data that was potentially relevant. This formed words or

brief phrases that captured the essence of a particular piece of data, creating

buildingblocks of analysis regarding this phenomenon. Finally, once the coding process

was completed, the researcher created a MAXQDA project file and imported semi-

structured interviews and focus groups data as an aid in the coding process. Once the

coding process was completed, the researcher began looking for themes.

Search for Initial Themes. A theme ‘captures something important about the data

in relation to the research questions and represents some level of patterned response or

meaning within the data set’ (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 82); therefore, the researcher

clusters together codes to create a plausible mapping of key patterns within the data

(Clarke et al., 2015). By identifying patterns, the researcher reviewed codes and collated

data relating to each code, looking for similarity and overlap between codes (concepts,

topics or issues relating to Christian secondary education science teacher perceptions of

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values and how they potentially influence the acceptance of evolution). Furthermore, this

process produced axial codes (categories, subthemes, initial themes), collating together

all instances of text where that code appeared, which led to initial themes (Braun &

Clarke, 2014). Finally, once the initial themes were selected, further review of the themes

was crucial for proper analysis.

Review Themes. The themes named at this point of the research were initial

themes and were revised and refined throughout the developing analysis (Braun &

Clarke, 2014). This process caused the researcher to pause the process of theme

generation to decide whether the initial theme answered one of the research questions

within the coded data or the entire data set (Clarke et al., 2015). Additionally, the process

caused the researcher to make no or few changes or discard the initial themes altogether if

needed and start the previous phase over. Finally, these processes aided in deciding the

defined themes.

Defining and Naming Themes. The process of defining themes decides what is

unique and specific about each (Braun & Clarke, 2014) and provides clarity for each

theme, leading to a road map for the final write-up (Clarke et al., 2015). The researcher

ensured each theme had a clear focus, scope, and purpose, providing a rich, coherent, and

meaningful picture of the dominant patterns in the data (Braun & Clarke, 2014). This

process was best conducted by writing theme definitions, which are short descriptions

explaining the scope and coverage and the boundaries of each theme (Clarke et al., 2015).

Moreover, this step ensures the development and enrichment of the analytic narrative or

the interpretative commentary on the data (Clarke et al., 2015), providing a rich and

detailed description and interpretation of the theme titles that aid in presenting rich,

interconnected, and logical analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2014). This is the goal in a

qualitative descriptive study. Additionally, writing theme definitions aided in the

organization and flow of analysis (Clarke et al., 2015). Finally, naming the themes is

another aspect of the development process because good theme names capture the

essence of each theme. This is often developed using data quotes or popular sayings

(Clarke et al., 2015). Once the themes were defined and named, a draft of the written

report provided an explanation of the research.

Write-Up. The final written report provided a concise and logical explanation of

the data and themes identified by weaving their analytic narrative with vivid, compelling

data extracts (Clarke et al., 2015). This researcher ensured this process occurred through

the iterative processes of editing. This process was paramount to avoiding discriminatory

language and avoiding implicit moral judgments (Braun & Clarke, 2014). Within this

narrative, the researcher provided the following elements in the reporting process:

introduction, descriptive findings, data analysis procedures, results, and summary; all of

which were instrumental to the purpose statement for this proposed study.

Ethical Considerations

The adherence to the key principles of the Belmont Report (respect, justice, and

beneficence) asserts ethical practices in research about the protection and rights of human

subjects. Therefore, the Belmont Report (1979) provided guidelines equal to the

protection of human subjects of research as highlighted in the National Research Act

(Pub. L. 93-348) of 1974. Moreover, prior to data collection a Site Authorization Letter

was secured from each educational institution where data was collected (Appendix B).

Moreover, each participant involved in human research is afforded the rights to

protection, privacy, and fairness (Adashi et al., 2018). A participant’s privacy is

paramount during the process of gathering data, and throughout the entire collection and

analysis process. Subsequently, no one should have access to participant data except the

researcher, as a minimal risk protection afforded by the Belmont Report (1979).

Additionally, participants were informed that all information provided was

confidential and that informed consent (Appendix D) was signed prior to data collection,

and that participants may cease the process at any time. Prior to conducting research,

Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained from Grand Canyon University,

as well as formal letters of approval and consent to conduct interviews and focus groups

with Christian secondary education science teachers. The interviews and focus groups

were conducted live or captured utilizing video conferencing software, with prior

approval and a signed agreement from school officials. Furthermore, a document of

informed consent was given to all research participants requesting their signature

approval before data collection began. The data will be stored securely for three years and

then destroyed to ensure confidentiality. The semi-structured interviews and focus groups

are confidential, and the interviewee will be protected from emotional and physical harm

or stress. Finally, the researcher provided as part of the recruitment information an

explanation of anonymity to protect participant identity.

Assumptions and Delimitations

The researcher of this study used a qualitative descriptive approach to examine

Christian secondary education science teachers about their understanding of how changes

in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high

schools. Therefore, the researcher decided that semi-structured interviews and focus

groups were the best instruments to collect data from Christian secondary education

science teachers working in Southern California Christian high schools. The following

assumptions and delimitations exist for the execution of this research.

Assumptions

An assumption predicates something the researcher determines will occur or not

occur that may have influence on the research (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Catane (2000)

noted that assumptions refer to statements that are presumed by the researcher to be true

for the purpose of conducting the study. The following are assumptions for this study.

1. It was assumed that participants answered all questions truthfully and from their

own perspective without intent to deceive. Therefore, confidentiality was

preserved to ensure all participants answered questions honestly. Additionally, all

participants were volunteers who had the right to withdraw from the research at

any time without ramifications; therefore, all participants were afforded

protection, privacy, and fairness as prescribed in the Belmont Report (1979) to

encourage complete honesty in semi-structured interviews and focus group

answers. Finally, if participants in this study did not provide truthful answers to

the questions, the data could be considered biased and untrustworthy.

Delimitations

Delimitations predicate decisions or choices made by the researcher during data

collection. Therefore, these decisions decide whether something is left out (boundaries,

limits, etc.) of the research purposefully by the researcher (Theofanidis & Fountouki,

2018). The following are delimitations for this study.

1. The study was delimited to Christian secondary education science teachers. The

delimitation was chosen for the following reasons: first, the purpose of this

qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian secondary

education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools describe

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian

Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values.

Second, even though this decision limited other Christian secondary education

participants and increased the potential site authorizations needed, it was not

feasible or profitable to interview other secondary education teachers that did not

teach science.

2. The study was delimited to Christian schools. The delimitation was chosen for the

following reasons: first, the purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to

understand how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern

California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in terms of changes in Christian Science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values. Second, even though this decision

limited other schools such as public, charter, and home schools, the goal was to

specifically gather information from on campus Christian high school science

teachers.

3. The study was delimited to Southern California. The delimitation was chosen for

the following reasons: first, the purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was

to understand how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern

California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in terms of changes in Christian Science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values. Second, even though this decision

limited other states within the United States from taking part, the study

specifically gathered information from Christian secondary education science

teachers in Southern California.

Summary

In consideration of the phenomenon in this study, the research illuminated how

changes in science curriculum, change societal values, and changes in traditional values

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory and potentially bring solutions to the

substantial increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in the Christian classroom

over the past three decades. Therefore, the researcher conducted this qualitative

descriptive study in a manner, which connotes the necessary processes of gaining insight

into how this phenomenon influences the acceptance of evolutionary theory. Additionally,

the researcher used the research questions to explore how changes in science curriculum,

change societal values, and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in the Christian education community. Moreover, in the data

collection process, the researcher looked to identify and put aside potential biases while

exploring the phenomenon.

The target population for this study was Christian secondary education teachers

and the sample size was 18 Christian secondary education science teachers for

semistructured interviews and two focus groups of four to six secondary education

science teachers. Subsequently, the qualitative descriptive methodology was the most

appropriate design for this study because it presented an accurate and vivid description of

the phenomenon and studied the, who, what, and where, understanding of the problem

(Elliott & Tamulak, 2005). Additionally, key to this study was a thick description of how

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory. Furthermore, the data analysis

formed an inductive thematic analysis process with transcripts, open coding, initial

themes, themes, and revised theme development (Frick, 2014). The researcher utilized

MAXQDA software to aid in storing, organizing, categorizing, analyzing, and visualizing

themes from both the semi-structured interviews, as well as the focus groups.

Finally, Chapter 4 contains the preparation of the raw data for analysis, the

descriptive data, as well as the data analysis steps taken. Next, the results are presented,

as well as the limitations of the study articulated. Lastly, a summary is given about the

results pertaining to how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern

California Christian high schools.

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results

Introduction

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian

Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The

researcher used a qualitative methodology to collect data from Christian secondary

education science teachers teaching in accredited Christian high schools. Qualitative

research is an empirical approach to examining phenomena within their natural

environment (Yin, 2014). Furthermore, the qualitative descriptive design focuses on

naturalistic inquiry while not making theoretical assumptions about the data, presenting

the data as communicated by the participant (Vat et al., 2017). This researcher focused on

data collection from participants utilizing demographic questionnaires, semi-structured

interviews, and focus groups to explore what Christian secondary education science

teachers understood regarding this phenomenon. The following questions guided this

qualitative descriptive study:

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increase acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

The goal of Chapter 4 was to methodically present the results of this qualitative

descriptive study and how they address the research questions. Chapter 4 subsequently

summarizes the data collected through the utilization of a demographic questionnaire,

semi-structured interviews, and focus groups. Additionally, this chapter describes the data

analysis methodology in detail and presents the results. The chapter ends with a summary,

which discusses the main findings from the qualitative analysis. The dissertation

presented for this study detailed three sources of data collection: a demographic

questionnaire, 15 semi-structured interviews, and two focus groups of four to six

participants. These processes were approved by Grand Canyon Universities (GCU) and

the Institutional Review Board (IRB). During the IRB process, site authorization was

acquired for six Christian high schools in Southern California. These site authorizations

produced 12 of the 15 semi-structured interviews and one of the two focus groups;

therefore, four additional site authorizations were acquired through an IRB modification

application (Appendix C). This allowed for the additional interviews and focus groups

needed. The second focus group was also conducted with six Christian secondary

education science teacher participants. This focus group had one additional participant

than was highlighted in the proposal. These processes did not alter the results of the study

but enhanced the rich data collection.

Preparation of Raw Data for Analysis and Descriptive Data

This qualitative descriptive study focused on the perceptions and experiences of

Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high

schools and how they described the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms

of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values. The participants were acquired through the processes of convenience sampling

and were required to meet specific inclusion criteria. The researcher collected data from

18 Christian secondary education science teachers (15 from semi-structured interviews,

seven of which participated in both semi-structured interviews and focus groups, and

three more which participated in focus group two only). Once the data was collected, the

following protocols were followed to prepare the raw data for analysis.

Preparation of Raw Data for Analysis

After the demographic questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and focus

groups were completed, the researcher prepared the raw data by utilizing the following

protocols. The demographic questionnaires were transcribed into an excel spreadsheet for

descriptive analysis. The semi-structured interviews and focus group transcripts were

developed by utilizing the audio to text transcription capabilities of the Xupurtlk, S01

digital voice recorder. Word files were created from the audio to text files. Additionally,

the researcher’s second data collection source (iPhone 13 video) was utilized to ensure

the audio to text transcription captured were accurate. The researcher verified the

accuracy of the transcripts by watching the videos and matching what was said to the

transcripts. Once these steps were completed, the editing process began. After reading

and re-reading the transcripts, the researcher maintained the integrity of the transcripts by

making minimal clean-up changes. The researcher ensured that the participants’

statements were not modified to fit the views or ideas of the researcher as this is a serious

breach of ethical conduct. After the transcript process was completed, the researcher

assigned the pseudonyms to each transcript previously assigned during the data collection

process for confidentiality. Finally, member-checking was utilized to ensure the

credibility of the data collected.

Member-checking is a technique protocol used to explore the trustworthiness and

credibility of results in the data collection process (Birt et al., 2016). After the

transcription procedures were completed, the data were returned to the participants of all

semi-structured interviews and focus groups to check for accuracy of information

captured in the generated transcripts. This process provided participants with the

opportunity to engage with, and add to, the transcripts produced from their semistructured

interview or focus group. The participants had two weeks to review the transcripts. Once

feedback was returned from the participants, data management protocols ensured the

protection of all participants and research data collected. After these processes were

completed, the Word files were uploaded to MAXQDA, creating a MAXQDA project file

for each semi-structured interview and focus group.

Descriptive Data

Participants for this study were chosen after site authorizations were acquired

from accredited Christian high schools in Southern California. After receiving site

authorization, the researcher contacted and scheduled a meet and greet session with all

secondary education science teachers from each school to explain the nature of the study

and gather interest. Once interest was identified, the researcher ensured all participants

met the following inclusion criteria: Christian secondary education science teacher,

working in an accredited Christian high school, two years’ experience, and was willing to

answer questions regarding science curriculum changes, societal values changes, and

traditional values changes. Additionally, all participants needed to be willing to answer a

demographic questionnaire regarding gender, race, age, years of experience, religious

affiliation, where they completed their post-secondary education, and whether the school

they were employed at was covenant or non-covenant.

This prompted participants to respond to this covenant or non-covenant Christian

school demographic question, determining whether the teachers were required to provide

a salvation testimony for employment. Watts and Kutschera (2021) noted that evangelical

Christianity, which entails covenant Christian schools, differs from mainline Christianity

because of their literalist views of the Bible as divinely inspired by God. This criterion in

the demographic questionnaire was crucial to better understand a Christian secondary

education science teacher’s views of creation. Additionally, teachers who provided

testimony of salvation potentially viewed Scripture as divinely inspired, making them

more likely to teach creation over evolutionary theory. Lastly, whether their school

actively taught evolution as fact, creation as fact, or both equally.

Data Paucity. Data paucity occurred in the data collection process. Grand Canyon

University policy dictates that semi-structured interview duration be 45 minutes per

interview. The shortest semi-structured interview was 27:04 minutes and the longest was

01:02:32, with an average duration of 44.68 minutes (4 over 45 minutes and 11 under 45

minutes) for all semi-structured interviews. Additionally, data paucity occurred for the

following reasons. First, the researcher lacked the understanding that all interviews must

be 45 minutes in duration according to GCU protocols. Second, the researcher should

have planned for additional follow-up questions in the semi-structured interview guide to

further develop the ability to interact and engage with both interactive and non-interactive

participants. Third, the researcher should have planned for equipment failure. During the

shortest interview (27:04), internet connectivity was sparse prompting the researcher to

have to restart the digital voice to text transcription device multiple times during the

interview. In reflection of these occurrences, the following protocols should be

established for future research.

To mitigate data paucity in future research, there are potential steps that could be

taken. First, robust protocols should be developed to facilitate a comprehensive interview

guide that incorporates additional follow-up questions for non-interactive participants.

Second, site location assessments should be conducted to verify the reliability of much

needed facility infrastructure (internet connectivity, etc.) to accommodate the recording

equipment utilized for data collection, in this case the Xupurtlk, S01 digital voice

recorder. Future reliability of the data collection site’s infrastructure to support recording

equipment is imperative, as indicated by this doctoral candidate’s previous research. By

following these enhanced and rigorous data collection methods, data richness could be

achieved.

Demographic Questionnaire. The researcher received 18 completed

demographic questionnaires (15 semi-structured interview participants and three

participants from focus group two that did not participate in semi-structured interviews).

These questionnaires were administered after informed consent was acquired and before

the interview process began. Nine of the 18 individuals were female and nine were male.

Nine of the participants were Caucasian, four were Hispanic, three were Asian, one was

Black, and one identified as other. Six participants were within the 22-30-year-old age

range, three participants were within the 31-40-year-old age range, five participants were

within the 41-50-year-old age range, one participant was within the 51-60-year-old age

range, and three participants were within the 61-70-year-old age range. Next, in the years

of experience category, two participants stated they had two years of experience, six

participants identified they had 3-10 years of experience, five participants stated they had

11-20 years of experience, three participants identified with 21-30 years of experience,

one participant stated 35 years of experience and one with other. These results to the first

four questions are highlighted in Table 4.

Table 4

Demographic Profile of Research Participants: Gender, Race, Age, Years Working

Participant in Order of Gender Race or Ethnicity Age Group Years Working

in Christian

Interview School

SSIP-1 Male Caucasian 41-50 11-20

SSIP-2 Male Caucasian 61-70 21-30

SSIP-3 Female Caucasian 22-30 3-10

SSIP-4 Female Caucasian 61-70 21-30

SSIP-5 Female Caucasian 41-50 21-30

SSIP-6 Male Caucasian 22-30 3-10

SSIP-7 Female Black 22-30 3-10

SSIP-8 Male Hispanic 31-40 11-20

SSIP-9 Male Caucasian 51-60 35

SSIP-10 Male Asian 22-30 2

SSIP-11 Female Hispanic 22-30 3-10

SSIP-12 Male Other 61-70 Other

SSIP-13 Female Caucasian 41-50 11-20

SSIP-14 Female Asian 31-40 3-10

SSIP-15 Female Hispanic 31-40 11-20

FG2P-1 Male Caucasian 22-30 3-10

FG2P-2 Female Hispanic 41-50 2

FG2P-3 Male Asian 41-50 11-20

Participants reported the following demographic breakdown regarding their

denomination (religious affiliation), post-secondary education, and highest level of

education. Seven participants identified as Baptist, nine participants identified as

Christian/non-denominational, one participant as Pentecostal, and one participant as

Presbyterian. Next, 10 participants attended a Christian university, six attended a secular

university, one attended both secular and Christian universities, and one attended a

Catholic university. Regarding level of education, eight teachers attained a bachelor’s

degree, eight a master’s degree, and two a doctoral degree. These findings are highlighted

in Table 5 below.

Table 5

Demographic Profile of Research Participants: Denomination, Teaching Level, Level of

Education

Participant in Order of

Interview

Denomination Post-Secondary

Education

Highest Level of

Education

SSIP-1 Baptist Christian Univ. Doctoral

SSIP-2 Christian Secular Univ. Masters

SSIP-3 Christian Christian Univ. Masters

SSIP-4 Christian Secular Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-5 Baptist Christian Univ. Masters

SSIP-6 Baptist Christian Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-7 Christian Christian Univ. Masters

SSIP-8 Christian Secular Univ. Masters

SSIP-9 Christian Secular Univ. Doctoral

SSIP-10 Baptist Christian Univ. Masters

SSIP-11 Baptist Christian Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-12 Baptist Christian Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-13 Pentecostal Christian Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-14 Presbyterian Christian Univ. Bachelors

SSIP-15 Christian Secular Univ. Masters

FG2P-1 Christian Secular Univ. Masters

FG2P-2 Christian Catholic Univ. Bachelors

FG2P-3 Baptist Christian/Secular Bachelors

Participants reported the following demographic breakdown regarding whether

their school was covenant or non-covenant, whether their school utilized a Christianbased

curriculum, and whether their school taught evolution as fact, creation as fact, or both

equally. Nine participants taught in a covenant school while nine taught in a noncovenant

school. Watts and Kutschera (2021) noted that evangelical Christianity, which entails

covenant Christian schools, differ from mainline Christianity because of their literalist

views of the Bible as divinely inspired from God. This criterion in the demographic

questionnaire was crucial to better understand a Christian secondary education science

teacher’s views of creation. Regarding Christian-based education, 15 schools utilized a

Christian-based curriculum while three used a secular curriculum. Lastly, 13 teachers

taught in a school that presented creation as fact, five taught in a school that presented

both evolution and creation equally, and zero teachers taught in a school that presented

evolution as fact. These findings are highlighted in Table 6 below.

Table 6

Demographic Profile of Research Participants: Type of School, Curriculum Use,

Teaching Evolution/Creation

Participant in Order of

Interview

Teach at Covenant or

NonCovenant School

Your School Uses

Christian-Based

Curriculum

Teach Evolution as

Fact, Creation as Fact,

Both Equally

SSIP-1 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-2 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-3 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-4 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-5 Non-Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-6 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-7 Non-Covenant Yes Both Equally

SSIP-8 Non-Covenant Yes Both Equally

SSIP-9 Non-Covenant No Creation as Fact

SSIP-10 Non-Covenant Yes Both Equally

SSIP-11 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-12 Non-Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

SSIP-13 Non-Covenant Yes Both Equally

SSIP-14 Non-Covenant No Creation as Fact

SSIP-15 Covenant No Both Equally

FG2P-1 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

FG2P-2 Non-Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

FG2P-3 Covenant Yes Creation as Fact

Semi-Structured Interviews. Fourteen participants completed a face-to-face,

semi-structured interview, and one Zoom semi-structured interview. The semi-structured

interviews were conducted in either the science teacher’s classroom, conference room, or

by Zoom video conferencing (11 in the classroom, three in the conference room, and one

via Zoom). The semi-structured interviews were performed between February 14, 2023,

and May 5, 2023. Interviews ranged from 27 to 61 minutes and lasted an average of 44.68

minutes and the total number of minutes recorded was 566.94 minutes. The singlespaced

interview transcripts ranged from 9 to 20 pages long, with the average number of single-

spaced transcripts being 14.5 pages and a total of 196 pages. This data is highlighted in

the participant interview summary which is Table 7.

