Multiple discovered natural aspects are referenced throughout this paper from concrete sources which enhance the credibility of this research. Research sources include documentation from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) which provides a solid reference for a popular theory that, although not yet proven to be a law, certainly raises eyebrows when considering scriptures that have been read for hundreds or even thousands of years. This intriguing comparison is noted throughout this paper in both the Old and New Testament books of the Bible.

Scientific Research Supports Biblical References in Scripture about Nature

Science and religion are often areas of intense debate because of dogmatic unwavering views from either side of intellectual discussions. Although there is often disagreement between scholars and well educated theologians regarding the validity of scriptures and why humans exist, this research exposes the possibility that both the knowledge of science and the understanding of scripture can reason together. This paper will not explore such controversial areas of faith and belief, but rather provides a fact based comparative view of scientific research and Biblical writings.

Scientists and Religionists Can Agree

Many respected writers and well-read publications have made a comparison between science and scripture. In an article written for USA Today titled “Creation ‘Science’ vs. Religious Attitudes” McCollister writes (1996), “most scientists would agree with pro-evolution religionists that, when properly understood, religion and science enhance and complement each other, but only if the means, aims, methods, and ground rules of each are clearly understood.” (McColloster, 1996). Ms. McColloster is a freelance journalist and editor of Voices for Evolution, her articles have been published by notable publishers such as the National Center for Science Education in addition to USA today. McColloster’s peer reviewed articles and view points are recognized as an authoritative unbiased source dedicated to education and science.

When two areas of study provide information about similar subjects, it is logical to consider the material from both sources in a methodical comparison. Although science provides information as to how nature exists and functions, and the religious point of view is a theological answer as to why creation exists, valid scientific support can be recognized when the context of each source is considered. Ernest Lucas (2005) wrote in the journal of science and Christian belief that “there is no incompatibility between the biblically-based classical Christian doctrine of creation and modern science, provided one understands the different levels at which science and theology work and the limitations this puts on each of them.” (Lucas, 2005, p. 140). In consideration of the credibility of Dr. Lucas’ publications, The Faraday Institute (2009) wrote that “Ernest Lucas has a MA in Chemistry from Oxford University and a PhD in Chemistry from Kent.” He then studied theology at Oxford and was ordained a Baptist, later obtaining a PhD in Oriental studies from Liverpool. “Lucas was Associate Director of the Institute for Contemporary Christianity in London before moving to Bristol Baptist College, where he is Vice-Principal and Tutor in Biblical Studies.” (The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, 2009). Ernest’s diverse background in science and religion provides an expert reference from both an educated scientific and religious point of view.

The levels of information and the methods by which scientific and Biblical knowledge is presented may often seem difficult to comprehend. In order to understand the rationalization for science and scripture coinciding together, it is necessary to begin with some questions.

1. Are there documented scientific facts of nature that support scriptural references to “The Beginning” in the Bible?
2. Is there specific scientific knowledge of natural characteristics that are evident in the Bible regarding the areas of matter, time, the weather, the Earth’s geology and human biology?

Science is a very diverse and in depth area of study and it would be seemingly impossible to cover every branch of research. As well, classic Biblical scriptures, some written hundreds of years ago, and others written thousands of years ago, all in different languages, make the Bible alone a vast area of study. In order to address this subject in a time efficient manner this research documents four basic areas of study. Research has revealed that scientific evidence supports Biblical accounts of the natural characteristics relative to the composition of the universe, the nature of time, the Earth, and human biology.

The Beginning: The Big Bang Theory Supports the Beginning as Written in the Bible

The first area of research to address will appropriately be “the beginning” of the universe and time itself. As each day passes the progression of time is evident all around, and the questions of when everything began, or has everything simply existed, has been a puzzle that scientists have researched for hundreds of years. Until recently there was only speculation and belief about a beginning of the universe.

In 2003 NASA revealed an amazing discovery about the beginning of the universe. Dan Vergano (2003) wrote in an article for USA Today titled “NASA peers back to the beginning of the universe”. In this article NASA is noted for strengthening the Big Bang theory with a one hundred fifty million dollar project and Charles Bennett of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. is quoted stating “Astrophysicists will no longer have the freedom to invent whatever theory they want about the universe,” Bennett says, “We’ve ruled out a lot of the easy explanations.”(Vergano, 2003, para. 17). NASA is one of the world’s most recognized authorities on scientific exploration into the unknown. When comparing the science of a beginning to the Biblical account of a beginning, as written in Genesis “In the beginning” (Genesis 1:1 KJV), it is easy to understand that there is a complementary correlation between the two areas of study. Scientific theory clearly supports the fact that there was a beginning of time and matter.

