[2] In 2003, the "strengths and weaknesses" language in the standards was employed by members of the board in an unsuccessful attempt to dilute the treatment of evolution in the biology textbooks they were considering.
While this language was described by The New York Times as a "benign-sounding phrase", they mention that critics state that it is a new strategy to undermine the teaching of evolution, and for students to hear religious objections under the heading of scientific discourse.
The then SBOE Chairman, Don McLeroy, a Young Earth creationist dentist from Central Texas, denied that the language "is subterfuge for bringing in creationism."
[2] In December 2008, the San Antonio Express-News stated in an editorial that the Texas SBOE has a "long history of trying to water down the science curriculum with criticisms of evolution that lack scientific credibility.
"[8] The lesson we draw from these shenanigans is that scientifically illiterate boards of education should leave the curriculum to educators and scientists who know what constitutes a sound education.In January 2009, the Texas SBOE voted to remove the 'Strengths and Weaknesses" language, but its conservative faction, led by Don McLeroy, managed to pass several amendments to the science curriculum that opponents describe as opening the door to teaching objections to evolution that might lead students to reject it.
These included one amendment that compels science teachers to teach about aspects of the fossil record that do not neatly fit with gradualism, but rather show the relatively sudden appearance of some species while others seem to remain unchanged for millions of years.
"[10] Board member Ken Mercer of San Antonio, who voted to keep "strengths and weaknesses" described his support for the language in explicitly religious terms: "It's an issue of freedom of religion.
[13] In 2003 and 2004, creationist lawyer Larry Caldwell sought to persuade the Roseville Joint Union High School District Board of Trustees to adopt a policy which included teaching "the scientific strengths and weaknesses" of evolution.
[14][15] In February 2008 the Discovery Institute created an Academic Freedom petition that stated "Teachers should be protected from being fired, harassed, intimidated, or discriminated against for objectively presenting the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwinian theory.