Table 7

Participants Interview Summary

Participant in

Order of

Interview

Setting Interview

Date

Duration # Transcript

Pages (Times

New Roman,

Font size 12,

single-spaced)

SSIP-1 Classroom 021423 30:00 9

SSIP-2 Classroom 021423 42:05 12

SSIP-3 Classroom 021423 40:29 10

SSIP-4 Classroom 021423 27:04 9

SSIP-5 Classroom 022123 41:37 14

SSIP-6 Classroom 022123 29:52 9

SSIP-7 Classroom 022223 40:13 12

SSIP-8 Classroom 022223 35:44 12

SSIP-9 Conference Room 031723 50:04 16

SSIP-10 Conference Room 032023 50:36 18

SSIP-11 Classroom 032023 41:16 14

SSIP-12 Zoom 041223 36:05 13

SSIP-13 Classroom 041723 39:47 13

SSIP-14 Classroom 042423 52:06 15

SSIP-15 Conference Room 050523 01:02:32 20

MEAN N/A N/A 44.68 minutes 14.5

TOTAL N/A N/A 566.94 minutes 196

Focus Groups. Two focus groups were completed. The first focus group

consisted of four participants in a face-to-face interview scenario. The focus group

participation time was 01:25:55. The participants in group one produced 124 initial codes.

The second focus group consisted of six participants, three face-to-face and three

attending via Zoom video conferencing. The focus group participation time was

01:34:25. The participants in group two produced 134 initial codes for the discussion. The

total participation time for both focus groups was 03:00:20. The total initial codes

produced in both focus groups was 258 initial codes. This data is reflected and

highlighted on Table 8.

Table 8

Focus Group Participation Length and Codes Summary

Focus Group Participation Length Initial Codes Produced

FG1 01:25:55 124

FG2 01:34:25 134

Total 03:00:20 258

Finally, the raw data preparation consisted of the following sections: descriptive

data, data paucity, demographic questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and focus

groups. A section on data paucity was included because the average duration of the

semistructured interviews was 44.68 minutes, and the minimum duration, according to

Grand Canyon University protocol, is 45 minutes. Additionally, the demographic

questionnaire profile of the research participants was highlighted utilizing tables. Lastly, a

narrative of the semi-structured interviews and focus groups was illustrated to include

interview durations totaling 566.94 minutes and 196 pages of single-spaced transcripts.

Data Analysis Procedures

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

described increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian

Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The

researcher utilized a qualitative methodology to collect data from Christian secondary

education science teachers currently teaching in accredited Christian high schools. This

doctoral candidate focused on data collection from participants utilizing a demographic

questionnaire as an additional source of data and semi-structured interviews and focus

groups as primary data sources to explore what Christian secondary education science

teachers understood regarding this phenomenon. An inductive thematic analysis approach

was utilized to ensure data organically emerged from the transcripts. Finally, the

following research questions guided this qualitative descriptive study:

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

To prepare the data for analysis, the researcher utilized two data collection

devices. The first was a Xupurtlk, S01 digital voice recorder, audio to text transcription

device and the second source of data collection was the researcher’s iPhone 13 video

capability. The audio to text transcription device produced the initial transcript. Next, the

researcher watched all the video recordings to ensure that all audio to text transcriptions

were accurate. This process produced transcripts, which were given to all participants

(member checking) for review, ensuring that all transcripts produced were accurate to

their intent and meaning. No participants requested revisions to the transcripts. Finally,

the transcripts were downloaded to MAXQDA, and a data research project was started.

Data Analysis Steps

The researcher followed the six-phase inductive thematic analysis from Braun and

Clarke (2006) to analyze the data: (1) Familiarization, (2) Coding, (3) Search for themes,

(4) Review themes, (5) Defining and naming the themes, (6) Write-up. Additionally, the

researcher utilized the MAXQDA software to assist in the data analysis. Finally, the

following narrative details the processes included in analyzing the data.

Familiarization. The first step in the data analysis was becoming familiar with

the data collected. Familiarization was facilitated by an in-depth knowledge of and

engagement with the data set (Clarke et al., 2015). It was accomplished by reading and

noting items of potential interest (Braun & Clarke, 2014). After the learner transcribed all

words recorded from the semi-structured interviews and focus groups using a Xupurtlk

S01 digital voice recorder and an audio-to-text digital transcription device, familiarization

occurred by reading each transcript three times.

The secondary recording source was the researcher’s iPhone 13 video recording

feature. Once transcription was accomplished, the researcher saved the transcript as a

Word document file. At that point, the researcher was familiar with the word data because

the data was read and re-read, making notes of any analytic observations (Clarke et al.,

2015). For instance, Braun and Clarke (2014) noted that familiarization is not a passive

process of just understanding words; it is about starting to read the data as data. Finally,

once the familiarization process was completed, the researcher began the coding phase as

a systematic means of gathering, identifying, and labeling relevant bits of data, which

emerged organically from within the study.

Coding. Coding was the second step in data analysis. As a systematic process,

coding was about identifying and labeling relevant features of data within the study

(Clarke et al., 2015). Therefore, during the coding phase of the data analysis process, the

researcher engaged in a systematic review of the transcripts to identify recurring themes

and patterns. This phase commenced with an additional comprehensive reading of each

transcript to facilitate a holistic understanding of the content. Through this examination,

potential themes and patterns emerged, guiding subsequent analytical endeavors.

Subsequently, an open coding approach was employed, where segments of the text

were systematically labeled based on their content. An inductive methodology permitted

codes to organically arise from the data, rather than being predetermined (Braun &

Clarke, 2006). Significant statements, phrases, or concepts within the transcripts were

identified as key units of analysis, subsequently coded using descriptive labels or

keywords reflective of their underlying meaning or content. For instance, an interview

participant, labeled as semi-structured interview participant ten (SSIP-10), noted that

mainstream academia still calls evolution the theory of evolution but promotes this theory

as a fact. Therefore, the descriptive label given this chunk of data was evolution as fact.

These processes are further highlighted in Appendix F.

Additionally, to ensure methodological rigor and consistency throughout the

coding process, a codebook (Appendix F) was developed. To create this codebook,

Microsoft Word was utilized. The document delineated each code, accompanied by its

definition and examples drawn from the data. Serving as a reference guide, the codebook

facilitated uniformity in coding decisions and interpretations across the transcripts,

providing a comprehensive description for each code (Saunders et al., 2023). The coding

process unfolded iteratively, necessitating multiple engagements with the data to refine

and revise codes considering emergent insights and patterns. For example, through this

iterative process, patterns of codes emerged relating to social media exposure, outside

influences on Christian secondary education science students, and increased references to

evolutionary theory in newer curriculum editions, to name a few. The codebook further

highlights the emergent insights and patterns (Appendix F).

Once the coding processes were accomplished, a project file was created in

MAXQDA to further characterize by inductive methodology means, the organic

identification of significant statements, phrases, or concepts within the transcripts.

Additionally, the MAXQDA software was instrumental in discerning clusters of codes

and coalescing them around common ideas and key units of analysis, as well as creating a

greater awareness of these chunks of data by utilizing a color-coding system (Amanfi,

2019). For example, in the MAXQDA project file, all codes referring to philosophy and

worldview were coded light blue and all codes referring to public school transfers were

coded burgundy.

Furthermore, through this iterative process, the researcher discerned clusters of

codes coalescing around common themes or ideas, while also attending to outliers or

discrepant cases that provided nuanced insights. For instance, common themes and ideas

emerged around social media exposure, societal values, and secular ideologies to name a

few (Appendix F). Patterns and variations within the data were meticulously scrutinized,

with attention directed towards elucidating relationships between different themes or

concepts. This systematic approach to coding produced 795 codes, which were reduced to

268 meaningful chunks of data that were relevant to the phenomenon researched

(Appendix F). Finally, these codes were further reduced by utilizing the following

processes: (1) the assigned codes identified segments of data representing passages of

interest, (2) that the codes represented meaningful segments of text (shorter than a

paragraph and longer than a few words), and (3) the codes formed a complete (or full)

thought (Saunders et al., 2023). Once these coding processes were completed, the

researcher began looking for initial themes.

Search for Initial Themes. Following the familiarization and coding phases, the

researcher proceeded to identify initial themes within the data by capturing crucial

aspects in the data in relation to the phenomenon that represented some level of patterned

response or meaning within the data set (Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 82). This phase

involved a systematic search for recurring patterns, topics, or concepts that emerged from

the data, reflecting the essence of the participants' experiences and perspectives. The

initial theme search commenced with a close examination of the coded data, focusing on

identifying overarching patterns or clusters of codes that represented salient aspects of the

phenomenon under investigation. The step involved reviewing the coded segments within

each transcript, noting similarities, differences, and relationships between codes, and

further sorting them into potential themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). For example, multiple

codes highlighted the increased presence of evolutionary theory in each new edition of

the science curriculum. These codes were grouped together under the initial theme,

Evolution-based curriculum. This process of coded grouping is further highlighted in

Appendix F.

Additionally, as the researcher delved deeper into the data, initial themes began to

emerge organically, identified by shared characteristics or recurrent ideas across multiple

coded segments. These emergent initial themes were not predefined but instead arose

from the data itself, reflecting the rich and multifaceted nature of the participants'

narratives. To facilitate the identification of initial themes, the researcher employed a

process of constant comparison, whereby coded segments were compared within and

across transcripts to discern commonalities and differences (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The

iterative process involved moving back and forth between the data and the emerging

initial themes, refining, and revising those considering new insights and interpretations.

For instance, the researcher utilized the codebook, as well as the MAXQDA project files

to refine and revise initial themes by color-coding the emerging initial themes and

moving codes from theme to theme as new insights and interpretations emerged.

Next, memo writing played a crucial role in the initial theme searching process,

allowing the researcher to document thoughts, reflections, and analytical decisions as

they engaged with the data. Memos served as a tool for capturing emerging ideas,

refining conceptualizations, and generating insights that informed the development of

initial themes. Overall, the process of searching for initial themes involved a

comprehensive and systematic analysis of the coded data, guided by the overarching aim

of identifying patterns, topics, and concepts that encapsulated the essence of the research

phenomenon (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The iterative approach laid the groundwork for the

subsequent phases of the inductive thematic analysis, providing a solid foundation for

indepth exploration and interpretation of the data.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. Additionally, from the emerging

patterns, topics, and concepts, the investigator developed 29 initial themes, which are

highlighted in Appendix F, as well as Tables 9 through 16. Table 9 highlights the codes,

initial themes, and theme meaning for the first four of 29 initial themes, utilizing shading

for easy readability. The initial themes are Outside Influences, Critical Thinking, Teacher

Bias, and Philosophy and Worldview.

Table 9

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 1-4

Codes Initial Themes Initial Theme Meaning

Outside Influences

Influence Outside of School

Evolution Influence Outside of Christian

School.

Continuous Battle Over Our Kids.

Outside Influences The influences that occur

outside of Christian

education.

Critical Thinking (2)

Things that are true agree

Thinking Critically

Evidence-based Conclusions

Question Everything

Critical Thinking Teaching from an

evidencebased perspective.

Science and religion are bias

Secular curriculum biased towards evolution.

Science bias

Biased toward teaching creation

Teaching unbiased

Evolution bias in secular textbooks.

All teachers are biased (2)

Teaching and curriculum bias

Scientific bias (5)

Secular textbook bias

Christian teacher bias

Everyone is bias

Foundation for your bias

Scientifically biased

Science bias and pride

Teacher Bias Science and religion teaches

their perspective as fact.

Philosophy and Worldview

Worldview skews scientific facts

Today’s worldview influences the acceptance of

evolutionary theory.

Christian Worldview

Secular philosophies are not neutral.

My worldview affects my conclusions.

Affected by their worldview

Christian worldview or Christian philosophy.

Worldview

Biblical Worldview

Philosophical Argument

Societal philosophies are in opposition to

biblical values.

Christian values and Christian worldviews.

Philosophy and

Worldview

An individual’s belief

system.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 10 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next three of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. The initial themes were How

Creation/Evolution is Presented, Secular Curriculum Approach, and Apologetics Class.

Table 10

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meanings: Theme 5-7

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Presentation

Teaching both sides (9)

Teaching Honestly

Compare and Contrast

Approach

Equal Time

More time teaching evolution is dangerous.

How you present evolution and creation.

Teach both Equally (2)

Teacher shapes the classroom

Equal time creates greater acceptance.

Teacher Delivery

Teaching both sides fair

Science and Religion

Evidence-based conclusions

Fair and Honest

Teacher Approach vs. Curriculum.

Emphasis vs. Acceptance

Curriculum approach not curriculum change.

(3)

Students believe what teachers say.

How

Creation/Evolution

Is Presented

How the teacher presents the

topics of evolutionary theory

and biblical creation in the

classroom.

Secular curriculum approach

Secular curriculum tells students evolution is

fact.

Secular curriculum and social media promote

evolutionary theory acceptance.

Secular curriculum and social media support

each other’s thought processes.

Secular curriculum omits truth s to support

their views.

Curriculum influences acceptance of

evolution.

Secular curriculum teaches evolution as fact

Secular curriculum (2)

Secular Curriculum

Approach

How a teacher approaches

secular science curriculum (the

teaching of evolutionary theory)

and whether the curriculum

changes actually change the

student’s outcome to the belief

of evolutionary theory.

Apologetics Class (4) Apologetics Class Theology Class

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 11 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next three of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. These initial themes were

Creation/Evolution by Faith, Public School Transfers, and Evolution-based Curriculum.

Table 11

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 8-10

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Faith in something (6)

Lead by faith and out by faith

Firm in their faith

Faith (2)

Evolution and creation must be accepted by faith.

It takes faith to believe both

Accept not by faith

More faith to believe evolution

Evolutionists have a faith in what they believe.

Taking it by faith

Science accepted by faith

Loss of faith in Christianity

Evolutionists have a strong faith in what they believe.

Wavering faith

Creation/Evolution

by Faith

Everyone has faith in

something whether it

is biblical creation or

the scientific

approach to

evolutionary theory.

Changing student body potentially increases the evolution

acceptance.

Public school students influence Christian schools in

evolutionary theory.

Public school integration can influence values.

Open enrollment introduces more secular views.

Kids coming from public schools believe evolution.

Public school transfers

Public School

Transfers

Students that transfer

from public schools to

Christian schools.

Evolution-based curriculum (2)

Evolution as fact is not debatable

Evolution as fact embedded everywhere in secular

textbooks.

Secular thought reports evolution as fact

Evolution presented as fact (7)

Explicit evolution in science textbooks

Shaping thought on evolution at the elementary level.

Science textbooks have more evolution now

More evolution in each textbook

Teaching evolution as fact impacts acceptance

Evolutionary science is a religion

Subtle message of evolution

Evolution-based

Curriculum

Curriculum that

emphasizes evolution

and evolution as fact.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 12 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next four of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. These initial themes were Social

Media Exposure, Christian Foundation, Covenant Schools, and Perspectives.

Table 12

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 11 - 15

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Social media influences on students

Social media influences what students believe

Social media accepts evolutionary theory as fact

Social media influences on students

Students place more stock in what they hear on social

media than the classroom.

Students can get evolution information on the internet.

Opinions from outside the school

Social media mocking Christian views

Influence towards evolution by TV, Hollywood

Social media influence (2)

Access to different points of view on their cell phones.

Exposure to evolution by outside world

Students getting information from outside sources

Society influences evolution acceptance

Social media negatively influences traditional biblical

values.

Cell phone influences (2)

Christian values negatively influenced

Evolution influences outside schools

Social Media vs. Evolution

Social media exposure

Students and Societal Information

Social Media

Exposure

Evolutionary theory

influences on

Christian students

from social media

exposure.

Foundation (7)

Christian Foundation

Foundation is strong

Christian strong foundation

Foundation based on Christian principles

Great starting point

Hold to the truth

Christian

Foundation

What kind of training,

whether biblical or

secular, does a

Christian secondary

education science

student receive?

Covenant Schools

Academic vs. Religious Schooling

Covenant

Schools

Schools that require a

testimony of salvation.

Christianity from a science perspective

Perspective

Perspective A particular attitude

towards an idea or

concept.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 13 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next four of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. These initial themes were

Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism, Secular Textbooks, Secular Ideology, and

Parental Influence.

Table 13

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 16-19

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Humanism, Secularism, Post-modernism

Anti-Christian

Secularism is anti-Bible

Secularism in Christianity

Secularism is anti-Christian

Secularism promotes no God

Evolution is a religion of Humanism, Secularism, and

Postmodernism.

Humanism in society

(ABC) Anything but Christ

Humanism in Christianity

Devoid of Religion

Specifically, Humanist

Specifically, Secular and Humanist

Secularism, Naturalism, and Humanism

Humanism,

Secularism,

Post-modernism

Worldviews that are

prevalent in Southern

California societal

values.

Secular textbooks promote mainstream science only

Students can be influenced by the textbook they are using

Textbooks are not neutral

Science only gives their side

Using secular textbooks endorses secular thought

Secular science doesn’t teach both sides

Secular textbooks impeach themselves

Evolution entrenched in academia

Secular indoctrination in secular textbooks

Secular thought influences evolution acceptance

Publishers have an opinion

Secular

Textbooks

Textbooks used by

secular organizations

such as the public

school system.

Secular Ideology

Secular Christians

Secular ideology is a religion

Exposure to secular education

Christian influences vs. Secular influences

Secular

Ideology

Mainstream belief

system, which

promotes anti-God

and anti-Bible

values.

Parental Influence (2)

Relationship with parents

Secular parents and evolution

Parental

Influence

Parental influence on

a secondary education

science student.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed 29 initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F. Table 14

includes the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next two of 29 initial

themes. These initial themes were Societal Values are Prevalent, and Upbringing.

Table 14

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 20 - 21

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Societal values are prevalent

Societal values impact our belief system

Values are the enemy in society today

Societal culture rooted in idolatry

SoCal societal values are not neutral

Some students believe society over Christian beliefs

Societal truths are seeping in Christian communities

Accepting anything contrary to traditional values

Church-run schools identify with church values

Traditional biblical values (2)

Christian values

Openness to teach traditional values

What their values are

Societal values are opposed to biblical values

Societal Influences

No biblical values lead to societal values acceptance

Moving away from traditional biblical values

Societal values

Socially Acceptable

Societal Values

are Prevalent

Modern day societal

values are strong in

Southern California.

Upbringing (7)

Religious Upbringing

Traditional biblical beliefs (2)

Parents play an important role

Strong relationship with parents

Strength in biblical beliefs

Depends on the home

Strong belief system

Christian upbringing

Christian environment

Christian home

Strong Christian background

Strong Christian upbringing

Strong Christian homes

Traditional Christian beliefs

Upbringing How an individual

Christian secondary

education science

student is raised in

Southern California by

their parents.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 15 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the next six of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. These initial themes were Academia

denounces Christianity, The Bible Matters, Religious Denominations, Christian

Textbooks, Academic Standards, and Evolution is Not Scientific.

Table 15

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 22 - 27

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Misinformation and Disinformation

Brainwashing

Indoctrination

Mainstream science ridicule of Christianity

Academia denouncing Christianity

Secular science never gives credence to Christian

viewpoints.

Academia views creation as fairy tales

Academia

Denounces

Christianity

Information that

purposefully misleads

students regarding the

topic of Christianity.

The Bible Matters

Bible is the final authority

Biblical convictions

Biblical point of view

Biblical principles

The Bible

Matters

The Bible you use

determines traditional

values or not.

Religious denominations

Religion type changes science acceptance

Depends on what religion

Religious denominations have different views on

evolution and creation.

What type of religion

Religion matters

Religious

Denominations

Different

denominations have

different levels of

biblical acceptance.

Inferior Christian Textbooks

Christian curriculum

No change in Christian school curriculum

Christian curriculum better explains evolution in new

textbooks.

No curriculum change

Christian

Textbooks

Textbooks published by

Christian publishing

companies.

Must teach evolution to meet California standards

Evolution required for accreditation

Accreditation influences evolutionary theory being

accepted.

Academic

Standards

The guidelines put in

place to operate a

public or private

Christian school in

California.

Evolution is not scientific

Reputation to keep

Foolishness of evolution

Control the narrative through curriculum

Evolution Is Not

Scientific

The thought process

that evolutionary theory

is not based on true

science.

To distinguish the codes assigned to the initial themes, these themes were visually

differentiated by highlighting every other theme. Tables 9-16 present the initial themes,

categorized independently of the research questions. From the emerging patterns, the

researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes, which are highlighted in Appendix F.

Table 16 highlights the codes, initial themes, and theme meaning for the final three of 29

initial themes, utilizing shading for easy readability. These initial themes were Cultural

Influences, Changing Christian Culture, and Curriculum Doesn’t Matter.

Table 16

Codes, Initial Themes, and Theme Meaning: Theme 28 - 30

Codes Initial Themes Theme Meaning

Cultural influences

Evolutionary Theory

Societal influence on what students believe

Students are shaped by the culture they live in

Societal influences

Can’t avoid evolution in society

Popular people promote evolutionary theory

Today’s student influences

Peer Influence (2)

Societal Pressure

Cultural Influences (2)

The culture around you affects you

Culture is anti-God

Student Influences

Students looking for a way out of believing creation

Go with the flow

Trying to fit in

Peer Pressure

Cultural

Influence

Students influenced by

the culture around

them.

Changing Christian Culture

Cultural Christians believe both evolution and creation

Secular Christians

Evolution is more accepted in Christian culture

Evolutionary theory is more of an issue in Christian

schools today.

Christian teachers believing evolution

Culturally Christian (2)

Families sending their kids to Christian schools for

different reasons.

I teach evolution as a religion

Evolution is more in Christian schools

Important that evolution is taught in Christian schools

Changing

Christian Culture

Changes that are

occurring within

Christian academia.

Curriculum Doesn’t Matter Curriculum

Doesn’t Matter

The curriculum you use

in the classroom

doesn’t influence

evolution or creation.