When considering the theory of the Big Bang it is logical that in the progression of time and natural order that the Earth itself would begin to form. (The theory about how fast the formation of the Earth took place is not addressed in this research, as this would incorporate areas of faith and belief. The focus for this research is directly related to facts and science.)

Once the Earth was formed it is safe to consider that an atmosphere and water developed and that certain areas of the Earth were covered in water and other areas were exposed as dry land. The scientific theory for a mass continent called Pangaea supports the distinct likelihood that a super continent existed. This one mass of land is theorized to have drifted apart according to the pre-existing theory of Continental Drift. However, in the past 30 years continental drift has been explained through the forces of plate tectonics which explain how the plates of the Earth’s surface move (Kious, Tilling, 1996).

The Beginning: The Theory of Pangea Supports the Formation of Land on the Earth in the Bible

A very interesting correlation is able to be seen between the Biblical reference of the formation of a super continent and the supporting scientific evidence. As the scripture states in the book of Genesis “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters” (Genesis 1:6). In addition to this scripture we see also another scripture written which states “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear” (Genesis 1:9). In these scriptures we see a reference to a firmament and that the waters are gathered together into one place. This scriptural reference clearly is supported by the scientific theory of a single land mass and a single body of water.

The Beginning: Science States the Earth is Suspended by Gravity as Written in the Bible

The forces of nature which formed the Earth are not only at work on the surface of the Earth, but the very planet itself is suspended by gravity, floating in the midst of space held by natural forces which are yet to be completely understood. According to the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs or IIP (2008) “in 1972, astronauts on board Apollo 17 captured the first full view of Earth suspended in space, exposed in full sunlight” (U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs, 2008). This wonderful picture clearly shows the Earth suspended in space as has been known and recognized for hundreds of years. This scientific evidence supports the Biblical reference to the gravitational forces of “nothing” suspending the Earth in the book of Job (Job 26:7). It is quite interesting that this scientific evidence supports scriptures which clearly indicate that the Earth is suspended by forces which are not seen even with today’s modern advances in technology.

The Beginning: Gravitational Forces Affect Celestial Objects in the Bible

The gravitational forces suspending the earth in the picture taken by the Apollo 17 astronauts affect all celestial bodies throughout the universe. The scientific documentation of planetary gravitational forces is noted in the writings of astrophysicists. In a book titled “A Year in the Life of the Universe: A Seasonal Guide to Viewing the Cosmos”, the authors write about the gravitationally bound Pleiades star cluster. Gendler & Ferris(2006) state that “the Pleiades will probably travel through space as a bound cluster for another 250 million years” (Gendler, Ferris, 2006). These stars are able to be seen by the unaided eye. In the ancient Biblical time of Job the forces of gravity of the star constellation was used in a rhetorical question. The Bible states that God asks Job, “Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?” (Job 38:31). It is obvious that binding the influences is referring to the gravitational forces which hold the stars together. The fact that the stars are bound together by gravity is a documented scientific fact which supports the natural occurrence of gravity documented in the Bible.

Relevant scientific research supports the facts which have been mentioned so far, and this documented research is shown to compliment and correlate with scripture which address very similar areas of science and knowledge. Scientific support for the beginning of time and matter are not the only occurrences which have been noted in research. Specific examples of natural facts in the areas regarding the end of matter, time zones, weather, and geology are also noted and provide further affirmation which anchors the fact that science and scripture can and do complement each other in many relevant fields of study.

The Nature of Matter: The Second Law of Thermodynamics Supports the Destiny of the Universe in the Bible

Mankind has theorized and speculated about the end of the world and the universe as long as documented history can record. This question has fascinated everyone from common men and women to distinguished scholars. As science has progressed, the understanding of matter and the makeup of matter has advanced as well. When a scientific theory is tested over and over again, it is proven to be law; a scientific law typically does not change. The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a law which addresses the statistics of the order of molecules which make up matter. In his paper titled “Things Fall Apart: An Introduction to Entropy”, Gary Felder (2001) uses the example of a dandelion and spores. The statistical probability of dandelion spores being blown from the stem is much more likely than the dandelion spores re-attaching themselves to the stem from which they grew (Felder, 2001). This is an example of the statistical law of entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. Research and statistics show that in every area of matter which includes everything on the Earth, the Earth itself and the entire universe is gradually falling apart through the progression of time. Although you cannot see the hands on a clock move they are still moving and this is simply how the Earth is breaking down as time progresses.

