Minnesota Department of Education main page for the Minnesota Academic Standards
Links to documents on the Minnesota Department of Education Web site very often break, so it might be necessary to start on the Department's main page when seeking information there.
As of June 2004, it appears that even the content of files on the Minnesota Department of Education Web site seems to be subject to change without notice. Thus, following links to documents there may yield different results at different times. Copies from this server should be stable.
Initial "Working Draft" of the Science Standard (If that link breaks, here is a copy from this server.)
Some complaints about the working draft. (Submitted, with some difficulty, to the Department.)
"Final Draft" ("Second Draft") of the Science Standard (If that link breaks, here is a copy from this server.)
"Minnesota Science Standards Minority Report" (If that link breaks, here is a copy from this server.) Apparently the only part of the Science Standard to generate any significant comment was the material related to evolution.
Some complaints about the final/second draft.
First, it appears to make a few minor typographical changes (but does not remove any of the errors cited above). Second, it adds a few more subtle/feeble attempts to cast a bit of doubt on evolution, while striving to maintain fairness by doing the same for a few other foundational theories of modern science:
10. Be able to explain how scientific and technological innovations as well as new evidence can challenge portions of or entire accepted theories and models including, but not limited to, atomic theory.
8. Be able to explain how scientific and technological innovations as well as new evidence can challenge portions of or entire accepted theories and models, including, but not limited to, plate tectonic theory and big bang theory.
[...] The student will be able to explain how scientific and technological innovations as well as new evidence can challenge portions of or entire accepted theories and models including, but not limited to, cell theory, theory of evolution and germ theory of disease.This is all good fun, but it does little to improve a document which is more embarrassing than valuable.
Although it's difficult to discern from the Department's Web site, it appears that the 10 March 2004 Draft cited above (with a different format) is what was approved by the Legislature, now available as Final Science Standards - approved by Legislature, May 2004. (If that link breaks, here is a copy from this server.)
For those with the stamina for it, the Governor's press release touting the new standards may be found here. (A simplified ("printer-friendly") version is available from this server, here.)
Readers interested in seeing a serious science standards document might consider the Virginia Science Standards of Learning Curriculum Framework. (If that link breaks, here is a copy from this server.)
Unlike the proposed Minnesota standards, this document from the Virginia Department of Education (all 400-plus pages of it) actually includes material which might be found in a high-school-level biology, chemistry, or physics class. (It even includes the use of the dreaded equal sign ("=").)
Minnesota Academic Standards in Science--September, 2008 - DRAFT REVISION
Some complaints about the 2008 Revision - First Draft.
Minnesota Academic Standards in Science -- DRAFT 11.06.08
Some complaints about the 2008 Revision - Second Draft.
Minnesota Academic Standards - Science K-12 - 2009 -- DRAFT for rulemaking process 4.27.09.
Some complaints about the 2009 Revision - April Draft.
Minnesota Academic Standards - Science K-12 - 2009 -- DRAFT for rulemaking process 7.15.09.
(Note: As of 2009-08-14, the Department Of Education Web site offered this revised document as "013906.pdf", the same name used for the earlier draft. Error, bad judgement, or desire to hide the evidence? You decide.)
Minnesota Academic Standards in Science - Changes for Rulemaking -- July 15, 2009.
Some complaints about the 2009 Revision - July Draft.