In review, the initial theme search commenced with a close examination of the

coded data, focusing on identifying overarching patterns or clusters of codes that

represented salient aspects of the phenomenon under investigation. Additionally, initial

themes were not predefined but instead arose organically from the data itself, reflecting

the rich and multifaceted nature of the participants' narratives. Next, memo writing played

a crucial role in the initial theme search, allowing the researcher to document thoughts,

reflections, and analytical decisions as they engaged with the data. Finally, once the

twenty-nine initial themes were selected, further review of the initial themes was crucial

for proper analysis.

Review Themes. The themes identified at this point of the analysis were initial

themes and were revised and refined throughout the developing analysis (Braun &

Clarke, 2014). The researcher’s attention shifted from the interpretation of individual

chunks of data to the interpretation of the data across the data set, again allowing for

themes to arise organically. These processes required the investigator to revisit the initial

themes to determine whether some of the initial themes produced sufficient data to

support a theme.

To determine whether an initial theme constituted a theme, the researcher utilized

Patton’s criteria for judging initial themes – internal homogeneity and external

heterogeneity, allowing for clear and identifiable distinctions between the themes (Braun

& Clarke, 2006). The first step in this process involved reviewing the data at the coded

data extract level (internal homogeneity) to determine whether the initial theme formed a

coherent pattern. The investigator read all the collated extracts for each initial theme to,

(1) determine whether enough data existed to support a theme, (2) that the data might be

too diverse, and (3) that some of the initial themes should be thematically consolidated.

For example, the initial themes Secular Curriculum Approach and Secular Textbooks

were consolidated to produce the theme Secular Science Curriculum as Fact.

The initial themes Apologetics Class, The Bible Matters, Covenant Schools,

Perspectives, Parental Influence, and Curriculum Doesn’t Matter were discarded because

they did not fit the overall story narrative of the data set. This iterative process reworked

themes and data extracts to form renamed themes or new themes. A thematic map was

created utilizing Venngage software (Appendix K) for visualization. Once these processes

were accomplished, a similar procedure occurred, but concerning the entire data set.

To determine the validity of the themes and whether the thematic map accurately

reflected the meanings in the data set, an analysis of the entire data set (external

heterogeneity) was conducted. At this point, the data was re-read to determine whether

the themes worked in relationship to the data set and whether any additional data needed

to be coded within themes that may have previously been missed in earlier coding phases.

At this stage, some re-coding occurred, and the thematic map was revised to reflect the

re-coding that occurred (Appendix K). For instance, the codes Societal Truths are

Seeping in Christian Communities and Accepting Anything Contrary to Traditional

Values were moved from the initial theme Societal Values are Prevalent to the theme,

Changing Christian Culture and consolidated.

The themes identified after these processes provided the researcher with an

accurate identification of themes and how those themes blended to tell the overall story

regarding the data. At this point, a total of ten themes were generated to answer the

research questions. The following are the research questions:

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The

themes were Social Media Exposure, Academia Denounces Creation, and

Public-School Transfers.

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The themes were Academic

Standards in Curriculum, Science Textbooks present more Evolutionary

Theory, and Secular Science Curriculum as Fact.

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The themes were

Evolutionary Theory Worldview, and Humanism, Secularism, Post-

Modernism.

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The themes were Changing

Christian Culture, and Societal Values Impact Christian Belief System. These themes

appear in Appendix F. Table 17 highlights themes, theme meanings, and theme

exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for clarification to address Research Question 1:

How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 17

Theme, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for Research Question 1

Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Social Media

Exposure

Evolutionary

theory influences

on Christian

secondary

education science

students from

social media

“…social media has a higher credibility compared to

what they hear in the class because that’s what they

know.”

“…what goes into their heads is no longer coming from

the school or church for that matter, because they’re so

connected to the outside world through social media.”

exposure.

Theme 2.

Academia Denounces

Creation

Mainstream

academic society

views creation as

lacking scientific

evidence.

“…when it comes to any kind of alternative scientific

theory, they, it's like ABC ‘anything but Christ’, that's

pretty much what's being accepted out there.”

“…all the language is coded to make the mainstream

opinion of the science, to make it sound like its

irrefutable fact and that there is no debate.”

Theme 3.

Public School

Transfers

Students that

transfer from

public schools to

Christian schools.

“…I would find that most students who come in already

believe or have a leaning towards evolution. I’m not

changing their mind; they’re just staying in that camp.”

“…because we have a diverse student body here…some

students who would say there, you know, evolutionists

and believe in evolution…there’s infighting that happens

in the class over these discussions…”

From the emerging patterns, the researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes

that were reduced to 10 themes highlighted in Appendix F. By identifying the themes, the

researcher was able to understand how they interrelated and contributed to the overall

story revealed by the data. Table 18 highlights the themes, theme meanings, and

exemplary quotes, utilizing alternate shading of lines for clarification to address Research

Question 2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in curriculum, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 18

Theme, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for Research Question 2

Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Academic

Standards in

Curriculum

The guidelines put

in place to operate a

public or private

Christian school in

California

“Yeah, if we're going to be accredited, and we don't

mention evolution, then we're actually probably not

meeting standards to be accredited.”

“…from a practical point of view, like we have to

(present evolutionary theory), in order for our, you

know, diplomas to be respected.”

Theme 2.

Science Textbooks

Present More

Evolutionary Theory

Curriculum that

emphasizes

evolution and

evolution as fact.

“We use secular textbooks. And so, it's filled with

evolution, particularly every new publication that

comes out, there's more and more.”

“…I’ve seen examples in textbooks where…it

describes differences between science and

pseudoscience, and you see how they shape (the

narrative) even from like elementary kids.” Continuing

on, participant ten noted that, “…all the language is

coded to make…mainstream opinion of the sciences, to

make it sound like its irrefutable fact and that there is

no debate.”

Theme 3.

Secular Science

Curriculum as Fact

The teaching of the

theory of evolution

as factual.

“…anytime you have young, moldable minds…they

are prone to accepting what they are told…so then a

change that presents evolution as fact…is potentially

going to have a great impact on the acceptance of it…

(Evolutionary theory).”

“…we were asked to use secular textbooks…evolution

was embedded everywhere…and it is taught as fact for

sure.”

From the emerging patterns, the researcher developed 29 initial themes that were

further reduced to 10 themes, which are depicted in Appendix F. Inductive thematic

analysis yielded key themes, allowing the researcher to construct a coherent narrative that

captured the essence of the data. Table 19 highlights the themes, theme meanings, and

exemplary quotes, utilizing the alternate shading of lines for clarification to address

Research Question 3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 19

Theme, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for Research Question 3

Themes Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Evolutionary Theory

Worldview

An individual’s belief

system that the theory

of evolution is fact.

‘…when it comes to any kind of alternative scientific

theory, it’s like ABC, anything but Christ, that’s pretty

much what’s being accepted out there.’

“Absolutely, what you’re seeing in culture around you,

whether that’s what your Christian school is teaching

or not, what you see in your culture…is going to have

a massive effect on that,” referring to an evolutionary

theory worldview.

Theme 2.

Humanism,

Secularism,

Postmodernism

Worldviews that are

prevalent in Southern

California societal

values and promote a

society devoid of

God and religion.

“However, nowadays, even in Christian communities’

things are so blurred that there’s no right and wrong…

and it’s leading to issues with evolutionism and

creationism…and they absolutely bring it to the

classroom…”

“…what secularism promotes is very anti-biblical.”

Participant one from the same focus group further

noted that secularism is anti-Bible, because “…we’re

just so self-absorbed, and that’s what secularism

promotes, that’s very anti-biblical.”

From the emerging patterns, the researcher developed twenty-nine initial themes,

reduced to 10 themes that are further illustrated in Appendix F. Through inductive

thematic analysis, the researcher identified recurring themes within the data. These

themes provided a clear understanding of the underlying story and how these

interconnected elements contribute to the overall narrative. Table 20 highlights the

themes, theme meanings, and exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for clarification to

address Research Question 4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 20

Theme, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for Research Question 4

Themes Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Changing Christian

Culture

Changes that are

occurring within

Christian academia

and the Christian

community.

“…in Bible class last year, we hit on some really

challenging topics. And one of those we touched on

with all of our secondary students, the 7th to 12th

grade, about 160 whatever, kids. And we talked about

creation, evolution, because something that I would

not have imagined being a big issue when I was in

high school is now in a Christian School becoming

more and more a problem (evolution acceptance).

“…from what I see in Christian culture, as I view it,

through media…even in popular literature that the

idea of accepting evolutionary theory and being

Christian is becoming more prevalent than

historically it has.”

Theme 2.

Societal Values

Impact Christian

Belief System

Modern day societal

values in Southern

California that

influence the belief

system of Christians.

“…as a whole our society, and specifically Southern

California seems to be progressively moving away

from traditional biblical values. And, that movement

away from traditional biblical values has and is

leading to an acceptance of anything that is counter to

those biblical values.”

“…if you devalue one thing…it allows prevalence of

another thing (referring to societal values over

traditional values)…if you are able to partition your

life up into different things (academics, accreditation,

the need for academic acceptance, a safe

environment, etc.)…it kind of devalues Christianity

(traditional values)…”

In review, to determine whether an initial theme produced sufficient data to be

considered a theme, the researcher utilized Patton’s criteria for judging initial themes –

internal homogeneity and external heterogeneity, allowing for clear and identifiable

distinctions between the themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Internal homogeneity was

exercised by reviewing the data at the coded data extract level to determine whether the

initial theme formed a coherent pattern. Additionally, to determine the validity of the

themes, an analysis of the entire data set (external heterogeneity) was conducted. Next,

the data was re-read to determine whether the themes worked in relationship to the data

set and whether any additional data needed to be coded within themes that may have

previously been missed in earlier coding phases. Finally, the researcher once again

reviewed the themes to determine whether the theme names and definitions accurately

described the data set.

Defining and Naming Themes. The process of defining themes determined what

was unique and specific about each (Braun & Clarke, 2014) and provided clarity for each

theme, leading to a road map for the final write-up (Clarke et al., 2015). By providing

definitions, the researcher ensured each theme had a clear focus, scope, and purpose,

providing a rich, coherent, and meaningful picture of the dominant patterns in the data set

(Braun & Clarke, 2014). Additionally, this step ensured the development and enrichment

of the analytic narrative or the interpretative commentary of the data (Clarke et al., 2015),

providing a rich and detailed description and interpretation of the theme titles that aided

in presenting rich, interconnected, and logical analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2014). Part of

this rich and detailed descriptive interpretation determined whether the theme names

needed further revision.

Revising the themes was another aspect of the development process because good

theme names capture the essence of each theme. To develop the appropriate theme names,

the researcher engaged in the iterative process and critical reflection of the findings,

which encapsulated coherent and compelling descriptions to determine the need for

further theme name revisions. Moreover, the researcher utilized quotes from the

transcripts to support the rigor of the theme names and definitions. For example, the

theme Social Media Exposure incorporated the following definition: Evolutionary theory

influences on Christian secondary education science students from social media

exposure. The exemplary quote utilized to develop rigor for this theme was as follows:

“…social media has a higher credibility compared to what they hear in the class because

that’s what they know.”

Once the themes were defined, named or renamed, and quotes selected, the results

to the research questions were addressed and re-addressed, creating a theme revision from

10 to 9 themes. Additionally, theme two for research question one was renamed from

Academia Denounces Creation to Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation as it more

accurately defined the theme. The process identified what was interesting about the

themes and revised themes and why. Table 21 displays the themes, revised themes, theme

meanings, and exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for clarification to address Research

Question 1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 21

Themes, Revised Themes, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for RQ1

Themes Revised Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quotes

Theme 1.

Social Media

Exposure

Theme 1.

Social Media

Exposure

Evolutionary theory

influences on

Christian students

from social media

exposure.

“…social media has a higher credibility

compared to what they hear in the class

because that’s what they know.”

“…what goes into their heads is no

longer coming from the school or

church for that matter, because they’re

so connected to the outside world

through social media.”

Theme 2.

Academia

Denounces

Creation

Theme 2.

Mainstream

Academia

Denounces

Creation

Mainstream academic

society views creation

as lacking scientific

evidence.

“…when it comes to any kind of

alternative scientific theory, they, it's

like ABC ‘anything but Christ’, that's

pretty much what's being accepted out

there.”

“…all the language is coded to make

the mainstream opinion of the science,

to make it sound like its irrefutable fact

and that there is no debate.”

Theme 3.

Public School

Transfers

Theme 3.

Public School

Transfers

Students that transfer

from public schools to

Christian schools.

“…I would find that most students who

come in already believe or have a

leaning towards evolution. I’m not

changing their mind; they’re just

staying in that camp.”

“…because we have a diverse student

body here…some students who would

say there, you know, evolutionists and

believe in evolution…there’s infighting

that happens in the class over these

discussions…”

Once the themes were defined, named, and renamed, as well as exemplary quotes

selected, the results of the research questions were re-addressed, creating a theme

reduction from 10 themes to nine themes. Therefore, the theme renaming process reduced

three previously established themes and consolidated them into two themes. The theme,

Secular Science Curriculum as Fact was revised as a sub-theme of Science Textbooks

Present more Evolutionary Theory. The theme definition and renaming process produced

two themes: Academic Standards in Curriculum and Science Textbooks Present more

Evolutionary Theory. Table 22 displays the themes, revised themes, theme meanings, and

exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for easy readability, which are attributed to the

themes in Research Question 2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe changes in curriculum, which might explain

the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

Table 22

Themes, Revised Themes, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for RQ2

Themes Revised Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Academic

Standards in

Curriculum

Theme 1.

Academic

Standards in

Curriculum

The guidelines put

in place to operate

a public or private

Christian school in

California

“Yeah, if we're going to be accredited,

and we don't mention evolution, then

we're actually probably not meeting

standards to, to, be accredited.”

“…from a practical point of view, like

we have to (present evolutionary

theory), in order for our, you know,

diplomas to be respected.”

Theme 2.

Science Textbooks

Present More

Evolutionary

Theory

Theme 3.

Secular Science

Theme 2.

Science

Textbooks

Present More

Evolutionary

Theory

Curriculum that

emphasizes

evolution and

evolution as fact.

“We use secular textbooks. And so, it's

filled with evolution, particularly every

new publication that comes out, there's

more and more.”

“…I’ve seen examples in textbooks

where…it describes differences between

science and pseudo-science, and you see

how they shape (the narrative) even

from like elementary kids.” Continuing,

participant ten noted that, “…all the

language is coded to make…mainstream

opinion of the sciences, to make it sound

like its irrefutable fact and that there is

no debate.”

Curriculum as Fact

Once the themes were defined, named, or renamed, and quotes from the data

selected, the results of the research questions were addressed and re-addressed if needed,

creating a theme reduction from 10 themes to nine revised themes. Additionally, the

theme Evolutionary Theory Worldview was changed to, The Culture Around you

Influences You to better describe the data. Next, the second theme, Humanism,

Secularism, Post-Modernism, was placed as the first theme, and The Culture Around you

Influences You was placed as the second theme to better tell the story of the data. This

process identified what was interesting about the themes and why. Table 23 depicts the

themes, revised themes, theme meanings, and exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for

easy readability which are attributed to the themes in Research Question 3: How do

Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools

describe changes in societal values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the

theory of evolution?

Table 23

Themes, Revised Themes, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for RQ3

Themes Revised Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Humanism,

Secularism,

Post-

Modernism

Theme 1.

Humanism,

Secularism,

Post-

modernism

Worldviews that are

prevalent in Southern

California societal

values, promoting no

right and wrong and a

society devoid of God

and religion.

“However, nowadays, even in Christian

communities’ things are so blurred that

there’s no right and wrong…and it’s

leading to issues with evolutionism and

creationism…and they absolutely bring

it to the classroom…”

“…what secularism promotes is very

anti-biblical.” Participant one from the

same focus group further noted that

secularism is anti-Bible, because “…

we’re just so self-absorbed, and that’s

what secularism promotes, that’s very

anti-biblical.”

Theme 2.

The Culture

Around You

Influences You

Theme 2.

The Culture

Around You

Influences You

Students are

influenced and shaped

by their surroundings

in society.

“Absolutely, what you’re seeing in

culture around you, whether that’s what

your Christian school is teaching or not,

what you see in your culture…is going

to have a massive effect on that,”

referring to how students are shaped by

the culture they live in.

“…because it’s shaped by the culture,

and the culture is anti-God (referring to

the changing secular, societal,

nonreligious influences) …people don’t

want accountability. They don’t want to

believe in creation, because then there’s

a creator, and then you’re accountable to

that creator.”

Once the themes were defined, redefined, named or renamed, and exemplary

quotes selected, the results to the research questions were addressed and re-addressed to

create a theme reduction from 10 to nine themes. Additionally, theme one was changed

from Societal Values Impact Christian Belief System to Societal Values Influence

Traditional Values to better define the data. The defining and naming process identified

what was interesting about the themes and revised themes and why. Table 24 displays the

themes, revised themes, theme meanings, and exemplary quotes, utilizing shading for

easy readability which are attributed to the two themes in Research Question 4: How do

Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools

describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the increased acceptance of

the theory of evolution?

Table 24

Themes, Revised Themes, Theme Meaning, and Exemplary Quotes for RQ4

Themes Revised Theme Theme Meaning Exemplary Quote

Theme 1.

Societal

Values

Impact

Christian

Belief

System

Theme 1.

Societal Values

Influence

Traditional

Values

Modern day

societal values in

Southern California

that influence the

belief system of

Christians.

“…if you devalue one thing…it allows

prevalence of another thing (referring societal

values over traditional values)…if you are

able to partition your life up into different

things (academics, accreditation, the need for

academic acceptance, a safe environment, etc.)

…it kind of devalues Christianity

(traditional values)…”

“…as a whole our society, and specifically

Southern California seems to be progressively

moving away from traditional biblical values.

And, that movement away from traditional

biblical values has and is leading to an

acceptance of anything that is counter to those

biblical values.”

Theme 2.

Changing

Christian

Culture

Theme 2.

Changing

Christian

Culture

Changes that are

occurring within

Christian academia

and the Christian

community.

“…in Bible class last year, we hit on some

really challenging topics. And one of those we

touched on with all of our secondary students,

the 7th to 12th grade, about 160 whatever,

kids. And we talked about creation, evolution,

because something that I would not have

imagined being a big issue when I was in high

school is now in a Christian School becoming

more and more a problem (evolution

acceptance).

“…from what I see in Christian culture, as I

view it, through media…even in popular

literature that the idea of accepting

evolutionary theory and being Christian is

becoming more prevalent than historically it

has.”

In review, the process of defining themes determined what was unique and

specific about each (Braun & Clarke, 2014) and provided clarity for each theme, leading

to a road map for the final write-up (Clarke et al., 2015). Next, revising the themes was

another aspect of the iterative process because good theme names captured the essence of

each theme. To accomplish this, the researcher utilized quotes from the transcripts to

support the rigor of the theme names. Finally, the researcher was ready to write the results

once these processes were accomplished.

Write-Up. The final written report provided a concise and logical explanation of

the data and themes identified by weaving their analytic narrative with vivid and

compelling data extracts (Clarke et al., 2015). This researcher ensured this process

occurred through the iterative processes of editing coherent, concise, non-repetitive,

logical, and interesting accounts of the story, both within and across the themes

developed. Next, the write-up provided ample evidence of themes highlighted within the

data set, utilizing enough quotes to demonstrate rigor, building a case for the prevalence

of each theme developed. Additionally, the researcher utilized transcripts, which vividly

captured the essence of the point the researcher was making. Finally, this process avoided

discriminatory language and implicit moral judgments (Braun & Clarke, 2014). Within

this narrative, the researcher provided the following elements in the reporting process:

introduction, descriptive findings, data analysis procedures, results, and summary; all of

which were instrumental to the purpose statement for this study.

Results

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

described the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The unit of

analysis was 18 Christian secondary education science teachers (15 semi-structured

interview participants and an additional three participants in focus group two who did not

participate in the semi-structured interviews) teaching in accredited Christian high

schools in Southern California. It was apparent that all Christian secondary education

science teachers had a working knowledge and understanding of the researched

phenomena because all participants acknowledged understanding and clearly defined

questions two and three in the semi-structured interview protocol. Question two: What is

your understanding of the theory of evolution? Question three: What is your

understanding of the biblical account of creation? Therefore, the word data collected from

the semi-structured interview questions and the focus group prompts confirmed that all

Christian secondary education science teachers knew the topic well.

Themes organically emerged from the research questions based on 15

semistructured interviews and two focus groups of four to six participants. Codes were

identified from words, phrases, and paragraphs that were repeated and similar within the

transcripts, which led to the identification of 795 codes from open coding and reduced to

268 codes. The codes were systematically reduced by utilizing the following processes:

(1) the assigned codes identified segments of data representing passages of interest, (2)

that the codes represented meaningful segments of text (shorter than a paragraph and

longer than a few words), and (3) the codes formed a complete (or full) thought (Saunders

et al., 2023). Once these coding processes were completed, the researcher began looking

for initial themes.

The codes were reduced to 29 initial themes, reviewed and refined to 10 themes,

and further revised to nine themes. Nine themes organically emerged from the data as the

researcher utilized the six-phase inductive thematic analysis protocol by Braun and

Clarke (2006). The processes entailed familiarization with the data, generating codes,

searching for initial themes, refining those themes, reviewing the themes, and then

reporting the findings.