The second law of thermodynamics supports scriptures that were written in the Bible concerning the end of all creation. In the book of Psalms the scripture states “Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall perish, but thou shalt endure: yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment;” (Psalm 102:25, 26). In this scripture we see the words “perish” and “wax old” used describing the Earth itself and the heavens describing the universe and stars. Dr. Felder (2001) describes the end of all matter in the following statements “So far as we know entropy will continue increasing until someday the universe is filled with nothing but weak, uniform radiation.” He also states that “this scenario, known as “the heat death of the universe,” referencing that there will be a period when all matter experiences this ultimate progression of scientific law (Felder, 2001). Again this research supports additional scriptures one of which reads “the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” (2 Peter 3:10).

The Nature of Time: The Science of Day and Night During one Time Period Supports Scripture

Although the progression of entropy may be very slow in the short life spans that humans live, the twenty four hour cycle of night and day is evident. Modern science and the ability to travel great distances has allowed people to go from time zone to time zone in a matter of hours. The Lunar and Planetary Institute (2004) explains how the Earth experiences this cycle because of the rotation of the Earth on its axis. It is interesting to note that New Testament scripture is supported by this ever occurring fact of science. In the book of Saint Luke, Jesus makes a statement about people sleeping in a bed and others working in a field; inferring that it will be night one place and day in another when He returns (Luke 17:34-36). This inference makes an interesting correlation between the science of time zones and scripture.

The Nature Weather: The Science of Jet Streams Supports Biblical Scripture

In 1920 a discovery was made which drastically affected the study of weather patterns and air travel in modern avionics. This discovery is thought to have been made by meteorologist named Wasaburo Ooishi. His discovery was made possible by the use of a weather balloon which revealed the pattern of wind known today as jet streams (Sapojnikova, 2010), The air currents which travel at very high altitudes (some as high as 52,000 feet) help to increase the ground speed of jet airliners thus saving fuel and time. The jet streams are today well known facts of science that determine many factors of the Earths changing weather. Amazingly the circuits of the wind are noted in scripture which was written by the very wise King Solomon. In the book of Ecclesiastes it is written that “The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.” (Ecclesiastes 1:6). It is well known science that supports the fact that wind currents move toward different southern, northern and other points on the map, it is also known that these powerful wind currents whirl about and around the Earth returning to the same place as they circle the planet.

The Earth’s Geology: Oceanic Geological Science

Supports Biblical References

From the heights of the clouds to the very depths of the sea, sciences supporting biblical scriptures are recognized in nearly every area of study. A question was posed to Job by God saying “Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?” (Job 38:16). From a theological perspective this was asked of Job in order for Job to realize his limited ability, to know or be able to do as much as God, even though Job was a good man. But from a scientific perspective research has shown that scientific discoveries were made in 1977 that support the science of this scripture. Watson (1999) from the U.S. Geological Survey writes that in 1977 “scientists discovered hot springs at a depth of 2.5 km, on the Galapagos Rift” (Watson, 1999). Although there had been pre-existing theories about these springs since the 1970’s they had not been captured by a camera.

So far scientific research has supported the creation of time and the universe; as well as theories, facts and laws that have correlated with the principles of gravity affecting the Earth itself and stars. In addition research has shown specific examples of the destiny of useful matter, the affirmation of time zones, jet streams and oceanic springs. All of these areas of science specifically focus on the Earth and other natural surroundings. It is therefore necessary to explore the biological science and the interrelation of biblical scripture regarding the human body itself.

Human Biology: Recent Scientific Theories Support the Account of a Type of Adam in the Bible

Recently DNA research has revealed an interesting theory regarding the early origins of mankind. This DNA research has led to the close consideration that early mankind developed from one man or one small group of people. In a National Geographic article Hillary Mayell (2003) writes “geneticist Spencer Wells has concluded that all humans alive today are descended from a single man who lived in Africa around 60,000 years ago.” (Hillary, 2003). Albeit Dr. Wells theory is still a theory which requires much more additional research in order to become fact, this modern discovery reveals an amazing basic support for the oldest Biblical accounts for mankind’s origin. As stated in the beginning of the book of Genesis, God created Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and then in the New Testament a scripture describes “The first man Adam was made a living soul” (1 Corinthians 15:45). Still research continues to reveal if not only an inference, a direct resemblance to this carefully studied theory of the origin of mankind.

