Cover Image: Dr. Anna Beniermann at SkepKon 2019 in Augsburg. (Credit: Andreas Brauner, bluesbrother.de)
Dr. Anna Beniermann is an evolutionary biologist and researcher at the Humboldt University Berlin. She works at the intersection of education and Darwin’s theory of evolution. She is also an active skeptic in the German skeptics organization GWUP.
Annika Harrison: Hi, Anna. Thanks for the interview. Can you quickly introduce yourself?
Anna Beniermann: I’m a science education researcher, specialized in the field of Biology education. Currently, I’m a postdoctoral researcher in Biology education research at Humboldt University Berlin.
Until the beginning of 2019, I was the manager of a small science center on human perception and perceptual illusions (at “turmdersinne,” Nuremberg, Germany). Apart from my job as a researcher, I am a science slammer [lecturer] and very enthusiastic about different formats of science communication.
AH: As a teacher, I’m especially interested in your work. Can you tell me more about it?
AB: In my PhD research, I investigated acceptance of evolution and influencing factors (like knowledge about evolution or religious faith) with a focus on measurement issues, such as what an accurate format to assess the acceptance of evolution is.
Based on this work, I am now leading a European research group within the COST Action “Euroscitizen” (www.euroscitizen.eu/) on measuring acceptance and knowledge about evolution across Europe.
In my current research, I’m interested in so-called socioscientific issues: scientific topics that are controversially discussed in public, such as climate change, vaccination, GMOs, or the COVID-19 pandemic. For topics like that, we ask people about their opinions and analyze their arguments and justifications for their positions. Furthermore, my research addresses the field of science communication research: for example, how science education and science communication can inform each other and what characterizes social media discussions concerning controversial scientific topics.
AH: I had biology in school and I’m now a history teacher. Can you still explain the theory of evolution to me in a few short sentences?
AB: Change over time. That is the easiest way to explain evolution. Well, ok, it’s actually a bit more complicated.
To understand evolution appropriately, you need to realize two crucial components are interacting. On one hand, you have the common descent of all living beings, and on the other hand are the conditions (e.g., variation, mutations) and mechanisms (e.g., natural selection, genetic drift) of evolution.
However, a lot of scientifically inappropriate conceptions about evolution are widely spread. This is often due to wording that has other meanings in everyday language, such as theory, fitness, or adaptation. Furthermore, the random mechanisms of evolution are especially hard to understand, which leads to the widely spread teleological conceptions. Teleological conceptions entail the idea that living beings, or nature as an entity, follow plans toward a final goal.
Even if such everyday conceptions are not scientifically accurate, they are the foundations of learning evolutionary principles, as most learners hold such views when first confronted with the topic of evolution.
AH: What would be the harm if people only learned
creationist teachings? What are creationists actually
claiming?
AB:
Even if there are several different variations of
creationism, they have some elements in common: The
assumption that species have not evolved and do not change
over time and that all species were created by God (or in
the case of intelligent design by an intelligent
designer).
Young-earth creationism and old-earth creationism can be distinguished by their assumptions about the age of the earth: Old-earth creationists, such as the strangely famous Harun Yahya, who distributed The Atlas of Creation, assume a more or less scientifically accurate age of the earth. In contrast, young-earth creationists believe that the earth is only about 6,000 years old— based on the time frames described in the Bible. Furthermore, they see the biblical story of Noah’s flood as a historical event.
Young-earth creationism is especially represented in the protestant community of evangelicals, for example in “free churches.”
These ideas are on one hand not compatible with evolutionary biology (as well as several other disciplines, such as geology) and on the other hand, they undermine general principles of scientific thinking. In my opinion, this is the crucial problem with creationism. Creationist arguments are unscientific and should be treated as such, not as an “alternative” to scientific findings. If this would be accepted as a proper argument or position in scientific or educational discourses, this would be a huge problem for science and science education!
However, I do not think that creationism is the largest problem of fundamental religious groups, because many of them are very homophobic and transphobic, and thus lacking fundamental humanist ideals.
AH: At SkepKon 2019, you told the audience about teaching materials about evolution for younger children. Why is it important to teach evolution? Why is it good to start teaching it with young children?
AB: Evolution is the key to understanding the different fields of biology and their interconnectedness. Even if young children will not be able to understand all aspects of evolution, especially the more complex mechanisms, it is possible to initiate an understanding of evolution even in primary school. In particular, the common descent of all living beings can be explained to and discussed with little children. Furthermore, variation between individuals of one species as the foundation for the understanding of evolutionary mechanisms can be understood by primary school children.
Remarkably, evolution is a very interesting topic for children. For teachers and parents interested in discussing aspects of evolution with children, teaching materials from the German Evokids project are available in several languages. You can find out more at http://www.scientix.eu/resources/details?resourceId=16634.
AH: If you are not researching the didactics of evolution, what do you do to relax?
AB: I like to go for walks with my husband and my dog Bolle or on hikes in the rural areas around Berlin—a very good thing to do during pandemic times. Apart from this, I love to play board games with friends and do yoga and Pilates.
In normal times, I enjoy live music at concerts and festivals. At the moment, I listen to music at home only, unfortunately.
AH: You’re also a member of GWUP. How did you get into the
skeptics’ movement?
AB: About ten years ago, at a time when I was already
interested in creationism, I came across literature from the
skeptics’ movement. But the most important factor in my
joining the GWUP was Dittmar Graf, my PhD supervisor, who is
a member of the GWUP science council. He first introduced me
to the GWUP, when he told me about the World Skeptics
Congress 2012 in Berlin, which was the first skeptical event
I attended. [To read an interview with another mentee of
Dittmar Graf, Elvira Schmidt, and to find out about their
latest book, see:
“A Guide to Teach Critical Thinking about Medicine in
Schools—Author Elvira Schmidt Talking about Her
Research.”]
AH: Having worked internationally, what is special about
skepticism in Germany? What is special regarding
pseudoscience, e.g., creationism?
AB: The German creationist movement is different from many other national movements, especially in comparison to the United States. The most important creationist movement in Germany is academic rather than populistic. They often show high knowledge about evolution and act less political, compared to in the United States.
AH: Having seen your statistics work for your PhD, I was really impressed. What would you say to any little girl or boy who wants to be a scientist?
AB: I want to quote Aaron Swartz (1986–2013) to answer this: “Be curious. Read widely. Try new things. I think a lot of what people call intelligence boils down to curiosity.”
This is so true. If you are curious, like to be creative and to discover problems, problems, and more problems to solve, you may be a happy future scientist!
AH: Which three books should be read by any person entering the skeptics’ movement?
AB: This is a super tough question. As I assume your readers might be familiar with all the typical skeptics’ literature already, I decided for one evolution-specific book and two rather entertaining narratives to conquer the current hard times with laughter:
- Evolution Education around the Globe by Hasan Deniz and Lisa A. Borgerding (2018)
- Last Chance to See by Douglas Adams and Mark Carwardine (1990)
- Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ’s Childhood Pal by Christopher Moore (2002)
AH: Thanks for the interview!
If you want to find out more about Anna Beniermann’s work, please take note of this article by her and international colleagues:
https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12052-020-00132-w