Presenting the Results

The following narrative presents an overview and analysis of the results regarding

the data collected from the four research questions: For Research Question 1, three

themes emerged from the codes, which are Social Media Exposure, Mainstream

Academia Denounces Creation, and Public-School Transfers. For Research Question 2,

two themes emerged from the codes, which are Academic Standards in Curriculum and

Science Textbooks Present more Evolutionary Theory. For Research Question 3, two

themes emerged from the codes, which are Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism, and

The Culture Around you Influences You. For Research Question 4, two themes emerged

from the codes, which are Societal Values Influence Traditional Values and Changing

Christian Culture.

Table 25

Themes and Sub-Themes for Research Questions 1-4

Research Question Theme Sub-Theme

Research Question 1

Theme 1: Social Media Exposure

Theme 2: Mainstream Academia

Denounces Creation

Theme 3: Public School Transfers

Sub-Theme 1: Peer Influence from

Public School Students

Research Question 2

Theme 1: Academic Standards in

Curriculum

Theme 2: Science Textbooks

Present more Evolutionary Theory

Sub-Theme 1: Secular Science Textbook

Bias

Sub-Theme 2: Evolutionary Theory as

Fact

Research Question 3

Theme 1: Humanism, Secularism,

Post-Modernism

Theme 2: The Culture Around you

Influence You

Sub-Theme 1: Humanism and

Secularism within Christian High

Schools

Research Question 4

Theme 1: Societal Values

Influence Traditional Values

Theme 2: Changing Christian

Culture

Sub-Theme 1: Academics vs. Religious

Schooling

Research Question 1. How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution? The Christian secondary education science teachers described Social Media

Exposure as instrumental in accepting the theory of evolution because students were

predisposed to gather information from various social media platforms such as television,

the internet, and smartphones rather than the Christian, science classroom. Additionally,

Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation by not teaching evolutionary theory and

creation equally in society, that academia argues that creationism lacks sufficient

scientific evidence for evolutionary theory as fact and discounting biblical creation. Next,

Public-School Transfers to Christian high schools influenced the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools, because public schools

teach evolutionary theory as fact.

RQ1 – Theme 1: Social Media Exposure. All Christian secondary education

science teacher participants working in Christian high schools noted that social media

exposure from Hollywood, television, the internet, and greater access to smartphones

increased their student’s acceptance of evolutionary theory, because students were

predisposed to gathering their information from social media platforms rather than the

Christian high school science classroom. Based on the semi-structured interview and

focus group responses, all the Christian secondary education science teacher participants

posited that social media exposure influences Christian secondary education science

students to accept the theory of evolution. Several codes identified from the interviews, as

well as the focus groups indicated an association with social media exposure and an

increase in evolutionary theory acceptance in Southern California Christian high schools.

Some of the codes included social media influences what students believe, social media

accepts evolutionary theory as fact, and students influenced towards evolution by

television and social media. The following discussion provides a narrative regarding the

theme of Social Media Exposure as it organically emerged from the Christian secondary

education science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

All participants in both the semi-structured interviews, as well as the focus groups

agreed that social media exposure from Hollywood, television, the Internet, and

smartphone usage increased their student’s acceptance of the theory of evolution, because

the student’s placed more credibility in social media platforms rather than the Christian,

science classroom to gather their information. For example, when asked whether

Southern California societal values influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structured interview participant 14

noted that, “…this generation nowadays…believe what they see on the internet and on

their social media…with higher credibility compared to…what they hear in the classroom

because that’s all they know.” Likewise, semi-structured interview participant two when

asked the same question noted that students were, “…heavily influenced by TV shows,

commercials, everything is very anti-Christian, and that kind of thing is so subtle.”

Finally, the notion that Christian secondary education science students placed more

credibility for their knowledge-gathering on social media was further highlighted by their

accessibility and familiarity with the platforms.

All Christian secondary education science teacher participants in both focus

groups noted that Christian secondary education science students placed more credibility

in their social media exposure to gather their information, primarily because of their

accessibility (amount of time on social media in comparison to the classroom) and

familiarity. This was articulated as focus group participants expressed their lack of faceto-

face interaction with their students in comparison to the average amount of time Christian

secondary education science students spent on social media platforms to gather their

knowledge. For instance, focus group one, participant two noted “…that we have them in

the classroom, which let’s say 30 minutes out of 24 hours,” noting a substantial

disadvantage when it came to influencing their students towards biblical creation.

Additionally, focus group two, participant one posited that, “…as Christian educators,

we’re always fighting an uphill battle, because we might get them (Christian secondary

education students) for 45 minutes a day, five days a week.” The participants further

noted that social media platforms are designed to be universally accessible and engaging,

which might make it more appealing for users such as Christian secondary education

science students to quickly consume and share content they receive on social media

platforms, placing the evolutionists’ point of view at their fingertips.

Several Christian secondary education science teacher participants noted that

Christian secondary education science students placed more credibility in their social

media platforms to gather knowledge, because of accessibility and familiarity, which

placed the evolutionist’s point of view at their fingertips. For example, when asked

whether Southern California societal values influenced the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in Southern California Christian high schools, participant nine stated that social

media exposure was having an influence on the acceptance of evolutionary theory, “…

because they’re so connected to the outside world through all the social media and the

exposure is really what it comes down to…so the evolutionists point of view…it’s more

at their fingertips.” Participant seven stated it this way. “And so, their faced with

something that goes against who God is. For those that are on Instagram, TikTok, or

Snapchat, there’s no escaping it (evolutionary theory) really.” Moreover, in consideration

of all the social media outlets that Christian secondary education science students had at

their fingertips, others were the influence of Hollywood, internet platforms such as

YouTube, and documentaries, which often promoted the theory of evolution as fact.

Overall, 16 of the 18 participants agreed that social media platforms such as the

internet, Hollywood productions, television shows, and documentaries played a distinct

role in influencing Christian secondary education science students by often promoting the

theory of evolution as fact. By using social media as a medium, these same participants

noted that information regarding the theory of evolution was very accessible to all

Christian secondary education science students in Southern California Christian high

schools. For instance, when asked whether societal values in Southern California are

neutral and have no negative influence on the acceptance of the theory of evolution,

participant five of focus group two stated the following: “…other things that influence

students (Christian secondary education science students) around here is the media, so

they’re heavily influenced by what they follow online, and what they watch on

YouTube.” Participant three in focus group one even noted that documentaries shown in

science class were presenting evolutionary theory as fact. “It’s like watching

documentaries too…its (evolutionary theory) completely accepted as fact.” Finally, in

consideration of the theme, Social Media Exposure, all participants agreed that the most

influential platform was Christian secondary education science students receiving their

knowledge from smartphones.

All Christian secondary education science teacher participants noted that

smartphones provided Christian secondary education science students constant access to a

variety of social media platforms, allowing Christian students the convenience to

consume and share information regardless of time and location as explained previously

by participants who noted the disparity in time teachers had to influence students in

comparison to time spent by students on social media. Therefore, this social media

platform led to Christian secondary education science students being frequently exposed

and influenced by mainstream societal views, which often present evolutionary theory as

fact. When asked whether cell phones contributed to social media exposure and the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution, semi-structured interview participant six

noted that it has, “a huge, huge contribution.” Similarly, semi-structured interview

participant five stated, “I would say this is having more impact (cell phones) than

anything I’ve ever dealt with in teaching…all the way down to like middle and lower

elementary…” Additionally, semi-structured interview participant seven stated “yes,

100%.” Semi-structured interview participant nine further noted that students as young

as second grade now have phones and, “…what goes into their heads is no longer coming

from the school or church for that matter, because they’re so connected to the outside

world through social media.” Finally, after further analysis of the Christian secondary

education science teacher responses, another theme that emerged was Mainstream

Academia Denounces Creation.

RQ1 – Theme 2: Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation. Nearly all (14 of

the 18) Christian secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian

high schools noted that mainstream academia denounced creation by either not teaching

evolutionary theory and creation equally in society, arguing that creationism lacks

sufficient scientific evidence, teaching evolutionary theory as fact, or discounting biblical

creation altogether, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution. Based on the semi-structured interview and focus group responses, 14 of the

18 Christian secondary education science teachers noted that mainstream academia’s

stance on biblical creation had an effect on whether a Christian secondary education

science student accepted the theory of evolution. Several codes identified from the

interviews, as well as the focus groups indicated an association between mainstream

academia denouncing creation and evolutionary theory acceptance in Southern California

Christian high schools. Some of the In-Vivo codes included biblical views are dumb,

society belittling creationism, and every alternative to evolution is a joke in mainstream

academia. The following discussion provides a narrative regarding the theme of

Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation as it emerged from the Christian secondary

education science teacher's semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

Fourteen of the 18 participants in both the semi-structured interviews as well as

the focus groups noted that there is a cultural perception that Christianity in general and

biblical creation have been downgraded in relationship to mainstream scientific thought,

which has created a greater acceptance of the theory of evolution amongst Christian

secondary education science students in Southern California Christian high schools. The

reasons for these perceptions entailed how the biblical account of creation and the theory

of evolution is presented in society today and how academia viewed Christianity

compared to mainstream scientific thought. Whether the evolutionary theory was taught

as fact, which in turn created the narrative articulated by focus group two, participant six

that “anything but Christ (ABC)” is the mainstream scientific viewpoint regarding the

biblical account of creation.

The perception by 14 of the Christian secondary education science teacher

participants that “anything but creation” is the mainstream academic narrative when

discussing the theory of evolution/biblical creation points to a changing exposure to

evolutionary theory within Christian high schools in Southern California. For example,

when asked whether societal values and Southern California culture are neutral and have

no negative influence on a student’s Christian beliefs and whether they accept the theory

of evolution, focus group two, participant six stated the following: “…when it comes to

any kind of alternative scientific theory (biblical creation), it's like ABC ‘anything but

Christ’, that's pretty much what's being accepted out there.” Thirteen participants added to

this narrative.

Additionally, semi-structured interview participant 10 noted that the continual

“put down” of any alternatives to the mainstream academic viewpoint, as well as “…

anything that questions the mainstream narrative” was, “…wearing away at any kind of

biblical foundation…” and that what Christian secondary education science teachers were

instilling in their students, “…was a joke to them (mainstream academia).”

Semistructured interview participant 10 further noted that “…science starts to shape even

elementary kids.” That they (mainstream academia), “…start to shape your views as

anything that’s against mainstream is kind of laughable and not to be considered.”

Continuing, Participant 10 further stated that “…all the language is coded to make the

mainstream opinion of the science, to make it sound like its irrefutable fact and that there

is no debate.” Participant 10 completed their comments by stating the following: “It’s

going to be rife with not just explicit evolutionism, but it’s going to be rife with…coded

language that is putting down anything that might question these theories.” Finally,

throughout the interview process, all participants from both focus groups noted a

concerted effort from mainstream academia to remove the Christian narrative from

science altogether.

All participants from both focus groups noted that there has been a concerted

effort to remove the Christian narrative of biblical creation from mainstream scientific

thought altogether, making it more difficult for Christian secondary education science

students to have academic examples of the biblical creation narrative. For instance, when

asked whether the contributing factors to evolutionary theory acceptance were due, in

part, to secular ideology, focus group one, participant three noted that Christian narratives

in the sciences that once were referenced in textbooks, encyclopedias, and the internet

have since been removed to support a mainstream academia viewpoint. Participant Three

stated, "…when you go back and look at first document letters that people wrote in the

past…they constantly talked about and made references to God.” Participant Three

further stated “…now you read in Wikipedia, and there’s no mention at all of the main

reason why they (creationists) became a doctor.” Additionally, participant one in focus

group one stated that when they had students write reports on well-known Christian

scientists, they realized that “Wikipedia took out all the Christian stuff (references to

biblical creation).” Finally, in consideration of the theme, Mainstream Academia

Denounces Creation, a populist narrative seems to have further influenced Christian

secondary education science students towards accepting the theory of evolution.

All the Christian secondary education science teacher participants noted some

form of mainstream populist narrative (evolution as fact, denouncing all other theories,

defaming biblical creation) in academia that promoted the theory of evolution and

discounted the biblical account of creation, which might explain the increased acceptance

of the theory of evolution. The participants further explained that education systems and

popular media often emphasize scientific explanations of the theory of evolution,

sometimes at the expense of religious or Christian perspectives. As a result, Christian

beliefs, such as the biblical account of creation, may be marginalized or portrayed as

antiscientific. For example, when asked if the creation story in Genesis is a metaphor and

not reality and that only the theory of evolution should be taught, focus group one

participant one noted the following when referring to mainstream academia: “…they

think that the biblical account of creation is kind of a fairy tale.”

Additionally, semi-structured interview participant 15 noted when asked to

describe the influence of teaching evolutionary theory and biblical creation equally, “…

history has shown scientific discoveries to catch up to what has already been discovered

in scripture.” For instance, “…the claim that the Earth was flat has since been proven

false scientifically, but you Bible believers are dumb because you just believe what the

Bible says and that’s not science.” Focus group one, Participant Two stated it this way,

“…that secularism kind of makes Christians seem weak and dumb.” Finally, after further

analysis of the Christian secondary education science teacher responses regarding the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high

schools, another theme that emerged was Public-School Transfers.

RQ1 – Theme 3: Public School Transfers. Six of the Christian secondary

education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools described

students who transferred from public high schools as influencing the Christian high

school students towards accepting the theory of evolution because public school students

in Southern California are taught the theory of evolution as a mainstream, factual science.

Based on the semi-structured interview and focus group responses, these Christian

secondary education science teachers noted that public school transfers influenced

whether a Christian secondary education science student accepted the theory of evolution,

because of peer influence and interaction with public school student transfers. Several

codes identified from the interviews, as well as the focus groups indicated an association

with public school transfers and evolutionary theory acceptance in Southern California

Christian high schools. Some of these codes included transfer students from public

schools bring evolutionary theory influence, public school kids have only heard evolution,

and public-school students influence Christian school students in evolution. The

following discussion provides a narrative regarding the theme of Public-School Transfers

as it emerged from the Christian secondary education science teacher semistructured

interviews and focus groups.

Several participants noted that private Christian high schools in Southern

California opened their doors to in-person, on-campus learning sooner than their public

high school counterparts during the COVID-19 pandemic. This created a notable increase

in public high school student enrollments in open-enrollment Christian high schools in

Southern California, which may have attracted students from various backgrounds,

including those with differing beliefs regarding the theory of evolution. For example,

when asked whether modern-day California societal values influenced the acceptance of

the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structured

interview participant five posited that “…I taught in an open enrollment school… and

you get a whole variety of people…with all sorts of thoughts…and influences, and

beliefs.” Participant Five further noted that “…Southern California and California in

general is not your bastion of conservatism…Christian high schools that have open

enrollment…have students that come in (from public high schools) …that they’re

affected by that (Christian school high students), I’m certain.” Finally, all participants

further noted that public high school students have only heard the theory of evolution in

their public high school science classes.

In the United States, and in this case California, science education standards, such

as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), provide a framework for what public

high school students should know at all grade levels and in multiple science disciplines

including biology, chemistry, physics, and earth science (Hanisch & Eirdosh, 2023).

When asked whether instructional approaches and changes in science curriculum in

Christian secondary education science classes potentially affected the acceptance of

evolutionary theory, semi-structured interview participant nine noted that “I’ve got public

school kids coming in and all they’ve heard is evolution.” Participant 15 stated it this

way,” …public high schools should be very neutral and balanced on both sides

(evolution/creation) … and that is not what’s happening out there (referring to teaching

evolutionary theory as fact).” Therefore, all participants noted that public high school

students had greater influence from being taught evolutionary theory, which might affect

the overall disposition of Christian secondary education science students in Christian high

schools in Southern California.

The idea that public high school transfers to Christian high schools might

influence Christian secondary education science students in accepting evolutionary theory

due to their exposure to it in public high schools is plausible because all participants

noted that public high school science students were being taught evolutionary theory as

fact. Students who transferred from public high schools brought different perspectives to

the topic, including evolutionary theory being taught as a mainstream science. For

example, when asked whether teaching evolutionary theory and creation equally

influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory, semi-structured interview participant

eight noted that “…because we have a diverse student body here…some students who

would say there, you know, evolutionists and believe in evolution…there’s infighting that

happens in the class over these discussions…” Participant Eight further noted that, “…I

find that most students who come in already believing or already have…a leaning

towards evolution, I’m not changing their mind usually.” Therefore, transfer students that

had such strong viewpoints potentially had peer influence on Christian secondary

education science students in Southern California Christian high schools, which led to the

sub-theme, Peer Influence from Public High School Students.

The sub-theme of Peer Influence from Public High School Students arose

organically from the semi-structured interviews and focus groups to support the theme of

Public School Transfers. Ten of the 18 Christian secondary education science teacher

participants working in Christian high schools described peer influence from public high

school students as instrumental to the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in

Christian high schools because the public high school baseline science taught was

evolutionary theory. When prompted to discuss whether changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values contributed to an increase in

the acceptance of evolutionary theory, Participant Three of focus group one noted that

“peer pressure, you know, that’s the big one (referring to public high school student

influence on Christian high school students)…” Similarly, Participant 13 from the

semistructured interviews noted “…there’s pressure from friends that go to secular

schools… they talk about academics with their peers…I can definitely see that as an

influence.” Additionally, Participant 13 noted that “…they (students) are listening to other

people’s opinions of what they think and the facts that those people know, and that’s what

they’re basing their opinion on instead…” Based on the semi-structured interviews and

focus group data, 10 of the Christian secondary education science teachers acknowledged

peer pressure from public high school students as instrumental to the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in Christian high schools in Southern California.

Research Question 2. How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe the changes in curriculum, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? Five of the Christian

secondary education science teacher participants described Academic Standards in

Curriculum as required for accreditation in Southern California Christian high schools as

including evolutionary theory, which might explain Christian secondary education

science students accepting the theory of evolution over biblical creation. Next, Science

Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory, as described by all participants that each

new edition of science curriculum had more evolutionary theory embedded in its pages

and presented as fact, which might explain the increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory amongst Christian secondary education science students.

RQ2 – Theme 1: Academic Standards in Curriculum. Five of the Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools

described the changing academic curriculum standards required for accreditation in

Southern California Christian high schools as including evolutionary theory, which might

explain Christian secondary education science students accepting the theory of evolution

over biblical creation. Additionally, based on the semi-structured interview and focus

group responses, all the Christian secondary education science teacher participants

indicated that accreditation requirements dictated teaching the theory of evolution as part

of the curriculum standards for California. Several codes were identified from the

interviews and focus groups that were connected to the theme of Academic Standards in

Curriculum. Some of the academic standards in curriculum codes included accreditation

determines what’s taught, evolution required for accreditation, and accreditation

influences evolutionary theory. The following discussion provides information regarding

the theme of Academic Standards in Curriculum as it organically emerged from the

Christian secondary education science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus

groups.

Evolutionary theory is an integral part of the life science standards with regard to

the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). These standards serve as a framework

for science education and include evolutionary theory as a foundational concept (Hanisch

& Eirdosh, 2023). As a result, five of the Christian secondary education science teacher

participants in Southern California Christian high schools noted that California’s

academic standards for science education now mandated the teaching of evolutionary

theory as part of the curriculum in private Christian schools desiring accreditation

through the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. For example, when asked

whether barriers or challenges were encountered regarding curriculum approaches in a

semi-structured interview Participant 10 noted that “…if we’re going to be accredited,

and we don’t mention evolution, then we’re not meeting standards to be accredited.”

When prompted further, Participant 10 added the following: “…from a practical point of

view, like we have to (present evolutionary theory), in order for our, you know, diplomas

to be respected.” Regarding the theme, Academic Standards in Curriculum, a desire for

greater funding, and academic credibility also played a crucial role in potential

curriculum changes, as expressed by the participants.

A few Christian secondary education science teachers noted that accredited

Christian high schools in Southern California have access to various forms of funding,

including government grants, scholarships, and private donations. Maintaining

accreditation often hinges on meeting specific educational criteria, including teaching

topics such as the theory of evolution. Moreover, these same participants noted that

compliance with accreditation standards were often seen as necessary to secure and

maintain additional funding needed for private Christian high schools to operate. For

example, when asked whether there had been an increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structured interview

participant one noted there had been an increase in the acceptance of evolution and stated

the following as the reason why: “Accreditation and funding are one of the biggest

ones…causing the change to not align with the values that God has represented…”

Participant 13 stated it this way, “…I see it as a money issue…if we teach evolution,

we’re getting more students and we’re going to get money.” Therefore, as stated, funding

and accreditation influenced whether a Southern California Christian high school taught

the theory of evolution as part of its core curriculum. Finally, the second theme that

organically emerged from the semi-structured interviews and focus groups was the theme,

Science Textbooks present more Evolutionary Theory.

RQ2 – Theme 2: Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. All the

Christian secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high

schools described each new edition of science curriculum as having more evolutionary

theory embedded in its pages and presented as fact, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools.

Based on the participants’ responses in the semi-structured interviews and focus groups,

all the Christian secondary education science teacher participants indicated that each new

edition of science curriculum published had more explicit references to evolution,

evolution as fact, as well as slants or discrediting comments towards anything other than

evolutionary theory. Several codes were identified from the interviews and focus groups

that were connected to the theme, Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory.