Human Biology: Science Supports an Admonishment to Immoral Sexual Behavior in the Bible

The creation and growth of man will likely always be a subject of intense study that may never be completely understood. However, one area of research that has grown to epidemic proportions in modern science and medical study is the analysis of sexually transmitted diseases. In the British Medical Journal an article written by Ebrahim, McKenna & Marks (2005) provides statistics which expose that in 1990 thirty thousand deaths were attributed to sexual behavior. Sexual behavior is not only attributed to death but to other detrimental consequences as stated in the article “Sexual behaviour leads to a variety of harmful consequences, such as unintended pregnancy, social stigma, infections, and chronic psychological or pathological sequelae.” (Ebrahim, McKenna & Marks, 2005). Clearly the medical evidence shown throughout modern history underscores the fact that immoral or unrestrained sexual behavior is detrimental to the human body. Biblical scriptures are clearly supported by this fact which is identified by the Apostle Paul as he admonishes the church of Corinth. The New Testament scripture declares “he that commiteth fornicationsinneth against his own body.” (1 Corinthians 6:18). Fornication is the practice of immoral sexual activity outside of wedlock. It is well known and documented that sexual promiscuity leads to many of the diseases that modern day society faces in monumental proportions.

Conclusion

In light of the research presented in this paper it is evident that science supports Biblical scriptures and in return that Biblical scriptures reference documented scientific facts of nature. These written references affirm the many areas of study in which science references subjects that have been written and discussed in scriptures for hundreds of years. The scientific facts have been presented in these various areas, subsequent scriptures are then documented which are obviously supported by modern evidence.

Although much discussion and many debates have taken place about the validity of scripture in the context of known scientific facts, many respected scholars such as those from the Institute for Creation Research (2010) agree that there are valid and considerable comparisons in the studies of both. When the application of science and scripture are properly addressed accounting for the time period in which they were documented, the authors of the content, and the method in how they both are compared, it becomes apparent how these areas of study compliment one another.

The focus and research of this paper is to establish the fact that modern science supports many Biblical scriptures. One must realize the limitations of the compatibility of science and scripture, yet at the same time research clearly presents facts. In this research science supports a theory of a beginning in time and space, and then the scripture is presented which represents the beginning of time and space. The scientific evidence for the forces and laws of gravity are presented, subsequently the scriptural references are recorded which reference these areas. Research presents the second law of thermodynamics and then similar accounts of the Biblical record for the end of all matter are exhibited. Not only is scientific evidence presented which clarifies support for the Earth, space and time but research also supports the biology of the human body itself.

The names of the reviewers are kept confidential by the editor to ensure that the author does not directly contact the reviewer to argue or does not retaliate against a reviewer. In a recent case, John Christy was able to discover through the stolen CRU e-mails who reviewed one of his papers and why the editor published it as he did. The paper was controversial in nature and contained opinions not held by most other climate scientists. The editor, in an attempt to present both sides of the issue, published Christy’s paper alongside a paper that presented the opposite view. Using information to which he should not have been entitled, Christy publicly attacked the reviewers, the editor, the peer review process, and climate science in general. His actions violated the integrity of the process and also the professional ethics required of scientists as he released his opinions to the public before the matter could be impartially investigated.

The Public’s Rights: The claims that the names of the reviewers and the editor’s reasons should be made public are invalid. Scientific journals are funded by subscriptions and dues of members and not publicly funded. The review process is set up as it is to ensure the integrity of published science papers and “peer reviewed” is the gold standard of quality in science information. The editor of the journal has the right to choose the reviewers and decide what is published just as the editor of a newspaper has the right to publish or reject articles without divulging the reasons.

Scientific Data: The public’s right to the data of researchers is another matter. Researchers are required to keep records of their research so that any other scientist with comparable training and skills could reproduce the research. The “reproducibility” of the research is an important factor in the reviewer’s evaluation of the research. The public has a right to information produced by publicly funded research and that may be requested through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Usually a “Gatekeeper”, such as the project’s director, is designated to handle FOIA requests. That Gatekeeper has a responsibility to see not only that the public’s rights are upheld, but that the FOIA process is not abused and that the scientists are protected.

Abuse of Openness: Scientists are understandably reluctant to release their data – as some who did release it later came to feel as if gremlins had seized their work and their lives. Some researchers have been harassed by numerous and frivolous requests for information meant only to impede their work. That is particularly true in climate science where there are apparently well-funded gremlins, some of them ex-scientists*, at work. Worse, scientists have been criticized publicly for reasonable practices that can be misconstrued. For example, good research requires the calibration of equipment, yet that has been led to accusations of “adjusting the data”. And, a math ‘trick” used to simplify a computation, was mischaracterized as “tricking the public”.

Even worse, when Phil Jones, the CRU director, released his raw data for a 1990 research paper to a former London financial trader, Douglas J. Keenan, Keenan combed through the data and then tried to have the FBI arrest Jones’ co-author for fraud. An investigation cleared the researchers of any wrongdoing but it took a toll on their time and work. Incidents like that have a chilling effect on the willingness of scientists to release their data. Some scientists who released their raw data, have seen it “recalculated” in such a way as to reach conclusions contrary to their findings, yet attributable to them. Reputable journals will not publish the erroneous conclusions of “recalculated” data, but some newspaper articles, blog sites, and even Congressional hearings will use them to promote a controversy manufactured by someone who actually did no research. And, once the fallacy is “out there”, it is hard to correct.

Sorting It Out: Certainly, the public has a right to openness in public funded research. Much of the scientific debate take place at scientific meetings and those wishing to hear the research debated may attend. The FOIA Gatekeeper has an important role to see that the FOIA requests are valid, that scientists are not harassed, and that those who wish to use the data for unscientific, or even malevolent purposes, do not have easy access to the data. The next step for those who do not like the Gatekeeper’s decision is to seek redress in the courts – not by illegally hacking the researcher’s computers.

The Itch

Garrulous students occupied my sixth grade classroom after lunch, a few actually seated for class, many clustered with friends in small groups, and some strolling leisurely into the classroom. I stood before my class and raised my hand, feeling a moment of satisfaction as murmurs dwindled slowly. I took a deep breath, preparing for ninety minutes of geometry.

Twenty-eight students sat quietly, their eyes focused on me. Melissa, however, was not in her seat. I felt familiar frustration rise toward the child. She was weaving her way around desks, passing most of the students in her less than direct path toward me. Students began whispering amongst themselves. It would be difficult to regain their attention. Before I could admonish Melissa for interrupting, she handed me an envelope, “Mom said to give you this.”

My heart beat faster as I felt my face flush. Even after fourteen years in the classroom, I felt the momentary panic a note from any parent always caused. I mentally reviewed the last several days. What had I done that upset her mom? Melissa was happy in school, an A student, energetic and bright, but impulsive. She loved math so much she often blurted the answer before the rest of the class had even started the problem.

I sighed as I opened the envelope in front of the class. Bad protocol, but past experience had taught me it was best to respond quickly to parents. The envelope contained a card with a handwritten message inside. The class became a roar of talking, laughing and whispering voices as with a pounding heart I read,

“Please accept this small token of my deep appreciation in regards to the pleasant phone call I received about my daughter, Melissa Smith. It was truly a nice surprise (as well as a shock) to have a teacher call and praise a child about her good grades rather than calling about a discipline problem. I can honestly say that I have never had a teacher call me to tell me what a good job Melissa was doing in class. Ms. Allen, you made my day. Melissa is lucky to have been in your class! Thank you for having such a positive impact on my daughter and much continued success to you!

Sincerely,

Amy Smith.”

Tears wet my eyes. I turned my back to the class and faced the board. I allowed myself the luxury of reading the card again. Melissa would continue to be a challenging child in any teacher’s classroom. But she, and equally as important, her peers would learn.

Several things I did were unorthodox. I “wasted” instructional time calling Melissa’s mother during class, and even worse, I discussed a child’s progress in front of other students. To both, I plead guilty. If an administrator had walked into my classroom while my back was turned, while my students were off task and talking, I most certainly would have faced a reprimand and a letter would have been put in my file.

During the years I spent in the classroom I have watched students like Melissa learn — and yes, I sometimes met failure with students who didn’t succeed. On those occasions I did not consider myself a failure, although many in my profession would. The needs of some children were beyond those that could be met in my classroom.

The Tasmanian Devil

Three review problems written on the overhead projector welcomed students as they entered the classroom. Students were required to sit quietly and copy and answer the problems. It was a necessary “warm-up” routine designed to engage their sixth-grade minds in “school mode.” In an exclusive front row seat, sat Richard Hunt, also known as the “Tasmanian Devil.” His desktop contained one sneaker, one shoelace and one pencil. Richard was intensely concentrating on inserting the shoelace back into the eyelets of his sneaker. No textbook, paper or any other implement of learning cluttered his otherwise empty desktop.

I handed him a copy of the overhead review questions. “Start your warm-up, Richard,” I whispered. He didn’t acknowledge my presence. I took the sneaker, rather forcefully because he didn’t want to let go. “I’ll lace your shoe; you do your warm-up.” Richard looked unsure. His eyes remained on the sneaker in my hands while the class finished their warm-up, his questions left blank on the paper I’d given him.