Some of the codes included evolution is irrefutable, more evolution in each textbook,

secular textbooks are biased, and evolution-based curriculum. The following discussion

provides information regarding the theme of Science Textbooks Present More

Evolutionary Theory as it emerged from the Christian secondary education science

teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

Educational standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in

the United States often emphasize the importance of teaching foundational scientific

concepts, which includes the theory of evolution. As a result, textbooks are often updated

to align more closely with these standards (Hanisch & Eirdosh, 2023), potentially leading

to an increase in coverage of evolutionary theory topics. For instance, when asked how

instructional approaches and changes in science curriculum in Christian high school

science classes affected the acceptance of evolutionary theory, semi-structured interview

Participant 10 noted that “…I’ve seen examples in textbooks where…it describes

differences between science and pseudo-science, and you see how they shape (the

narrative) even from like elementary kids.” Continuing, participant ten noted that “…all

the language is coded to make…mainstream opinion of the sciences, to make it sound

like its irrefutable fact and that there is no debate.” Participant 10 further noted that, “…

it’s going to be rife with…explicit evolutionism…” Participant Nine stated it this way:

“We use secular textbooks. And so, it’s filled with evolution, particularly every new

publication that comes out, there’s more and more.” Finally, in consideration of new

science textbooks presenting an ever-increasing amount of evolutionary theory, 11 of the

18 participants also noted the increase of pro-evolutionary theory slants, narratives, and

biases in newer publications, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory

of evolution amongst Southern California Christian secondary education science students.

Eleven of the 18 participants noted that secular publishing companies publish science

textbooks and educational materials where evolutionary theory is presented as the

mainstream scientific explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. These participants

further posited that within mainstream academia, evolutionary theory was

overwhelmingly supported as fact, often creating slanted, disparaging views of

alternatives such as the biblical account of creation. Moreover, these same Christian

secondary education science teachers noted this as a potential influencer for accepting

evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools. For example, in a

semi-structured interview, Participant 10 noted “…if you use secular science textbooks…

it’s going to be coded and slanted…to put down any theories that are not mainstream,

right?” Participant 10 continued by stating, “anything that’s against mainstream is kind of

laughable and not to be considered (referring to alternatives to evolutionary theory) …it’s

going to be rife with kind of coded language that is putting down anything that might

question those theories.” Participant 10 concluded by stating the following about

mainstream secular science textbooks: “Everything, every alternative is a joke to them.”

Finally, in consideration of the theme, Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary

Theory, the sub-theme Secular Science Textbook Bias organically emerged from the data.

A sub-theme of Secular Science Textbook Bias emerged from the theme; Science

Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. Semi-structure interview participant

thirteen noted that in any field, including science education and textbook publishing,

there is always a potential for bias whether the educators and publishers are Christian or

non-Christian, and that “…publishers have an opinion also.” Moreover, several Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools

described secular science textbook bias as instrumental to changes in Christian high

school curriculum, which might explain the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory

amongst Christian secondary education science students. When asked whether secular

textbooks are biased, twelve participants stated that they were. For example, in a

semistructured interview, Participant Eight noted, “So, it’s just evolution, evolution,

evolution, right? There’s no questioning it, there’s no option.” Focus group one,

Participant One noted that when using a secular science textbook, evolutionary theory

bias was “embedded everywhere.” Participant Three, when discussing the secular science

curriculum, stated “…they never talk about the other side of the coin.” Additionally,

Participant One noted that “there’s a lot of scientific bias and pride going on” when

discussing secular science textbooks.

In contrast, a few participants noted that textbooks often reflect societal norms

and values, which can influence the selection and presentation of the content. Moreover,

authors and publishers may often introduce biases through language choices, examples,

and interpretations of data, as well as mainstream scientific narratives, which in many

cases are presented as fact. When discussing science curriculum changes, three of the

participants preferred to use secular science curriculum to highlight these potential

discrepancies. For example, semi-structured interview participant 12 preferred using

secular science curriculum, because they utilized the definitions within that textbook to

show their students that evolution is presented as fact and that they (secular science

textbooks), “…teach evolution as a religion” and that evolution, “impeaches itself,” in

turn, highlighting the potential biases of the secular science textbook publishing

companies. Participant 12 viewed their teaching strategy as presenting potential biases in

secular science curriculum, which might influence the acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high school science students. Finally, in

consideration of the theme, Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory, a

second sub-theme of Evolutionary Theory as Fact organically emerged from the data.

A second sub-theme of Evolutionary Theory as Fact emerged from the theme, Science

Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. All Christian secondary education science

teacher participants noted that in secular science textbooks, evolutionary theory is

typically presented as the predominant scientific explanation for the diversity of life on

Earth. Therefore, oftentimes science curriculum presents the theory of evolution as fact,

which might influence Christian secondary education science students attending Southern

California Christian high schools to accept the theory of evolution as fact. For example,

when asked how instructional approaches and changes in science curriculum in Christian

science class potentially affected the acceptance of evolutionary theory, semi-structured

interview participant six noted the following: “…anytime you have young, moldable

minds…they are prone to accepting what they are told…so then a change that presents

evolution as fact…is potentially going to have a great impact on the acceptance of it…

(Evolutionary theory).” Focus group one, participant one, when asked whether Christian

high school students view of evolutionary theory could be manipulated in favor of

evolution by changing science curriculum noted the following: “…we were asked to use

secular textbooks…evolution was embedded everywhere…and it is taught as fact for

sure.” Finally, as the sub-theme emerged, all participants noted that evolutionary theory

was presented as fact in secular science curriculum and considered “not debatable.”

As the sub-theme, Evolutionary Theory as Fact organically emerged from the word data,

Participant One further noted that not only was evolutionary theory presented as fact, but

as an irrefutable fact, which might explain the increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory amongst Christian secondary education science students attending Southern

California Christian high schools. For instance, when asked how changes in science

curriculum in the Christian secondary education science classroom potentially affected

the acceptance of evolutionary theory, Participant 10 noted that “…all the language is

coded to make…mainstream opinion of the sciences, to make it sound like its irrefutable

fact and that there is no debate.” Participant Eight stated it this way, “So, it’s just

evolution, evolution, evolution, right? There’s no questioning it, there’s no option.”

Therefore, as stated previously, secular science textbooks, which had a continual increase

in the topic of evolutionary theory presented, presented as fact, as well as presented as

irrefutable fact, might potentially explain why there has been an increased acceptance of

the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools.

Research Question 3. How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe changes in societal values, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The themes that emerged

from the participants’ answers to research question three were, Humanism, Secularism,

Post-Modernism, and The Culture Around you Influences You. The Christian secondary

education science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups indicated that all

teachers described Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism philosophies in Southern

California societal values promoted anti-Biblical, anti-Christian values, which, in turn,

might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. Next, The Culture

Around you Influences You was described by 10 of the 18 participants as changes in

today’s societal values endorse a pro-evolutionary theory philosophy and worldview

narrative and that students are shaped by the culture and societal values they live in,

which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. Several

participants agreed that these themes influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

Southern California Christian high schools.

RQ 3 – Theme 1: Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism. All Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools

described the increased presence of humanism, secularism, and post-modernism

philosophies in Southern California societal values that promoted anti-Biblical and

antiChristian values, which in turn, might explain the increased acceptance of the theory

of evolution. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus groups, all participants

noted that the changing Southern California societal values, which promoted secular

ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism influenced the acceptance

of the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. Several codes

were identified from the interviews and focus groups that were connected to the theme,

Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism. Some of these codes included secularism in

Christianity, secularism is anti-Christian, and evolution is a religion of humanism,

secularism, and post-modernism. The following discussion provides information

regarding the theme of Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism as it emerged

organically from the Christian secondary education science teacher semi-structured

interviews and focus groups.

All the Christian secondary education science teacher participants described

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism today as influencing the acceptance of

evolutionary theory, because of its anti-God, anti-Christian rhetoric. When the researcher

interviewed the Christian secondary education science teachers, the following definitions

were presented: Humanism is a worldview, which seeks to identify humans as

intrinsically good and valuable as an end to themselves and as an active, creative,

thinking, desiring, and loving force in nature (Nilsson & Jost, 2020). Secularism is based

on the ideological perspectives of philosophical, social, political, and cultural factors. The

word “secularism” was coined by the British writer George Holyoake as a means of

implicating social order without the affiliation of religion (Quadri, 2021). Postmodernism

is the theory whereby society must evolve into one devoid of religion (Adebumiti &

Ekhareafo, 2021). After articulating these definitions to all participants, the following

data emerged from the semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

When asked whether humanism, secularism, and post-modernism were prevalent

in Southern California’s changing societal values and influenced the acceptance of

evolutionary theory, all participants in both focus group one and two stated that these

ideologies were prevalent and promoting anti-God, anti-Christian rhetoric, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California

Christian high schools. For instance, focus group one, Participant Three noted that “…

what secularism promotes is very anti-biblical.” Participant One, from the same focus

group, further noted that secularism is anti-Biblical because “…we’re just so

selfabsorbed, and that’s what secularism promotes, that’s very anti-biblical.” Additionally,

in focus group one, Participant Four noted that modern-day Southern California societal

values “…are anti-God.” Therefore, the presence of these ideologies (humanism,

secularism, post-modernism) potentially affected the acceptance of biblical creation and

promoted the acceptance of the theory of evolution because of ideological, anti-God

rhetoric.

Five participants noted the promotion of humanism, secularism, and

postmodernism in Southern California as influencing the removal of Christian rhetoric

from society altogether, which might influence the acceptance of the theory of evolution

as a non-Christian alternative to biblical creation by developing an atmosphere where

there is no need for God. For example, Participant One in the focus group noted that the

increase of these ideologies (humanism, secularism, post-modernism) promoted

individuals to be authorities unto themselves. “So, therefore, if you’re an authority like

Participant Two said before, you don’t want a biblical account of creation because then

there is a God, and then you are accountable to somebody. “Additionally, all participants

in focus group two agreed that these secular ideologies are “a religion in itself,” which by

their very definition may influence the removal of Christianity and the biblical account of

creation.

In response to the same prompt, participant one further stated that the increase of these

ideologies promoted moral superiority. “You don’t need God, ‘cause we’re just morally

superior…” When asked whether societal values in Southern California were neutral and

had no negative influence on a student’s Christian beliefs, such as biblical creation,

Participant Six in focus group two stated that secular ideologies such as humanism,

secularism, and post-modernism had a huge influence by stating, “…when it comes to

any kind of alternative scientific theory, it’s like ABC, anything but Christ., that’s pretty

much what’s being accepted out there.” Finally, a few of the Christian secondary

education science teacher participants also acknowledged these secular ideologies from

an internal perspective.

A sub-theme of Humanism and Secularism within Christian High Schools

emerged from the theme, Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism. A few Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools

described humanism and secularism as being prevalent within Southern California

Christian high schools. The participants further noted that often Christian high schools

and their students are influenced by changes in Southern California societal values

because of their open enrollment status, which might potentially influence the acceptance

of evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools. When the researcher

interviewed the participants, the same ideologies (humanism and secularism) emerged but

from a Christian environment perspective. For example, when asked whether modern-day

California societal values influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern

California Christian high schools, Participant 10 noted the following: “So, there are

people that are very specifically secular and humanist…so many come to our school…

they live life for the material, they live life in a secular way.” Several participants further

noted that open enrollment added to the changing secular societal values being introduced

to Christian high schools, because enrollment depended on other variables aside from

traditional Christian values.

When asked the same question, Participant Nine stated the following: “…students

and families used to come to Christian schools for Christian values. That’s why they send

their kids to Christian schools…” Participant Nine continued by stating, “…It’s no longer

the case…they send them there for, I’d like a private school. I want my kids in a safe

environment.” Participant Nine concluded by stating that “…you would have a majority

of the kids at that school (Christian high school) as household Christians, whereas

nowadays…families are sending their kids to Christian schools for different reasons. It’s

not all biblical teaching…it’s not that way anymore.” Additionally, when discussing the

topic of modern-day secular ideology (humanism, secularism, post-modernism) in the

Christian school environment, Participant 10 noted the following: “A Christian school

wants their students to go to prestigious colleges. Well, prestigious colleges say this,

right…” referring to teaching evolutionary theory, “…if we want to be taken seriously, we

have to start saying these things…focus on those things, on the teaching of evolution…”

Participant 10 concluded by stating, “… the discrediting of any other belief

(Christian belief of biblical creation) is going to find its way into our Christian schools.”

Finally, another theme that emerged regarding changes in societal values was The Culture

Around you Influences You.

RQ 3 – Theme 2: The Culture Around you Influences You. All Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools in

Southern California noted how the changes in today’s societal values endorse a

proevolutionary theory philosophy and worldview narrative and that students are shaped

by the culture and societal values they live in, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus

groups, all participants noted that Southern California societal values, which promote

secular ideologies such as humanism and secularism influenced the acceptance of an

evolutionary theory worldview, because these ideologies aim to make society, “devoid of

religion.” Several codes were identified from the semi-structured interviews and focus

groups that were connected to the theme, The Culture Around you Influences You. Some

of these codes included what’s around you influences you, students are shaped by the

culture they live in, and culture influences evolutionary theory. The following discussion

provides information regarding the theme, The Culture Around you Influences You as it

organically emerged from the Christian secondary education science teacher

semistructured interviews and focus groups.

Ten of the 18 participants noted that the culture or societal values in Southern

California influenced their students to potentially accept the theory of evolution, because

culture and societal values are not neutral, and students are shaped by the culture they live

in. Additionally, when asked whether societal values in Southern California are neutral

and have no negative influence on a student’s Christian beliefs such as biblical creation,

all participants in focus group one, as well as focus group two noted that the culture

around them was not neutral and did influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

Southern California Christian high schools by promoting an evolutionary theory

worldview. For example, focus group two, Participant Four when referring to secular

ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism stated that “…as neutral

as they (secular philosophies) might want to portray themselves to be, they’re just not

neutral philosophies.” Participant One of the same focus group noted that “…two of the

definitions (secularism, post-modernism) …literally say void of religion,” referencing

that the goal of these increasing societal values was potentially not neutral and promoted

anti-God rhetoric. Finally, all the Christian secondary education science teachers noted

that these secular ideologies (humanism, secularism, post-modernism) increasingly

permeated Southern California societal values, which might influence the Christian

secondary education science students to accept the theory of evolution because the

societal values noted were opposed to traditional values.

A few Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high

schools in Southern California further noted that there was a concerted effort in Southern

California’s changing societal values to oppose traditional values, which might explain

the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. For example, when asked from their

experience, if modern-day California societal values influenced the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structure

interview Participant Six described the following: “…as a whole our society, and

specifically Southern California seems to me, to progressively move away from

traditional biblical values.” Participant Six further noted that, “…and that movement

away from traditional biblical values has and is leading to an acceptance of anything that

is counter to those biblical values…” Participant Six conclude their remarks by saying,

“…and so therefore, by default, I would say yes…” referring to whether societal values

were changing and influencing the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern

California Christian high schools. In consideration of the theme, The Culture Around you

Influences You, 14 of the 18 Christian secondary education science teacher participants

noted that Christian secondary education science students were influenced towards the

acceptance of the theory of evolution, because students were influenced by the culture

they live in.

When asked whether modern-day Southern California societal values such as

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism influenced the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in Southern California Christian high schools, 14 of the 18 participants stated that

they did, and one participant stated that they were not sure with two participants not

responding to this topic. Additionally, when asked whether a secular, non-religious

upbringing potentially influenced the acceptance or denial of evolutionary theory or

biblical creation, semi-structured interview Participant Four stated that “…because it’s

shaped by the culture and the culture is anti-God (referring to the changing secular,

societal, non-religious influences)…people don’t want accountability. They don’t want to

believe in creation because then there’s a creator, and then you’re accountable to that

creator.” Next, when asked how the surrounding culture might influence the acceptance

of the theory of evolution amongst Southern California Christian secondary education

science students, semi-structured interview Participant 10 stated it this way: “Absolutely,

what you’re seeing in culture around you, whether that’s what your Christian school is

teaching or not, what you see in your culture…is going to have a massive effect on that,”

referring to how students are shaped by the culture they live in. Finally, one participant

took the narrative one step further by noting that Southern California values today were

the enemy in society.

Focus group two, Participant One, when asked whether societal values and local

culture in Southern California were neutral and had no negative influence on a student’s

Christian beliefs such as biblical creation noted that both societal values and evolutionary

theory acceptance were interlinked by stating the following: “…and so when the

evolutionary theory and societal norms are all on the same page (referring to societal

values and evolutionary theory worldview in society), then Christian values are the

enemy of the argument…” Participant One commented further by stating, “…because

whether you talk about any sort of societal values that Southern California has or if

you’re talking about evolutionary theory, the Christian theology is the antithesis of

that…” Participant One concluded by stating, “…and it’s fair to draw the conclusion that

if one of them is winning out, say the societal values, the other one probably is too…and

so, I would say that they are linked…their influences are connected.” Therefore, in

consideration of the theme, The Culture Around you Influences You, all the Christian

secondary education science teachers agreed that changes in societal values influenced

the acceptance of the theory of evolution amongst Christian secondary educations science

students.

Research Question 4. How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution? The themes that organically

emerged from the participant’s answers to research question four were Societal Values

Influence Traditional Values and Changing Christian Culture. Additionally, the Christian

secondary education science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups further

indicated that all participants described changing Southern California societal values

(humanism, secularism, post-modernism) promoted anti-Biblical, anti-Christian values

that influenced the decline in traditional values, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution. Next, the Changing Christian Culture in Southern

California Christian high schools was described by 11 of the 18 participants as

instrumental to the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution because mainstream

scientific thought was more accepted today in Christian high schools, and traditional

values were not as strong as they once were.

RQ4 – Theme 1: Societal Values Influence Traditional Values. All Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools noted

that changing Southern California societal values were heavily influenced by humanism,

secularism, and post-modernism, causing Southern California societal values to

negatively impact traditional values and the Southern California Christian high school

student’s belief system, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. Based on the semi-structured

interviews and focus groups, all participants noted that Southern California Christian high

schools were negatively influenced by changing Southern California societal values and

evolutionary theory, which are the antithesis of traditional values and the biblical account

of creation. Several codes were identified from the interviews and focus groups

connected to the theme, Societal Values Influence Traditional Values. Some of these

codes included societal values impact our belief system, society is influencing evolution

acceptance, and accepting anything contrary to traditional values. The following

discussion provides information regarding the theme; Societal Values Influence

Traditional Values as it organically emerged from the Christian secondary education

science teacher semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

As mentioned previously and in accordance with this research projects theoretical

foundation, Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change as extracted from Lewin’s Change

Model (Three-Step Model of Change); organizational change occurs when two forces

compete for dominance (Lewin, 1936). In this case, the driving forces were changing

societal values in Southern California and the restraining forces were the traditional

values, which are typically identified with in Southern California private Christian high

schools as being tenants of their faith. All participants noted that the driving societal

values in Southern California were competing for dominance over the traditional values

in Southern California Christian high schools. According to one participant, by devaluing

one thing (traditional values) and allowing the prevalence of another (Southern California

societal values), traditional values in Southern California Christian high schools were

devalued and changing.

When asked whether the three factors of this study (changes in curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values) contributed to the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools, focus

group two, Participant Four noted that, “…if you devalue one thing…it allows prevalence

of another thing (referring to societal values over traditional values)…if you are able to

partition your life up into different things (academics, accreditation, the need for

academic acceptance, a safe environment, etc.)…it kind of devalues Christianity

(traditional values)…” Several participants further noted that because of the increased

prevalence of Southern California societal values in Christian high schools, those same

societal values negatively impacted the Christian secondary education science student’s

belief system (traditional values) and influenced the acceptance of anything contrary to

traditional values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution.

As mentioned previously, the factors that comprise organizational change war

against each other for dominance, in this case, the influence of Southern California

societal values (humanism, secularism, post-modernism). Therefore, a few participants

noted that these ideologies influenced accepting anything other than traditional values,

typically associated with Christian high schools. For instance, when asked whether

modern-day societal values in Southern California influenced the acceptance of the

theory of evolution, semi-structured interview Participant Six noted the following: …as a

whole, our society, and specifically Southern California, seems to me, progressively

moving away from traditional biblical values…that movement away from traditional

biblical values has and is leading to an acceptance of anything that is counter to those

biblical values.

As a result, the participants in focus group two further posited that because of the

devaluing of traditional values in Southern California, societal values were the enemy of

traditional values, which again might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high schools.

All Christian secondary education science teacher participants noted that the

changing Southern California societal values were a driving force that competed for

prominence against traditional values, creating a change in narrative that Southern

California societal values were the enemy of traditional values, which again might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California

Christian high schools. For example, when asked whether Southern California societal

values and local culture were neutral and had no negative influence on a student’s

Christian beliefs such as biblical creation, focus group two, Participant One noted the

following: “…evolutionary theory and societal norms are all on the same page, that

Christian values are the enemy (referring to traditional values)…” Participant One further

noted that “…any sort of societal values that Southern California has…or evolutionary

theory, the Christian theology (traditional values) is the antithesis to that…” All

participants in focus group two further agreed that there was a change in traditional

values because of Southern California’s increased acceptance of humanism, secularism,

and post-modernism thought within Southern California societal values, which influenced

the decline of traditional values in Southern California Christian high schools. According

to one participant, Southern California's societal values were the enemy of traditional

values because the secular ideologies embraced (humanism, secularism, post-modernism)

promoted an anti-God narrative and excluded religion altogether.

All Christian secondary education science teacher participants working in

Christian high schools noted that Southern California societal values were a driving force

that advocated for secular ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism,

which competed for prominence against traditional values. According to several

participants, the narrative created an anti-God, anti-Christianity message that promoted

the devaluing of traditional values, as well as the exclusion of religion altogether, which

might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. For instance, when

prompted to discuss whether societal values and local culture in Southern California were

neutral and had no negative influence on a student’s Christian beliefs, focus group two,

participant four noted that “…philosophies like humanism, secularism, postmodernism…

affect the acceptance of evolution and I think those things devalue and often specifically

exclude religion, Christianity (referring to the exclusion of religion altogether and the

traditional values associated with religion).” Additionally, focus group one, Participant

One further noted that these secular ideologies in Southern California societal values

were “…anti-countercultural to biblical values (referring to traditional values) …”

Finally, one participant noted the devaluing of traditional values by Southern California

societal values as creating a generation of secular Christians.