I taught the math lesson; then students worked in small groups practicing some problems. After a few minutes, lined paper littered the floor in a large circle around Richard’s team. Each sheet of paper was filled with big black numbers. Richard, his lips puckered in concentration, wrote with one of my blackboard markers. He stopped, sniffed the marker and stared at it, fascinated. “No, that’s wrong, Richard,” his teammate Alex said. Richard angrily threw the paper to the growing pile on the floor enveloping his team and pulled a new sheet of notebook paper from his binder.

“Richard, where is your pencil?” I asked.

“I don’t know. I lost it,” Richard replied, shrugging. I stared at the child, then at his floor and desktop. The pencil was nowhere in sight, but it could be under any one of the twenty or thirty sheets of paper on the floor. I sighed, gave him another pencil and removed the marker before he could become high from snuffing.

“Would you all please help Richard clean up these papers before you answer any more questions?”

“Yes, Ms. Allen,” students chorused.

The “Tasmanian devil” that was Richard Hunt sat in the front. He required preferential seating. Even so, a small hurricane usually ensued from in his general direction before the end of class. It began with a murmur of talking. Then spitballs, staples or any number of projectiles would fly through the air.

I was required to give Richard copies of my overhead notes. He couldn’t copy information from the board. His writing ability was on sixth-grade level, his reading slightly below that. Ability wasn’t the problem. He was just so fascinated by the sound the overhead projector made or the small rainbow of light it reflected onto the ceiling that he couldn’t concentrate long enough to copy information. He drew pictures on his paper, fascinated by their shapes. He could spend an entire ninety-minute class on one detailed drawing. I thought he showed exceptional ability in art, although his art teacher didn’t think so. Richard painted his pencils with correction fluid, and then scraped it off, leaving tiny white shavings covering his desk and the floor. He snuffed the fluid and the shavings.

Richard played with anything on his or his neighbor’s desk. Because he never remembered his own supplies, or he lost them during class, he stole supplies from his neighbor, usually causing a disagreement. I frequently had to change the seating of students sitting next to him due to complaints from students and parents. I gave Richard two textbooks so he could keep one textbook at home and one in his locker. Still the textbook was an enigma that somehow never made it to class.

Richard kept an assignment book where he recorded his homework assignments. I initialed it before her left my class each day. At the group home where Richard lived, he earned privileges based on completion of the homework assignments written in his assignment book. Still, I rarely saw his homework. It was lost in transition.

He had lived in the group home since first grade. That year he was in a car accident that killed both of his parents. When Richard began having behavior problems in his new home and in school, the school psychologist, in cooperation with the school resource teacher, administered a series of tests that revealed he had a condition known as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD.

Richard is a student with a disability, also known as an exceptional child (EC). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), a federal law reauthorized in 1997, guarantees children with disabilities a “free appropriate public education” in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Children with disabilities must be educated with children without disabilities, to the maximum extent possible. So, the least restrictive environment is typically the regular classroom.

Children with disabilities may be removed from the regular educational environment only when the disability is so severe that education in regular classes is not possible. It was possible (if not ideal) to educate Richard Hunt in the regular classroom. Toward that end, Richard’s teachers, the school psychologist, and the assistant principal wrote an Individual Education Plan, or IEP, for him. Richard’s IEP gave him modifications to help him in school. These included extended time on tests, testing in a separate room, having tests read orally to him, study guides, preferential seating away from distractions, and copies of the teacher’s notes.

ADHD is one of the most common mental disorders among children Richard’s age. The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), states that 3 to 5 percent of all children — perhaps as many as two million American children — have been diagnosed with ADHD. On the average, at least one child in every classroom in the United States is diagnosed with the disorder, boys two or three times more frequently than girls.

Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder is perplexing because it is not one particular mental disorder, but rather it is a group of symptoms, or behaviors, that fall under the diagnosis of ADHD. Any one of three groups of behaviors: hyperactivity, impulsivity and inattention, or any combination of the three, lead to the classification ADHD. Richard was inattentive and hyperactive. His attention was focused on insignificant things in his environment, such as his shoelaces and the smell of the marker he was using. He was unaware of the important event in his environment, the math concepts. He moved around constantly, touched his neighbors and anything around him.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, is a checklist of behaviors used to classify a child with ADHD. According to the DSM, inattention means a child is so distracted by irrelevant sights and sounds that he fails to pay attention to details and makes careless mistakes. He has difficulty following instructions without being redirected. He loses or forgets tools needed for a task, like textbooks, homework, toys, or pencils. According to the DSM, some signs of hyperactivity and impulsivity are fidgeting, squirming, running, difficulty waiting in line or for a turn and restlessness. The student leaves his seat or blurts out answers during a classroom setting (like Melissa). He answers questions before hearing the whole question.