When asked whether there has been an increase in the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structured interview

participant 10 noted that there had been and further cited the reason was an increase in

the changing societal values, creating a decrease (change) in traditional biblical values

amongst the next generation of Christian high school students. For example, Participant

10 stated the following: “Yeah, absolutely…you’ll get people that tout family values and

traditional Christian values all day and then live for …possessions…what school can I get

my kid into… (Referring to all things important except a traditional Christian

education).” Participant 10 further noted that their student would become “…specifically

humanist or specifically secular…” Participant 10 continued by stating, “…and they think

I’m a Christian (parents), I have traditional values and my child no longer does, and what

they don’t realize is that they don’t actually have Christian values, they have humanist

and secular values.” Finally, 11 of the 18 participants further noted that the changing

societal values that influenced changes in traditional values created a changing culture in

Southern California Christian high schools.

RQ 4 – Theme 2: Changing Christian Culture. Eleven of the 18 Christian

secondary education science teacher participants working in Christian high schools

described the changing culture in Southern California Christian high schools as

instrumental to the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution because mainstream

scientific thought is more accepted today in Christian high schools and traditional values

are not as strong as they once were. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus

groups, 11 of the 18 participants noted that Southern California Christian high schools

possessed a changing Christian culture, which was more user-friendly toward accepting

the theory of evolution. Several codes were identified from the interviews and focus

groups connected to the theme of Changing Christian Culture. Some of these codes

included evolution is more acceptable in Christian culture, cultural Christians believe

both evolution and creation, and traditional biblical values are not as strong. The

following discussion provides information regarding the theme of Changing Christian

Culture as it organically emerged from the Christian secondary education science teacher

semi-structured interviews and focus groups.

Eleven of the 18 Christian secondary education science teacher participants

working in Christian high schools posited that a changing Christian culture influenced the

decline or change in traditional values in Southern California Christian high schools,

because of the influence of mainstream academic thought regarding the theory of

evolution, Christian high school administration desires to be accredited, and parents

seeking enrollment in Christian high schools for reasons other than Christian or religious

training, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. For

example, when asked whether modern-day societal values influenced the acceptance of

evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools, semi-structured

interview participant six described traditional values in Christian high schools as not as

strong anymore. “Yes, I would say that the influence of traditional biblical values is not as

strong as maybe it once was…” Therefore, regarding a change in traditional values,

several Christian secondary education science teachers posited that Southern California's

societal values (humanism, secularism, and post-modernism) permeated their Christian

high school students, influencing the decline of their traditional values.

Eleven of the 18 Christian secondary education science teacher participants

working in Christian high schools noted a changing Christian culture that regarded

mainstream academic acceptance of evolutionary theory as plausible. This might explain

the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution and the decline in traditional values in

Southern California Christian high schools. Several aspects of a changing Christian

culture influenced this narrative. For instance, when asked whether there has been an

increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high

schools, semi-structured interview Participant Six noted that “…from what I see in

Christian culture, as I view it, through media…even in popular literature that the idea of

accepting evolutionary theory and being Christian is becoming more prevalent than

historically it has.” Focus group two, Participant Four stated it this way: “So they say I

can be culturally Christian…I can seek secular things…and believe in evolution, which is

what academia teaches…with my cultural beliefs in Jesus or my cultural Christian views

or my beliefs in the Bible.” One participant further noted the prevalence of this dual

mindset (secular and Christian) as weakening traditional values in Southern California

Christian high schools. Finally, a few participants further noted that a changing Christian

culture created a greater propensity to teach, as well as accept the theory of evolution.

A few Christian secondary education science teacher participants working in

Christian high schools posited that there has been an increase in evolutionary theory

acceptance amongst students, as well as faculty. For example, when participants were

asked whether teaching biblical creation and evolutionary theory created a greater

acceptance of the theory of evolution semi-structured interview, Participant Five stated

that “…something that I would not have imagined being a big issue (referring to the

acceptance of evolutionary theory) when I was in high school is now…becoming more

and more of an issue.”

Additionally, in a semi-structured interview, Participant Two, when asked whether

they had encountered any barriers or challenges regarding curriculum approaches to

evolutionary theory, recalled an encounter with a Christian secondary education science

teacher who accepted the theory of evolution as fact. They stated, "…especially one

teacher that I was really shocked. She said she was a Christian and she went full blast into

evolution…I’m going, how you can really call yourself a Christian.” Furthermore, a few

Christian secondary education science teachers posited an everincreasing desire from

Christian high school administrations to teach biblical creation and the theory of

evolution to fulfill California accreditation mandates, which might explain the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools.

Finally, a sub-theme of, Academics vs. Religious Schooling emerged from the theme,

Changing Christian Culture.

A sub-theme of Academics vs. Religious Schooling organically emerged from the

theme, Changing Christian Culture. Eleven of the 18 Christian secondary education

science teacher participants working in Christian high schools posited that the changing

Christian culture in Southern California Christian high schools placed a greater emphasis

on academic achievement, a safe environment for students, as well as accreditation for

academic credibility rather than religious training and traditional values, which might

explain the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California

Christian high schools. The following narrative describes the cultural Christian changes,

which replaced several traditional values and religious teaching in Southern California

Christian high schools.

When asked, from their experience, do modern-day California societal values

influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high

schools, semi-structured interview Participant 10 noted that “…in Southern California…

there is a massive emphasis on academics…academic achievement, on business

achievement, wealth, you know, on monetary gain, whatever you what to call it, material

possession.” Participant 10 continued by saying, “…in Christian schools…many families

and many students are looking at Christian schools as, what am I going to get out of

this?” Participant 10 further noted the following: “Academically, prestigiously, materially,

how is this going to affect…how much money or what kind of job I get in the future…

that’s a big part of the culture here…” Participant 10 concluded their remarks by stating,

“…what can you do for me? How can you set up the future for my child…what kind of

college are we going to be able to get into through this program?” A few

Christian secondary education science teacher participants further stated that emphasizing

academics negatively affected the mission of a Christian high school and the traditional

values and religious education originally intended. Finally, another aspect of cultural

Christian changes and their effects on academics vs. religious education that emerged was

that students attended Christian high schools for a safe environment. When asked

whether Participant 10’s Christian high school had a policy that guided their teaching of

evolutionary theory and biblical creation, in a semi-structured interview, Participant 10

articulated another reason for parents enrolling their students in a Southern California

Christian high school. For example, Participant 10 noted that “…there are some people

that are here for academics, some people are here for the feeling…you know the spirit of

the school, and then a lot of people are looking for a safe environment” and not

traditional values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution. Additionally, the ongoing trend of academics vs. religious education prompted

one participant to coin the phrase “Christian in name only.” Semistructured interview

Participant 12 stated it this way: “…I’m telling you; I know from being the athletic

director for our school…a lot of these private schools, they’re Christian in name only…

they don’t believe the Bible is, you know, the final authority.” Again, a few Christian

secondary education science teacher participants noted an emphasis on academics and

accreditation negatively affected the tenants of Christian education, creating change in

traditional values in Southern California Christian high schools, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution.

Limitations

The researcher utilized 18 (15 semi-structured interview participants and three

additional participants in the focus groups that did not participate in the semi-structured

interviews) Christian secondary education science teachers to determine their

understanding of how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory in

Southern California Christian high schools. The researcher incorporated a demographic

questionnaire, semi-structured interviews and focus groups to obtain data from the

Christian secondary education science teachers.

A limitation is something that is out of the researcher’s control, which affects the

outcome of the study (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). This study had three limitations.

The limitations were as follows:

1. The research was limited by an over-representation of Christian secondary

education science teachers who work in schools where creationism is promoted

over evolutionary theory. Of the 18 Christian secondary education science

teachers in this study, 13 taught biblical creation as fact, five taught both

evolutionary theory and creation equally, and zero taught evolutionary theory as

fact. Future researchers might mitigate this limitation to study more closely

science teachers in Christian schools who are required to present both evolution

and creationism to their students.

2. The research was limited by the fact that only one participant was educated at a

Catholic University. Of the 18 Christian secondary education science teachers in

this study, 11 teachers were educated at a Christian university, one at both a

Christian and secular universities, and five at a secular university. Future

researchers might mitigate this limitation to explore important distinctions

between Catholic secondary education science teachers and Protestant/Christian

secondary education science teachers.

3. The research was limited by an over-representation of Christian secondary

education science teachers who utilized Christian-based curriculum when

teaching biblical creation verses evolutionary theory. Of the 18 Christian

secondary education science teachers in this study, 15 utilized a Christian-based

curriculum while three utilized a secular curriculum. Future researchers might

mitigate the limitation to study more closely science teachers in Christian schools

who utilize secular science curriculum.

Summary

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in Christian

Science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The

researcher utilized a qualitative methodology to gather detailed information from

Christian secondary education science teachers currently serving in accredited Christian

high schools. There were 18 Christian secondary education science teachers (15

semistructured interview participants and three additional participants in the focus groups

who did not participate in the interviews) who participated in the study. Four research

questions were developed to collect data for the phenomenon, with 16 semi-structured

interview questions (Appendix H) and six focus group prompts (Appendix H) to provide

information for the research questions. The researcher utilized the six-phase inductive

thematic analysis process by Braun and Clarke (2006) to identify patterns and

relationships from the data collected. This researcher focused on data collection from

participants utilizing demographic questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, and focus

groups to explore what Christian secondary education science teachers understood

regarding this phenomenon.

The information provided within the data analysis results provided by Christian

secondary education science teachers was compelling. The semi-structured interviews

and focus groups revealed that the participants identified Social Media Exposure,

Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation, and Public-School Transfers as determining

factors in the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California

Christian high schools. Regarding research question two, the semi-structured interviews

and the focus groups revealed that participants identified Academic Standards in

Curriculum and Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory as determining

factors in the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory. Regarding research question

three, the semi-structured interviews and the focus groups revealed that participants

identified Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism, and The Culture Around you

Influences You as determining factors in the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory.

Regarding research question four, the semi-structured interviews and the focus groups

revealed that participants identified Societal Values Influence Traditional Values and

Changing Christian Culture as determining factors in the increased acceptance of

evolutionary theory.

The research study’s limitations were related to the interpretations of the results

and the subjectivity aspects of the thematic analysis process in a qualitative study. The

researcher utilized a structured Interview Protocol (Appendix H) to guide the

semistructured interview participant questions and the focus group prompts. However,

there remained a potential bias in interpreting the participant’s responses. Additionally,

since the researcher was a novice, the researcher utilized field testing (Appendix E) and

an expert panel to aid in designing the semi-structured interview questions and the focus

group prompts for efficacy. During this process, questions were altered and aligned from

suggestions of the field test and expert panel. To mitigate these limitations, the researcher

emailed each participant the transcript of their interview or focus group and asked each

participant to check the transcript for accuracy and meaning (member checking). This

study did have a limited sample size of eighteen participants between the semi-structured

interviews and focus groups. A larger sample would not have been manageable with the

amount of word data already collected in this research (196, single spaced pages of

transcripts). The sample population was not completely diverse in that only Christian

secondary education science teachers participated in the study.

Chapter 5 concludes this research project with a summary of the findings, overall

organization, as well as a reflection of the dissertation process. Next, sections on the

theoretical implications, practical implications, future implications, and strengths and

weaknesses of the study are articulated. Lastly, recommendations for future research and

a holistic reflection on the problem space is completed.

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

Introduction and Summary of Study

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. This study is

important because it advances how Christian secondary education science teachers in

Southern California viewed the phenomenon studied and why there has been an increase

in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian academia in the last 30 years. The

Christian secondary education science teachers in this study regularly interacted with

Christian secondary education science students, which provided the opportunity to

understand how this phenomenon occurred.

The researcher discovered a gap or problem space in the existing literature

regarding how Christian secondary education science teachers describe increased

acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values. This study aimed to fill this research

gap. Metzger et al. (2018), identified the need for further research regarding the impact of

curriculum change and how instructional approaches affect the acceptance of

evolutionary theory. Nehm and Mead (2019) identified the need for further research on

the measurement of knowledge, skills, and dispositions central to the evolutionary theory

education curriculum and how they mitigate student misconceptions regarding the

acceptance of the theory of evolution. Additionally, Barnes et al. (2020) noted the need

for further research on the differential impact of religious culture (traditional values)

competencies on students’ perceived conflicts regarding the acceptance of evolution.

Furthermore, Eichenlaub (2021) noted that societal values such as secularism could lead

to an eventual erasure of religion (traditional values) altogether. Finally, various

researchers have examined science curriculum change, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values using quantitative methods (Barnes et al., 2020; Mead et al.,

2019; Metzger et al., 2018) but not qualitative methodology.

This study focused on understanding how Christian secondary education science

teachers in Southern California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of

the theory of evolution in terms of changes in Christian, science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values. To properly understand this

phenomenon, four research questions were necessary. The following research questions

focused on the study:

RQ1: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ2: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in curriculum, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ3: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in societal values, which might explain the

increase acceptance of the theory of evolution?

RQ4: How do Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools describe changes in traditional values, which might explain the

increased acceptance of the theory of evolution?

The researcher utilized a qualitative descriptive design to understand how

Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high

schools described the increased acceptance of the theory of evolutionary in terms of

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values. This dissertation presents the outcomes of the research conducted. This study

utilized a demographic questionnaire, a semi-structured interview protocol, and two focus

groups of four to six participants. The researcher utilized a six-phase inductive thematic

analysis process by Braun and Clarke (2006) to analyze the data collected. Inductive

thematic analysis is a qualitative research approach utilized to identify, analyze, and

report patterns of data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Many codes and initial themes emerged

from the data analysis, which led to identifying nine themes over the four research

questions (3 themes for RQ1, 2 themes for RQ2, 2 themes for RQ3, and 2 themes for

RQ4).

The themes that emerged from the data analysis process were the following: For

research question one: Social Media Exposure, Mainstream Academia Denounces

Creation, and Public-School Transfers. For research question two: Academic Standards in

Curriculum, and Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. For research

question three: Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism, and The Culture Around you

Influences You. For research question four: Societal Values Influence Traditional Values

and Changing Christian Culture.

Researchers previously identified in Chapter 2 have shared their views regarding

outside influences such as social media exposure to Hollywood, the internet,

smartphones, changes in science curriculum, secular ideology (humanism, secularism,

post-modernism), as well as the changing Christian culture (traditional values) in

Christian academia. For instance, Francis et al. (2019) noted that various predictors or

outside influences potentially determine whether students accept or reject evolutionary

theory. Metzger et al. (2018) identified the impact of curriculum change and how

instructional approaches affect the acceptance of evolutionary theory. Eichenlaub (2021)

noted that societal values such as secularism could lead to an eventual erasure of religion

(traditional values) altogether. These researchers have identified both the benefits and

challenges posed by changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and

changes in traditional values.

The researcher utilized Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change, which was

extracted from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step Model of Change). This theory was

instrumental in this research because it highlighted organizational change processes.

Lewin’s theory highlighted constructs in the organizational change process of unfreezing,

moving, and freezing. This theory aided in understanding how Christian secondary

education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools described the

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values by further understanding the

driving forces (societal values) and the restraining forces (traditional values), which

fabricate change. During the semi-structured interviews and focus groups, it became

evident that Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California

Christian high schools identified the driving forces in their schools as the societal values

in Southern California consisting of humanism, secularism, and post-modernism and the

restraining forces as traditional values indigenous to Christian high schools in Southern

California. The researcher analyzed this data and developed theoretical implications,

findings, as well as future recommendations from the research.

Chapter 1 introduced the study’s background information, problem statement, and

purpose of the research. Additionally, research questions were introduced, as well as the

theoretical foundation, and the design for the study. Chapter 2 provided an overview, with

regards to previous research on the topic, explained the gap or problem space for the

study, and explained the theoretical foundation utilized for the research. Chapter 3

highlighted the following sections: the purpose of the study, research questions, rationale

for a qualitative methodology, rationale for a qualitative descriptive design, population

and sample selection, source of data, trustworthiness, data collection and management

process, data analysis procedures, ethical considerations, as well as the assumptions and

delimitations of the research. Chapter 4 provided a detailed explanation of the raw data

preparation, data collection procedures and analysis, results of the study, as well as the

study’s limitations and summary. Chapter 5 presents an overall summary of the findings

from the research conducted, the conclusions, as well as recommendations for future

research.

Summary of Findings and Conclusion

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. By utilizing a

qualitative descriptive design, the researcher explored the phenomenon articulated in the

purpose of this study. An inductive thematic analysis process was utilized to analyze data

from 15 semi-structured interviews, as well as two focus groups of four to six participants

(total of 18 participants), which produced nine themes. Although some coded data were

mentioned more often than others, each addressed the gap or problem space in previous

research regarding changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes

in traditional values. Additionally, a demographic questionnaire was utilized to provide an

additional layer of richness to the data set.

Overall Organization

This study sought to build on prior research that explored the increased

acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian academia. Additionally, this study sought

to discover new data organic to this phenomenon. The following narrative presents an

overview of the results regarding the data collected from the four research questions,

which are presented below and contrasted with findings from previous literature.

Research Question 1. How do Christian secondary education science teachers

working in Christian high schools describe the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution? The results from this research question were derived from 18 participants (15

semi-structured interview participants and three focus group participants who did not

participate in the semi-structured interviews). The Christian secondary education science

teachers’ words and phrases were like much of the literature reviewed in Chapter 2 of this

study. The three themes that organically emerged regarding research question one was

Social Media Exposure, Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation, and Public-School

Transfers. These themes aligned in the following manner with the literature review in

Chapter 2.

All the participants in the semi-structured interviews, as well as the two focus

groups indicated that they understood the importance that social media exposure plays

regarding the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern California

Christian high schools. Moreover, social media exposure from Hollywood productions,

television, the internet, and smartphones was instrumental to the increased acceptance of

the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. This aligned with

Francis et al. (2019), who noted that outside influences such as personal, psychological,

religious, theological, and attitudinal markers influenced the acceptance of evolutionary

theory, oftentimes through the influences of social media platforms.

Additionally, mainstream academia denounces creation as a theme was also a

significant factor in the participant’s responses regarding how Christian secondary

education science teachers described the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution.

This aligned with research from Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) and Pratt (2020) who

noted that mainstream academic philosophy and worldviews are an ideological construct

that produce change, modernism, and removal of religion (denouncing biblical creation)

from the public square. Next, Barnes et al. (2020), Barnes et al. (2021), as well as Pratt

(2020) all noted mainstream academia promoted evolutionary theory and denounced

religion and creation.

Finally, public school transfers were another significate factor in the participant

responses for research question one. This theme aligned with Bertka et al. (2019) who

noted that pedagogical approaches designed to address tensions in the public and private

US high school biology classroom were needed, because evolutionary theory and religion

were presented in such a way that influenced a students’ willingness to understand the

science-religion debate. Next, this theme also aligned with Marin and Lindeman (2021)

who noted that epistemic and ontological cognition predict debate between science and

religion by utilizing interaction perspectives such as conflict, independence, dialogue, and

integration, in this case, debate and argument amongst public school transfer students to

Christian highs schools and Christian students already attending Christian high schools.

RQ1 – Theme 1: Social Media Exposure. All Christian secondary education

science teacher participants working in Christian high schools noted that social media

exposure from Hollywood productions, television, the internet, and greater access to

smartphones increased their student’s acceptance of evolutionary theory because students

were predisposed to gathering their information from social media platforms rather than

the Christian high school science classroom. Based on the semi-structured interview and

focus group responses, all the Christian secondary education science teacher participants

posited that social media exposure did influence Christian secondary education science

students to accept the theory of evolution. These findings partially aligned with Francis et

al. (2019). For example, Francis et al. (2019) noted that personal, psychological,

religious, theological, and attitudinal markers (often from exposure to social media

platforms) potentially determined whether students accepted or rejected the theory of

evolution. This study further highlighted student dependability on social media to gather

their information rather than the Christian secondary education science classroom, which

constituted new research.

The results also aligned with the study's theoretical foundation, which is Lewin’s

Theory in Curriculum Change, as extracted from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step

Model of Change). Lewin (1936) posited that the unfreezing aspect of this theory was the

challenging process of reeducation, allowing for the fluidity necessary for change to

occur. Lewin further noted that this organizational change process occurred when driving

forces pressing for change were greater than those restraining change (Lewin, 1944).

Within this research, the driving forces regarding the acceptance of evolutionary theory

were societal values, and the restraining forces were traditional values in the Christian

community (Schein, 1999).

The Christian secondary education science teachers indicated that social media

exposure from Hollywood productions, television, the internet, and smartphone platforms

presented evolutionary theory as fact. This social media exposure created a driving force

in the acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian secondary education science classes

because the students’ accessibility and familiarization with these platforms encouraged

the Christian secondary education science students to gather their information from social

media rather than the Christian secondary education science classroom. Social media

exposure constituted new findings not highlighted in the Chapter 2 literature review.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included social media influences what students believe, social

media accepts evolutionary theory as fact, and students influenced towards evolution by

television and social media. The results suggested that Christian secondary education

science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools were not instrumental in

the increase of evolutionary theory acceptance, but that social media exposure from

various platforms such as Hollywood, the internet, and smartphones were creating the

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian

secondary education science students.