This could be because children with ADHD have a lower level of activity in the part of the brain that inhibits impulses. Scientists at NIMH used positron emission tomography, or a brain scan, to look at brains of people with ADHD and those without. Tests showed that the brains of people with ADHD were less active in the area that inhibits impulses, proving that there is a physical condition behind the behaviors classified as ADHD.

Supporting this, ADHD seems to be genetically inherited. Children with ADHD usually have at least one close relative with the disorder. One-third of all fathers who had ADHD will pass it on to their children. The “dopamine hypothesis” is generally accepted as the cause of ADHD, which postulates that ADHD is due to insufficient availability of the neurotransmitter dopamine in the central nervous system. Dopamine is responsible for alertness, motivation, deliberate movements, appetite control and sleep.

The Surgeon General’s report in 1999 proposed a dopamine-transporter gene on chromosome 5, and a dopamine-receptor gene on chromosome 11 as possible sources of genetic variation. Severe ADHD may be caused by abnormalities in the dopamine-transporter gene (DAT1).

Stimulants increase the availability of dopamine, controlling the symptoms of ADHD. Stimulants given to increase dopamine availability include methylphenidate (Ritalin, Metadate, and Concerta). Ritalin is the most widely known form of methylphenidate, a central nervous system stimulant. In normal adults it effects are more potent that caffeine and less potent than amphetamines. In children with ADHD it has a calming, focusing effect. Other stimulants used to treat ADHD are amphetamine (Adderall), dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine, Dextrostat), and pemoline (Cylert). Some children who do not respond to stimulants are given antidepressants such as bupropion (Wellbutrin).

Side effects of such stimulants are reduced appetite, insomnia and, less frequently, liver damage. On a cautionary note, stimulants do not have Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in children. A physician treating a young child with ADHD may prescribe a medication that has been approved by the FDA for use in adults or older children. This is called “off-label” prescription. Even though the FDA approves a stimulant for a defined population (adults), after that drug is approved and on the market, any physician may prescribe the drug to any patient, including children. The sponsor, however, is allowed to market the drug only for the approved population. This is why most drugs used to treat mental disorders in children are dispensed with this warning: “Safety and efficacy have not been established in pediatric patients.” A physician who prescribes an “off-label” drug for a child does so without the benefit of any research on safety and dosages in children.

While researchers study the genetic roots of ADHD, environmental and nongenetic factors are equally compelling. Hyperactivity and inattention correlate positively in children whose mothers smoked or used alcohol or other drugs during pregnancy. Alcohol and nicotine in cigarettes may damage developing nerve cells in fetuses. Fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), caused by the mother’s heavy alcohol consumption during pregnancy, is a condition leading to behaviors similar to those of ADHD. FAS can also cause intellectual impairment, low birth weight and physical abnormalities in addition to ADHD-like symptoms.

Cocaine — including crack, the smokable form — when used by a pregnant woman, seems to interfere with the formation of brain receptors in the fetus. In such children incoming signals from the senses (eyes, ears, and skin) are not transmitted to the brain, so the child seems unaware of his surroundings. These children often display ADHD symptoms.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Taylor Reed transferred into my school district a few weeks into sixth grade. After attending our school about a month, Taylor was put into my first period science class and my third period math class. His math teacher, a veteran teacher of twenty years, threatened to quit if Taylor wasn’t removed from his class. This was Taylor’s second try at sixth grade. The previous year he had scored only the 3rd percentile on his End of Grade math test. He had attended summer school, but had been absent too frequently to be promoted. Because Taylor’s achievement in math, reading and writing were all below his ability level, he was considered learning disabled (LD) in all three areas. Due to his disabilities he was protected by the IDEA, or Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which allowed him modifications in the regular classroom.

In addition, his pediatrician prescribed Ritalin for him to treat ADHD symptoms. But, he did not take his Ritalin most days; instead, he sold it. About a week after being placed on my team, Taylor was busted for selling marijuana to an eighth grade student at school and was suspended for ten days.

By the time I had a chance to work with Taylor it was three months into the school year. He was a high-achieving student during science. He couldn’t read the science textbook, but would listen when partnered with another student who read to him. He answered all the science questions carefully in neat, beautiful handwriting. He loved science experiments, hands-on activities and science class. I rarely had to redirect him. He was a model student who did well and was rarely absent.

In contrast, however, Taylor attended my third period math class only about three days out of five. The remaining two days he was either suspended and sent home for the rest of the day or on in-school suspension, or ISS. This was mainly because he didn’t like math, and with good reason. He didn’t know even elementary level math concepts.