RQ1 – Theme 2: Mainstream Academia Denounces Creation. Several Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools noted that

mainstream academia denounced creation by not teaching evolutionary theory and

creation equally in society, that academia argues that creationism lacks sufficient

scientific evidence for evolutionary theory as fact and discounting biblical creation,

which explained the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. Based on the

semistructured interview and focus group responses, several Christian secondary

education science teachers noted that mainstream academia’s stance on biblical creation

influenced whether a Christian secondary education science student accepted the theory

of evolution because of its widespread application on social media. These findings

support the Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) study, as well as the Pratt (2020) study in

which mainstream academic philosophy and worldviews are an ideological construct that

produces change, modernism, and removal of religion (denouncing biblical creation)

from the public square. Francis et al. (2019) further noted that mainstream academic

philosophy and worldview influence the fourth of five markers, theology (exclusivism,

inclusivism, pluralism, inter-religious perspectives, atheism, and agnosticism

worldviews), which is instrumental in accepting evolutionary theory and denying biblical

creation.

Additionally, several participants in both the semi-structured interviews as well as

the focus groups noted a cultural perception that Christianity in general and biblical

creation have been downgraded in relationship to mainstream scientific thought, which

has created a greater acceptance of the theory of evolution amongst Christian secondary

education science students in Southern California Christian high schools. The reason for

these perceptions entailed how the biblical account of creation and the theory of evolution

were presented in society today. How academia viewed Christianity in comparison to

mainstream scientific thought. Whether evolutionary theory was taught as fact, which in

turn, created the narrative that “anything but creation, (ABC)” is the mainstream

scientific viewpoint regarding the biblical account of creation. These findings are

supported by Barnes et al. (2021), positing that Christian views on biblical creation were

negatively stereotyped amongst the biology community and academia in general.

Furthermore, Barnes et al. (2020) noted that scientists were biased against Christians and

expressed a perceived bias against Christians in academic biology.

Furthermore, several Christian secondary education science teachers expressed

the development of a mainstream “populist narrative” in academia regarding the theory of

evolution, which discredited the biblical account of creation. Several participants further

explained that education systems and popular media often emphasized mainstream

scientific explanations of the theory of evolution at the expense of religious or Christian

perspectives. For instance, Barnes et al. (2020) further noted that Christians were the

most underrepresented groups in science, which, in part, stemmed from mainstream

academia’s scientific bias against Christian students. Barnes et al. (2020) stated that this

narrative was specifically directed toward fundamentalist and/or evangelical Christian

views on evolutionary theory and biblical creation.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included biblical views are dumb, society belittling

creationism, and every alternative to evolution is a joke in mainstream academia. The

results suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern

California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of evolutionary

theory acceptance, but that mainstream academia denouncing creation was creating the

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian

secondary education science students.

RQ1 – Theme 3: Public School Transfers. Several Christian secondary education

science teachers working in Christian high schools described students who transferred

from public high schools as influencing the Christian high school students towards

accepting the theory of evolution because public high school students in Southern

California are taught the theory of evolution as a mainstream, factual science. Based on

the semi-structured interview and focus group responses, several Christian secondary

education science teachers noted that public school transfers influenced whether a

Christian secondary education science student accepted the theory of evolution because

of peer influence and interaction with public school student transfers. These findings were

partially supported by the findings in Chapter 2, the literature review. For example,

Bertka et al. (2019) noted that pedagogical approaches designed to address tensions in

public and private US high school biology classrooms were needed because evolutionary

theory and religion were presented in such a way that influenced a student’s willingness

to understand the science-religion debate. Furthermore, this debate constituted a peer

influence amongst Christian secondary education science students.

Additionally, Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian

high schools described peer influence from public high school students as instrumental to

addressing the influences these students had on Christian high schools, because these

students potentially increased evolutionary theory acceptance in Christian high schools

due to their baseline science education being evolutionary theory. Regarding the peer

influence aspect of public high school transfer students to Southern California Christian

high school students, three participants noted a marked increase in classroom debates and

confrontations from public school transfer students against Christian high school

students. These findings on peer influences were supported by Marin and Lindeman

(2021). For example, Marin and Lindeman (2021) noted that epistemic and ontological

cognition predict debate between science and religion by utilizing interaction perspectives

such as conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. The Christian secondary

education science teachers working in Christian high schools further noted that conflict,

independence, dialogue, and integration were occurring.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included transfer students from public schools bring

evolutionary theory influence, public school kids have only heard evolution, and

publicschool students influence Christian school students in evolution. The results

suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in Southern

California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of evolutionary

theory acceptance, but that public high school transfers to Christian high schools were

creating the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California

Christian secondary education science students.

Research Question 2. The second research question examined how Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools described the

changes in curriculum, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution? The results from this research question were derived from 18 participants (15

semi-structured interview participants and three focus group participants that did not

participate in the semi-structured interviews). The Christian secondary education science

teachers’ words and phrases were like much of the literature reviewed in Chapter 2 of this

study. The two themes that organically emerged regarding research question two were,

Academic Standards in Curriculum, and Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary

Theory. These themes aligned in the following manner with the literature review in

Chapter 2.

Several of the participants in the semi-structured interviews, as well as the two

focus groups indicated that they understood the importance that academic standards in

curriculum played regarding the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in

Southern California Christian high schools. Moreover, academic standards in curriculum

played an instrumental role in the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in

Southern California Christian high schools because the science curriculum mandated the

teaching of evolutionary theory for accreditation. Similarities were identified around the

area of curriculum changes in this researcher’s Chapter 2 literature review. Such studies

included Bertka et al. (2019), Bradshaw et al. (2018), Metzger et al. (2018), as well as

Nehm and Mead (2019).

Additionally, all Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools described each new edition of science curriculum as having more

evolutionary theory embedded in its pages and presented as fact. Branch et al. (2021)

posited that many of the states that adopted the Next Generation of Science Standards

were teaching evolutionary theory as fact in their adopted curriculum choices, which

supported the findings in this study. Next, Metzger et al. (2018), as well as Nehm and

Mead (2019) posited that evolution measurement instruments were instrumental in

creating a pro-evolutionary theory science curriculum, which presented evolutionary

theory as fact. Lastly, Ziadie and Andrews (2018) indicated that the pro-evolutionary

theory curriculum was influential in the teaching and accepting the theory of evolution.

RQ2 – Theme 1: Academic Standards in Curriculum. Several Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools described the

changing academic curriculum standards required for accreditation in Southern California

Christian high schools as including evolutionary theory. Based on the semi-structured

interview and focus group responses, the Christian secondary education science teachers

indicated that accreditation requirements dictated teaching the theory of evolution as part

of the curriculum standards for California. The participants noted this as instrumental to

Christian secondary education science students accepting the theory of evolution over

biblical creation. These findings were partially supported by the two cohort studies

described in Bradshaw et al. (2018). For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted that

evolutionary theory acceptance in Christian academia was attributed to the following: (1)

the introduction of science curriculum changes, (2) a decline in negative messaging

towards the theory of evolution, and (3) an increase of evolutionary theory acceptance

amongst the students’ parents.

Evolutionary theory is an integral part of the life science standards with regard to

the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). These standards serve as a framework

for science education, and they include evolutionary theory as a foundational concept

(Hanisch & Eirdosh, 2023). As a result, several Christian secondary education science

teachers in Southern California Christian high schools noted that California’s academic

standards for science education now mandated the teaching of evolutionary theory as part

of the curriculum standards in private Christian schools desiring accreditation through the

Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). These findings on curriculum

standards were partially supported by Bertka et al. (2019). For example, Bertka et al.

(2019) noted curriculum change (pedagogy) as instrumental to the acceptance of

evolutionary theory. Additionally, the fact that Southern California’s academic standards

for accreditation through WASC mandated the inclusion of evolutionary theory in its

curriculum for private Christian schools to be accredited constituted added information

from what the Chapter 2 literature review provided.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included accreditation determines what’s taught, evolution

required for accreditation, and accreditation influences evolutionary theory. The results

suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in Southern

California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of evolutionary

theory acceptance, but the changes to academic standards in curriculum that mandated the

theory of evolution be taught in Christian high schools were creating the increased

acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian secondary

education science students.

RQ2 – Theme 2: Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. All

Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools

described each new edition of science curriculum as having more evolutionary theory

embedded in its pages and presented as fact, which explained the increased acceptance of

the theory of evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. Based on the

participants’ responses in the semi-structured interviews and focus groups, all the

Christian secondary education science teachers indicated that each new edition of science

curriculum published had more explicit references to evolution, evolution as fact, and

slants or discrediting comments toward anything other than evolutionary theory.

Educational standards, such as the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in the

United States, often emphasize the importance of teaching foundational scientific

concepts, which include the theory of evolution. As a result, textbooks are often updated

to align more closely with these standards (Hanisch & Eirdosh, 2023), increasing

coverage of evolutionary theory topics. All participants in both the semi-structured

interviews and the focus groups noted that each new edition of science textbooks

presented more evolutionary theory embedded in its pages. These findings were

supported by Branch et al. (2021). For instance, Branch et al. (2021) posited that many of

the states that adopted the Next Generation of Science Standards were teaching

evolutionary theory as fact in their adopted curriculum choices because the only

curriculum utilized by the NGSS had more and more evolutionary theory embedded in its

pages.

Several participants noted that secular publishing companies publish science

textbooks and educational materials where evolutionary theory was indeed presented as

the mainstream scientific explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. The participants

further posited that within mainstream academia, evolutionary theory was

overwhelmingly supported as fact, oftentimes creating slanted, disparaging views of

alternatives such as the biblical account of creation. Moreover, several Christian

secondary education science teachers noted this as a potential influencer for accepting

evolutionary theory in Southern California Christian high schools. This data constituted

added information from what the Chapter 2 literature review provided.

A sub-theme of Secular Science Textbook Bias emerged from the theme: Science

Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory. Several participants noted that in any field,

including science education and textbook publishing, there is always a potential for bias

whether the educators and publishers are Christian or non-Christian. Moreover, several

Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools

described secular science textbook bias as instrumental to changes in Christian high

school curricula, explaining the increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst

Christian secondary education science students. Numerous studies in the field of

evolutionary theory instrumentation research supported these findings on science

textbook bias.

For the past 25 years, the utilization of evolution measurement instruments, which

measure knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about evolutionary theory have been

instrumental in influencing the development of science curriculum, with the goal of

promoting an ever-increasing display of evolution as fact, scientific bias towards

evolutionary theory, slants and disparaging views towards alternatives such as the biblical

account of creation, which in turn, has produced more and more evolutionary theory

embedded in each new edition of science curriculum. For instance, Metzger et al. (2018)

noted that science curriculum changes, which have continually adopted an increased

amount of evolutionary theory, which created a greater increase in the acceptance of the

theory of evolution. Additionally, Nehm and Mead (2019) posited that evolution

measurement instruments were instrumental in mitigating misconceptions of the natural

sciences through pro-evolutionary theory science curriculum. Lastly, Ziadie and Andrews

(2018) indicated that pro-evolutionary theory curriculum affected the teaching and

acceptance of the theory of evolution.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included evolution is irrefutable, more evolution in each

textbook, secular textbooks are biased, and evolution-based curriculum. The results

suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in Southern

California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of evolutionary

theory acceptance, but the changes in science curriculum that students were exposed to

presented more evolutionary theory as fact, which in turn, increased acceptance of

evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian secondary education science

students.

Research Question 3. The third research question examined how Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools described

changes in societal values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution? The results from this research question were derived from 18 participants (15

semi-structured interview participants and three focus group participants that did not

participate in the semi-structured interviews). The Christian secondary education science

teachers’ words and phrases were like much of the literature reviewed in Chapter two of

this study. The two themes that organically emerged regarding research question three

were as follows: Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism, and The Culture Around you

Influences You. These themes aligned in the following manner with the literature review

articulated in Chapter 2.

All Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high

schools acknowledged the increased presence of humanism, secularism, and

postmodernism philosophies in Southern California societal values, which promoted

antiBiblical and anti-Christian values. These findings aligned with those of Pratt (2020),

who noted that secular ideology, such as secularism, produces social change,

modernization, and the removal of religion from the public square. Moreover, similarities

between secular ideologies and historical movements and “isms” that support the

evolution theory were also identified. These ideologies further aligned with studies from

Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021), Nilsson and Jost (2020), Quadri (2021), Watts and

Kutschera (2021), and Wright (2020).

Additionally, several Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools in Southern California noted how the changes in today’s societal

values endorse a pro-evolutionary theory philosophy and worldview narrative and that

students are shaped by the culture they live in. This theme constituted added information

from what the Chapter 2 literature extrapolated. However, the definitions previously

mentioned supported the findings in this study. For instance, studies such Adebumiti and

Ekhareafo (2021), Nilsson and Jost (2020), as well as Quadri (2021) noted humanism,

secularism, and post-modernism as cultural influences, which promote social engineering

through a disassociation from religion and religious beliefs such as the biblical account of

creation.

RQ3 – Theme 1: Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism. All Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools described the

increased presence of humanism, secularism, and post-modernism philosophies in

Southern California societal values that promoted anti-Biblical and anti-Christian values,

which explains the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. Based on the

semistructured interviews and focus groups, all participants noted that the changing

Southern California societal values, which promoted secular ideologies such as

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism, influenced the acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. These secular ideology findings

aligned with humanism, secularism, and post-modernism definitions. For example,

Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) posited that post-modernism seeks to introduce social

ideologies that influence societies to become devoid of religion. Nilsson and Jost (2020)

posited that humanism is a worldview that seeks to identify humans as intrinsically good

and valuable as an end to themselves. Quadri (2021) noted that secularism seeks a social

order without the affiliation of religion. During the semi-structured interviews and focus

group participation, all the participants commented on secular ideologies as instrumental

in Southern California Christian high school students accepting evolutionary theory.

Additionally, several participants noted the promotion of humanism, secularism,

and post-modernism in Southern California as influencing the removal of Christian

rhetoric from society altogether, which influenced the acceptance of the theory of

evolution as a non-Christian alternative to biblical creation by developing an atmosphere

where there was no need for God. As previously mentioned, these findings aligned with

the definitions of humanism, secularism, and post-modernism articulated in the Chapter 2

literature review. For example, Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) noted that

postmodernism seeks to establish a society devoid of religion. Quadri (2021) posited that

secularism sought a social order without the affiliation of religion. Lastly, Nilsson and

Jost (2020) noted that humanism sought to promote humans as being their own god.

The results also aligned with this study’s theoretical foundation, which is Lewin’s

Theory in Curriculum Change, as extracted from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step

Model of Change). Lewin (1936) posited that the unfreezing aspect of this theory is the

challenging process of reeducation, allowing for the fluidity necessary for change to

occur. Lewin (1944) further noted that organizational change occurs when driving forces

pressing for change exceed those restraining change. Within this research, the driving

forces instrumental in the acceptance of evolutionary theory were societal values, and the

restraining forces were traditional values in the Christian community (Schein, 1999). The

Christian secondary education science teachers indicated that secular ideologies such as

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism were a driving force in accepting

evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian secondary education science

students.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included secularism in Christianity, secularism is

antiChristian, and evolution is a religion of humanism, secularism, and post-modernism.

The results suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Southern California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of

evolutionary theory acceptance, but the changes in Southern California societal values,

which embraced secular ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism

created an increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California

Christian secondary education science students.

RQ3 – Theme 2: The Culture Around you Influences You. Several Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools in Southern

California noted how the changes in today’s societal values endorse a pro-evolutionary

theory philosophy and worldview narrative and that students are shaped by the culture

and societal values they live in, which explains the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus groups, all participants

noted that Southern California's societal values, which promoted secular ideologies such

as humanism and secularism, influenced the acceptance of an evolutionary theory

worldview because the aim of these ideologies was to make society “devoid of religion.”

This theme constituted new information from what Chapter 2 literature provided.

However, the definitions previously mentioned supported the findings in this study. For

instance, studies such as Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021), Nilsson and Jost (2020), as

well as Quadri (2021) noted humanism, secularism, and post-modernism as cultural

influences, which seek to nullify religion and principles such as biblical creation.

Christian secondary education science teachers noted that societal influences in Southern

California, such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism, contributed to accepting

evolutionary theory because the culture around you influences you.

Several participants noted that the culture or societal values in Southern

California influenced their students to potentially accept the theory of evolution, because

culture and societal values are not neutral, and students are shaped by the culture they

live in. This theme further constituted added information not previously articulated or

identified in the Chapter 2 literature review but did align with the definitions previously

highlighted regarding the tenants of humanism, secularism, post-modernism, and how

they influence societal change in Southern California Christian high schools, as well as

Southern California society in general. Additionally, these same participants noted that

there was a concerted effort in Southern California’s changing societal values, to oppose

traditional values, which further explains the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution. Again, these findings were supported by Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021),

Nilsson and Jost (2020), as well as Quadri (2021).

As mentioned previously, the results also aligned with the theoretical foundation

of this study, which is Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change, as extracted from Lewin’s

Change Model (Three-Step Model of Change). Lewin (1936) posited that the unfreezing

aspect of this theory is the challenging process of reeducation, allowing for changes to

occur. Lewin (1944) further noted that this organizational change process occurs when

driving forces pressing for change exceed those restraining change. Within this research,

the driving forces regarding the acceptance of evolutionary theory were societal values

and the restraining forces were traditional values in the Christian community (Schein,

1999). The Christian secondary education science teachers indicated that cultural

influences in Southern California were the driving forces in the acceptance of

evolutionary theory amongst Christian secondary education science students because the

culture around you influences you.

The words and phrases repeatedly mentioned by the Christian secondary

education science teachers included what’s around you influences you, students are

shaped by the culture they live in, and culture influences evolutionary theory. The results

suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in Southern

California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of evolutionary

theory acceptance, but the changes in Southern California societal values, which

embraced secular ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism,

influenced the culture created amongst Christian high school students and created an

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian

secondary education science students.

Research Question 4. The fourth research question examined how Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools described

changes in traditional values, which might explain the increased acceptance of the theory

of evolution? The results from this research question were derived from 18 participants

(15 semi-structured interview participants and three focus group participants that did not

participate in the semi-structured interviews). The Christian secondary education science

teachers’ words and phrases were like much of the literature reviewed in Chapter 2 of this

study. The two themes that organically emerged regarding research question four were,

Societal Values Influence Traditional Values, and Changing Christian Culture. These

themes aligned in the following manner with the literature review articulated in

Chapter 2.

All Christian secondary education science teachers working in Christian high

schools posited that Southern California societal values were influenced by humanism,

secularism, and post-modernism, which caused Southern California societal values to

adversely impact traditional values and the Southern California Christian high school

student’s belief system. This theme explains the increased acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Southern California Christian high schools. This data constituted added

information from what was previously extrapolated from the Chapter 2 literature review.

However, the definitions previously articulated support the findings in this study. For

example, Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021), Nilsson and Jost (2020), Pratt (2020), as well

as Quadri (2021) noted humanism, secularism, and post-modernism as cultural

influences, which seek to nullify religion and create religion devoid of God, diminishing

the traditional values taught to Christian secondary education science students in

Southern California Christian high schools.

Additionally, several Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools described the changing culture in Southern California Christian

high schools as instrumental to the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. These

findings aligned with studies such as Bradshaw et al. (2018) as well as Lindsay et al.

(2019), which noted that a Christian culture that promoted scientific methodology and

mainstream, secular academic thought was changing perspectives and the importance

placed on traditional values taught in Southern California Christian high schools, creating

an increased acceptance of the theory of evolution amongst Christian secondary

education science students.

RQ4 – Theme 1: Societal Values Influence Traditional Values. All Christian

secondary education science teachers working in Christian high schools noted that

Southern California societal values were heavily influenced by humanism, secularism,

and post-modernism, causing Southern California societal values to negatively impact

traditional values and the Southern California Christian high school student’s belief

system, which explains the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in Southern

California Christian high schools. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus

groups, all participants noted that Southern California Christian high schools were

negatively influenced by Southern California societal values and evolutionary theory,

which are the antithesis to the tenants of traditional values and the biblical account of

creation promoted in Southern California Christian high schools.

Next, all Christian secondary education science teachers working in Southern

California Christian high schools noted that the changing Southern California societal

values (humanism, secularism, post-modernism) were influencing a decline in traditional

values typically aligned with private Christian high schools. This data supported the

findings previously articulated in the Chapter 2 literature review. For example, Adebumiti

and Ekhareafo (2021) noted that every society evolves on established values, norms and

traditions which shape their lifestyle over time. The author further noted that as post-

modernism values (Southern California societal values) increased, traditional values were

decreasing, in part, due to irresponsibility on social media platforms. Furthermore, Pratt

(2020) posited that the rise of secularism (Southern California societal values) created a

feeling of antipathy towards Christianity and its traditional values associated with it.

Additionally, several Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Christian high schools noted that Southern California societal values were a driving force

that advocated for secular ideologies such as humanism, secularism, and post-modernism,

which competed for prominence against traditional values. According to several

participants, the narrative created an anti-God, anti-Christianity message that promoted

the devaluing of traditional values, as well as the exclusion of religion altogether, which

explains the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution. These findings aligned with

Pratt (2020), who noted that secularism was an ideological construct instrumental in

social change (in this case, changes in Southern California societal values), which

competed for prominence in society, creating a decline in religious or traditional values.

Finally, the findings aligned with the theoretical foundation of this study.

As mentioned previously, the results also aligned with the theoretical foundation

for this study, which is Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change as extrapolated from

Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step Model of Change). Lewin (1936) posited that the

unfreezing step in this theory is a challenging reeducation process, allowing for the

pliability necessary for change to occur. Additionally, Lewin (1944) noted that this

organizational change process occurs when driving forces pressing for change (in this

case Southern California changes in societal values) are greater than those restraining

change (traditional values). The Christian secondary education science teachers indicated

that the Southern California societal values were the driving forces in the acceptance of

evolutionary theory amongst Southern California Christian secondary education science

students because the current societal values in Southern California, as well as Southern

California Christian high schools, were influencing traditional values.

The words and phrases repeatedly associated with the Christian secondary

education science teachers included societal values impact our belief system, society is

influencing evolution acceptance, and accepting anything contrary to traditional values.

The results suggested that Christian secondary education science teachers working in

Southern California Christian high schools were not instrumental in the increase of

evolutionary theory acceptance, but the changes in Southern California societal values,

which influenced the traditional values associated Southern California Christian high

schools created an increased acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern

California Christian secondary education science students.

RQ4 – Theme 2: Changing Christian Culture. Several Christian secondary

education science teachers working in Christian high schools described the changing

culture in Southern California Christian high schools as instrumental to the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution because mainstream scientific thought has become

more accepted today in Christian high schools, and traditional values are not as strong as

they once were. Based on the semi-structured interviews and focus groups, several

participants noted that Southern California Christian high schools possessed a changing

Christian culture, which was more user-friendly toward accepting the theory of evolution.

These findings aligned with Bradshaw et al. (2018), as well as Lindsay et al. (2019). For

example, Bradshaw et al. (2018) posited that there had been a 72% increase in the

acceptance of the theory of evolution in Christian academia over the past 30 years due to

a changing culture in the Christian academic community. Bradshaw et al. (2018) further

noted these changes in Christian culture transpired due to, (1) more student exposure to

the theory of evolution, (2) less negative messaging regarding the theory of evolution,

and (3) more Christian parents accepting the theory of evolution as a scientific

explanation for origins. Additionally, Lindsay et al. (2019) noted the increase in the

acceptance of the theory of evolution in Christian denominations such as the Nazarenes,

Christian churches, and schools, as well as the Assemblies of God.

The results also aligned with Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change as extricated

from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step Model of Change). Lewin (1936) posited that

the unfreezing phase of this theory is the challenging process of reeducation, allowing for

the flow necessary for change to transpire. Lewin (1944) further noted that this

organizational change process occurs when driving forces pressing for change are more

dynamic than those restraining change. The driving forces promoting the acceptance of

evolutionary theory were Southern California societal values, and the restraining forces

were traditional values. The Christian secondary education science teachers noted that a

changing Christian culture in Southern California Christian high schools was paramount

to the decline of traditional values and increased acceptance of the theory of evolution in

Christian secondary education science students.

The words and phrases repeatedly associated with the Christian secondary

education science teachers included evolution is more acceptable in Christian culture,

cultural Christians believe both evolution and creation, and traditional biblical values

are not as strong. The results suggested that Christian secondary education science

teachers working in Southern California Christian high schools were not instrumental in

the increase of evolutionary theory acceptance, but the changes in Southern California

societal values, which influenced the traditional values associated with Southern

California Christian high schools created an increased acceptance of evolutionary theory

amongst Southern California Christian secondary education science students.

Conclusion. The significance of this study indicated that Southern California,

Christian secondary education science teachers understood and articulated that there had

been a steady increase in the acceptance of evolutionary theory amongst Southern

California Christian secondary education science students. However, this increase did not

occur from Christian secondary education science teacher influences but from outside

influences such as social media platforms, negative messaging from mainstream

academia to Christian academia regarding the evolutionary theory/biblical creation

debate, and the influence of public school transfer students to private Christian high

schools.

Additionally, increased influences on the acceptance of the theory of evolution

amongst Christian high school students have occurred due to changing academic

standards on curriculum imposed on private Christian high schools seeking accreditation

from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). Moreover, these

curriculum changes created a steading increase in the acceptance of the theory of

evolution in Christian academia. Finally, another contributing factor in changing

curriculum practices, which contributed to this increase was that each new edition of

science textbook sought to include more evolutionary theory embedded in its pages and

taught as fact.

Next, Southern California's societal values and cultural influences, such as

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism, have permeated Southern California culture

and created an anti-God and anti-Christian atmosphere even within Christian high

schools. Moreover, as stated by most of the participants, the culture around you

influences you, which is what is occurring in Southern California Christian high schools.

The findings further highlighted a significant correlation between Southern California

societal values and their effect on traditional values typically associated with as the

foundational building blocks of the Christian faith, as well as Christian academia.

Moreover, Southern California societal values (humanism, secularism,

postmodernism), have influenced or marginalized traditional values associated with

Christian academia, because the culture in Southern California has been in opposition to

traditional values. Additionally, the cultural influences highlighted have affected a

changing Christian culture within Southern California Christian high schools. Therefore,

the significance of these findings further substantiates the concepts articulated in Lewin’s

Change Model, where driving forces and restraining forces compete for dominance.

Finally, the findings in this study further suggest that the concepts highlighted in

Lewin’s Theory in Curriculum Change (Three-Step Model of Change) were instrumental

to the acceptance or rejection of evolutionary theory amongst Southern California

Christian high school science students. Driving forces such as Southern California

societal values and restraining forces such as traditional values associated with Christian

high schools competed against each other for supremacy. All participants agreed that

current Southern California societal values influenced the acceptance of evolutionary

theory amongst Christian high school students because of the anti-biblical, anti-God

message propagated by ideologies such as secularism, humanism, and post-modernism.

In conclusion, these findings were all contributing factors instrumental to the increased

acceptance of the theory of evolution amongst Southern California Christian high school

students.

Reflection on the Dissertation Process

In reflection of this dissertation, the iterative process stands out as the thread of

knowledge, which stitches together all aspects of this doctoral journey from start to

finish. For instance, in reflection of the dissertation process, this candidate gained greater

understanding of the functionality of the 10 strategic points, the prospectus, the proposal,

academic quality review (AQR), institutional review board (IRB), and the data collection

process. These processes have built upon each other and formulated a stable, but crucial

foundation necessary to accomplish research in a trustworthy and meaningful manner.

Scripture states it best, “Iron sharpeneth iron…” (Prov. 27:17, King James Version).

Furthermore, the iterative process has highlighted the challenges symbiotic to this level of

academic rigor. The following are this doctoral candidate’s challenges, and strategies

implemented throughout the doctoral process to mitigate those challenges.

In reflection, the major challenges and mitigation strategies are discussed in the

following paragraphs: first, the amount of literature that needed to be reviewed was

lengthy, since this phenomenon has been in existence for over 150 years and has been

viewed from numerous perspectives. The overarching strategy utilized to organize the

plethora of information was to categorize the Chapter 2 literature review by historical

movements (isms) that influenced the acceptance of evolutionary theory, the creationist

movements and events in American history, evolution from five population perspectives

(demographics), evolution instrumentation research, and current thinking on science vs.

religion from a Christian perspective.

The second challenge was the controversial tendencies associated with the topic

of evolutionary theory and biblical creation. The mitigating strategies utilized to

overcome these controversial tendencies were focused on fair and balanced writing skills,

which ensured the synthesizing of all literature available on this topic. Through the

iterative process, the narrative was better developed to produce an informative, nonbiased

explanation and presentation of both sides of the phenomenon. Additionally, through the

development of a robust demographic questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and

focus group protocol, a large amount of data was collected in a nonbiased, non-

confrontational manner. Lastly, through the processes of inductive thematic analysis,

themes emerged organically in a non-biased manner.

The third challenge was the population size of Christian secondary education

science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools, which posed a potential

challenge regarding the number of site authorizations needed. Most Christian high

schools in Southern California are typically smaller in size and are categorized as

kindergarten through twelfth grade. These schools typically employ one or two science

teachers. The mitigating strategy utilized to overcome this challenge was to obtain site

authorizations from larger Christian high schools. For instance, one school had a

population of 1,500 students. Five other schools had a population of 400-500 students,

which allowed this doctoral candidate to obtain site authorization from 10 schools, which

ensured the population sample needed.

Implications

This section is segmented into four sections: theoretical implications, practical

implications, future implications, and strengths and weaknesses of the study. The

theoretical implications highlight the interpretation of the dissertation findings, regarding

the research questions and how they guided the study. The practical implications identify

how the results of the study are applied in education. The future implications focus

specifically on how a researcher can utilize this study in future research. Lastly, the

strengths and weaknesses section focus on the successes and limitations of this research

from a methodological, design, and analysis perspective.

Theoretical Implications

As extracted from Lewin’s Change Model (Three-Step Model of Change),

Lewin's Theory in Curriculum Change was instrumental in this research because it

highlighted the organizational change processes (unfreezing, moving, and freezing).

Lewin (1936) introduced the unfreezing aspect of his theory as the challenging process of

reeducation, allowing for the fluidity necessary for change to occur. Additionally, Lewin

(1936) identified the moving function of this theory as locomotion or “a changing

position within the field” (p.216). Locomotion occurs when driving forces pressing for

change are greater than those restraining change (Lewin, 1944). Previous researchers

supported the three-step model of change, because of its identification of driving and

restraining forces associated with the model. For example, Schein (1999) posited that

within the processes of curriculum change, driving and restraining forces are instrumental

to change occurring.

The participants in this study were selected specifically because of their

identification as Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern California

Christian high schools. This study found that all participants asserted the influences of

societal values as the driving forces fueling the increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in Southern California Christian high schools. In contrast, all participants indicated

that traditional values or the restraining forces warring to prevent the acceptance of

evolutionary theory were paramount in Christian secondary education students

maintaining an acceptance of biblical creation, which is the Young Earth Creationists

interpretation of this historical narrative. Furthermore, the participants agreed that the

driving forces (societal values) in Southern California were stronger than the restraining

forces (traditional values) in Southern California society. These processes highlighted

“locomotion” or change as described by Lewin (1936).

Practical Implications

The practical implications of this research study’s findings can be applied to help

Christian secondary education science teachers, as well as other Christian professionals to

identify the outside influences within Southern California society which are instrumental

in driving change or increased acceptance of evolutionary theory. Some of these outside

influences are ideologies like humanism, secularism, and post-modernism. For instance,

Adebumiti and Ekhareafo (2021) posited that post-modernism seeks to introduce social

ideologies, which influence societies to become devoid of religion. Quadri (2021) noted

that secularism seeks a social order without the affiliation of religion. Therefore, previous

research indicates these ideologies as anti-biblical, anti-God, and detrimental to the future

existence of Southern California Christian high school students.

Additionally, the findings of this study revealed two primary practical

applications. First, the results of the study build upon the collaboration and knowledge

sharing between Christian secondary education professionals as crucial to mitigating the

driving forces within Southern California society. The specific collaboration and

knowledge sharing participants described were as follows: openness to teach traditional

values, that the Bible is the final authority in Christian academia, and that secular

philosophies are not neutral. Second, implications of this study provided crucial insight to

Christian secondary education science teachers regarding the understanding of driving

and restraining forces, which compete for change within an organization. The study

results indicated that changes in societal values, which negatively influence traditional

values comprise of numerous components, as described in the nine main themes and

subsequent sub-themes articulated by the participants’ responses. Therefore, it can be

presumed that this research provides insight regarding changes in curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values and how they influence the acceptance

of evolutionary theory.

Future Implications

The purpose of this qualitative descriptive study was to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools

describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. The results of this research

identified nine themes: Social Media Exposure, Mainstream Academia Denounces

Creation, Public-School Transfers, Academic Standards in Curriculum, Science

Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory, Humanism, Secularism, Post-Modernism,

The Culture Around you Influences You, Societal Values Influence Traditional Values, and

Changing Christian Culture.

This study was delimited to focus on Southern California, Christian secondary

education science teachers. Future research could be conducted with Christian high

school principals to determine their understanding of driving forces (societal values) and

restraining forces (traditional values), and how they exercise change within a Christian

education institution. Overall, the findings suggested that Christian secondary education

science teachers understood the dynamics involved in organizational change (driving and

restraining forces). Since all but three participants were interviewed utilizing face-to-face

protocols, future investigations could involve Zoom video conferencing to ensure

interviews are conducted over a broader geographical area. Finally, another future

implication could involve Christian secondary education science teachers sharing the

dynamics of driving vs. restraining forces with other stakeholders such as parents and

students.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Study

There were many strengths to this study. Choosing a qualitative methodology

provided perspective to the phenomenon because it approached research from a

theoretical rigor and sound reasoning perspective, utilizing words as data (Braun &

Clarke, 2013). The decision to utilize a qualitative descriptive design over other

qualitative designs was paramount, as it allowed the Christian secondary education

science teachers to provide detailed information from their perspective (Sandelowski,

2000). Additionally, the population and sample selection protocols produced a target

population of 18 Christian secondary education science teachers, producing 196 pages of

single-spaced transcripts. Regarding the data sources, a demographic questionnaire, 15

semi-structured interviews, and two focus groups of four to six participants provided the

researcher with a rich description of how changes in science curriculum, changes in

societal values, and changes in traditional values influenced the acceptance of the theory

of evolution. All the participants used similar words and phrases to describe their

understanding of the phenomenon, producing substantial data to answer the four research

questions.

At the beginning of this research, the doctoral candidate identified several

weaknesses to the study. The first weakness was the limited time to research Christian

secondary education science teachers. The access to participants was limited due to their

extremely busy schedules. Another weakness was the utilization of a convenience

sampling methodology, and the collection of data based on the investigator’s

convenience. Additionally, another weakness was that the researcher interviewed

Christian secondary education science teachers only when seeking information regarding

changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional

values in Southern California, Christian high schools. Since they may have more

experience, interviewing Christian high school principals would have generated a more

diverse data set. Despite these weaknesses, the research questions were addressed and

answered in a manner that provided the researcher with 566 minutes of audio/video

recorded interviews, producing 196 pages of single-spaced transcripts, leading to nine

themes from the inductive thematic analysis process. Therefore, in reflection of this study,

the modifications or changes this doctoral candidate would make in future research

correspond to the weaknesses articulated in this section.

Recommendations

This section of the dissertation highlights the recommendations for future research

and practice. It is evident that additional research is needed on how Christian secondary

education science teachers in Southern California Christian high schools describe

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in terms of changes in science curriculum,

changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values. Christian secondary

education science teachers, as well as other Christian professionals articulated a need to

better understand how the acceptance of evolutionary theory is influencing Christian high

school students in Southern California and how future research can benefit the mitigation

of this phenomenon.

Recommendations for Future Research

Based on the data analysis and findings, there are five recommendations for future

research regarding how Christian secondary education science teachers in Southern

California Christian high schools describe increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in

terms of changes in Christian science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes

in traditional values. These findings articulate a broader spectrum of potential research to

include more diverse denominational backgrounds and their levels of conservatism, other

curriculum opportunities such an apologetics, and greater diversity amongst participants.

Finally, the following are the recommendations for future research.

1. It would be beneficial to perform this study with Christian secondary education

science students to determine whether teaching apologetics could mitigate the

increased acceptance of evolutionary theory in Christian high schools. This would

enable researchers a broader perspective on Lewin’s Curriculum Change Model

(driving forces and restraining forces) and how apologetics curriculum might

influence a counterbalance to the increased acceptance of the theory of evolution

in Southern California Christian high schools.

2. This study examined 18 Christian secondary education science teachers’

understanding of how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values,

and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary theory

in Southern California, Christian high schools. Using a stratified random

methodology would be beneficial to conduct this study with a larger number of

participants nationwide to provide greater diversity in demographic,

denominational, geographical, and organizational backgrounds.

3. The sample in this study was not diverse from the perspective of denominational

background. With regards to the 18 participants, nine identified as

Christian/nondenominational, seven as Baptist, one as Pentecostal, and one as

Presbyterian. Researchers could conduct a similar study with a convenience

sample of greater denominational diversity (Catholics, Methodists, and Lutherans

etc.) to determine whether denominations that are less conservative or less

evangelical offer a unique perspective of the phenomenon.

4. During this research, mainstream academia’s bias views regarding the acceptance

of evolutionary theory as fact were prevalent. Using a qualitative methodology to

conduct future research on Christian secondary education science teacher bias

towards the acceptance of biblical creation could be beneficial to determine

whether Christian secondary education science teacher bias influences Christian

secondary education science students to accept biblical creation as fact. This

could investigate another dimension of Lewin’s change model.

5. The researcher focused this study on Christian secondary education science

teachers’ perceptions of how changes in science curriculum, changes in societal

values, and changes in traditional values influence the acceptance of evolutionary

theory in Southern California, Christian high schools. Future research could focus

on Christian school principals and their perceptions of how changes in science

curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes in traditional values influence

the acceptance of evolutionary theory.

Recommendations for Future Practice

The findings in this research have the potential to benefit Christian secondary

education science teachers as well as other Christian school professionals. The

conclusions to this study provide recommendations that can improve the overall

understanding and identification of the driving forces (societal values) and restraining

forces (traditional values), which oppose each other to influence organizational change in

Southern California Christian high schools. There are three recommendations for future

practice, which aligned with the significance of the study discussed in Chapter one.

1. As noted in Chapter 1, religiosity is a statistically significant negative predictor of

evolution acceptance (Barnes et al., 2019), whereas societal values (driving

forces) such as secularism led to an eventual erasure of religion (traditional

values) altogether (Eichenlaub, 2021). Several participants mentioned that

upbringing, a biblical foundation, and a strong relationship with parents, and

traditional biblical values create a propensity for Christian secondary education

science students to accept biblical creation rather than evolutionary theory.

Christian secondary education science teachers could provide additional emphasis

in areas where evolutionary theory and Christianity are compatible. Options such

as the views of Young Earth Creationists, Old Earth Creationists, and

Evolutionary Creationists could be considered.

2. It would be beneficial for Christian secondary education science teachers to

examine their approach to teaching biblical creation and evolutionary theory.

Several Christian secondary education science teachers noted the importance of

presentation when teaching biblical creation and evolutionary theory. Some of the

sub-themes identified were critical thinking, teaching both sides equally, which

created a non-biased approach in their classroom. Christian secondary education

science teachers could provide opportunity for greater understanding through

debate and critical thinking exercises. This could be offered through an

apologetics class.

3. As noted in Chapter 1, outside influences such as personal, psychological,

religious, theological, and attitudinal markers influence science and religion

(Francis et al. 2019). Several Christian secondary education science teachers

mentioned that societal influences were a major contributing factor in student

acceptance of evolutionary theory. The societal influences mentioned were peer

pressure, social media exposure, cultural influences, and values such as

humanism, secularism, and post-modernism. Perhaps Christian secondary

education science teachers could collaborate with other stakeholders such as other

teachers, parents, and the students themselves to solidify Christian culture,

organizational statements of faith, and biblical foundations of the Christian

school’s student attend.

Holistic Reflection on the Problem Space

In reflection of the problem space, there was a need to understand how Christian

secondary education science teachers described the increased acceptance of evolutionary

theory in terms of changes in science curriculum, changes in societal values, and changes

in traditional values. For instance, Bradshaw et al. (2018) noted a marked increase in the

acceptance of evolutionary theory across a broad spectrum of mainstream Christian

denominations. This marked increase in evolutionary theory acceptance led to the

introduction of pedagogical approaches, which emphasized the reconciliation and

coexistence of the science and religious communities through the utilization of epistemic

and ontological cognition (Marin & Lindeman, 2021), as well as the utilization of

evolution measurement instruments to determine what aspects of evolutionary theory

students accepted and which aspects they rejected.

Evolution measurement instruments (quasi-experimental studies) were later used

to identify what students readily accepted and rejected regarding the theory of evolution.

These tools were used to change the science curriculum, as well as pedagogical

approaches in the science classroom. Another aspect of evolutionary theory measurement

and instrumentation were influential predictors of conflict between religion and

evolutionary theory acceptance. Francis et al. (2019) noted that the following five

predictors influenced the acceptance or denial of evolutionary theory: personal,

psychological, religious, theological, and attitudinal. These markers were highlighted in

this study through outside influences such as social media exposure, mainstream changes

in science curriculum, public school transfers, societal influences, and culture, as well as

denominational demographics. Through the processes of research and discovery, this

doctoral candidate came to understand the depth and complexity of this problem space.

In consideration of the relevancy and contribution to the phenomenon, the

interaction of driving forces (societal values) and restraining forces (traditional values)

within Southern California Christian high schools stand out as paramount. The 150 years

of history articulated in Chapter 2 were a tremendous foundation to understanding this

science/religion debate; however, this study further provided greater understanding and

relevancy through the utilization of Lewin’s three step model of change. By highlighting

the processes of organizational change (unfreezing, moving, and freezing) as defined by

driving forces for change and restraining forces against change, this study unlocked the

characteristic attributes of this science/region debate that have been there all along, but

never highlighted. For instance, history gives credence to the “isms” such as secularism,

humanism, and post-modernism as mentioned in Chapter 2 as the driving forces to

change. In contrast, creationist movements and events in American history were the

restraining forces against change.

In retrospect, the greatest contribution this research study provides is

understanding how themes such as Social Media Exposure, Mainstream Academia

Denounce Creation, Public School Transfers, Academic Standards in Curriculum,

Science Textbooks Present More Evolutionary Theory, Humanism, Secularism, Post-

Modernism, The Culture Around you Influences You, Societal Values Influence

Traditional Values, and Changing Christian Culture contribute to the driving forces

(societal values) as well as restraining forces (traditional values), which compete against

each other to influence change in the Southern California Christian high school science

classroom.

Influences on Evolutionary Theory Acceptance Changes in Curriculum, Societal, and Traditional Values

Students also viewed