The first day in my math class he said, “I am not going to do that f*cking work. It is too hard. You need to learn to f*cking teach.” His disrespectful treatment toward me would have cost me the other students’ success, so I had no choice but to send him to the office. The rest of the days followed a disturbingly similar pattern. As soon as he entered the classroom for math, he immediately created a conflict with a fellow classmate or myself. One day he made the mistake of calling Jamal a “crack head.” Jamal punched him, and then Taylor threw a desk at Jamal. I had to call our security guard, the principal or both to remove Taylor from my class on more than one occasion.

Taylor never brought his textbook, paper or pencil to math class in the afternoon, although he brought all three to science in the morning. Taylor was truly a Jekyll and Hyde. He was a dedicated student during science who changed into an unrecognizable monster, Mr. Hyde, during math class in the afternoon. There were two reasons: First, Taylor didn’t like math. Second, he took a 24-hour dose of Ritalin in the morning. But, the timed-release dose didn’t seem to work properly because his impulsivity became more pronounced during the afternoon.

My goal after Taylor joined my team was simply to get through math class each day without physical violence erupting in my classroom or students getting hurt. I had given up on teaching anyone math. But somehow, without any prompting from me, and against the preferential seating modification written into his Individual Education Plan, Taylor started sitting in a desk at the back of the room during math. Eventually he moved to a table at the back of the room and then started sitting under the table on the floor. He said he didn’t like the front of the room. The lights hurt his eyes.

I breathed a sigh of relief. He was quiet. I could teach the others. At first I ignored him there, didn’t ask him to participate and just ignored him, crossing my fingers that I would not have to call the deputy that class.

One day I gave Taylor an old third grade math workbook. I told him I needed the answers filled in to use for my next class and asked if he’d start a few for me so I could see how hard they were. By the end of class he had done five problems. So from then on, before I gave the rest of the class their assignment I got Taylor started on his “own” math problems. At first his goal was to work for five minutes alone. I gradually increased his goal by a few minutes every couple of weeks. By the end of the year Taylor could make it through forty minutes working at the third grade level. He always took a ten or fifteen minute break to walk around the classroom, get water and move around my personal papers on my desk.

Class was ninety minutes long, so even with Taylor’s improvement, he was still on task for less than one half of the class period. After he finished his math problems Taylor played Solitaire on the computer or organized science equipment for the next day. He counted test tubes and labeled my shelves in the science equipment room. He stapled worksheets. He sorted my files. He ran errands. I kept him very busy.

Even so, by school standards, Taylor was not successful in my classroom. At the end of sixth grade he again scored in the 3rd percentile on his end of year math test. He retested at only the 2nd percentile. But, Taylor did not go to summer school. Instead, due to his many discipline referrals and lack of progress that year, the Committee on Special Education placed him in a more restrictive environment for the seventh grade. Taylor would be in the Behaviorally Educably Handicapped class which consisted of twelve students, one teacher and one teacher assistant. He would finally receive the help he so badly needed. But help came too late for Taylor.

Taylor would be fifteen before Christmas his seventh grade year, and sixteen midway into his eighth grade year. He was a prime candidate to drop out at sixteen, without even an eighth grade education. In fact, Taylor missed forty-nine days of school in seventh grade, scoring in the fifth percentile on his math EOG test. His retest was even lower, in the first percentile. Due to his ADHD and learning disability in math, Taylor was promoted to the eighth grade. He was not required to go to summer school. He told his seventh grade teacher that he hated math and had a mental block against it. He felt like he didn’t fit in at school.

Taylor sees a probation officer now and has tested positively for marijuana on a routine drug test. He is scheduled to go to court for selling marijuana. He’s had several problems with the law. If he isn’t sent to juvenile detention he will go to Wilderness Camp, a home for troubled kids.

What turned Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde?

How could this happen? Melissa, Richard and Taylor all suffer from the same disorder, ADHD. All three take medication for their disorder. Melissa is a strong A student, who frustrates her teachers, but her behaviors are controlled. Richard is a “Tasmanian Devil,” who is hard to manage but will learn in the regular classroom — with modifications of course. He will probably not earn A’s or make the honor roll, but he will learn. In contrast, Taylor is truly “Mr. Hyde.” He has not been successful either in the regular education environment or in the more restrictive environment of the behaviorally educably handicapped classroom. He is in trouble with the law and a prime candidate to drop out without even the skills necessary to perform the most menial jobs in society.

What is the difference? The answer is chance. Melissa was fortunate. She had a caring mother who monitored her progress closely and worked with her doctors and the school system from the time she was diagnosed in kindergarten. Richard was also lucky, although some might argue that to lose both parents tragically is not luck. But with that loss, Richard was protected by the child welfare system. When he began having difficulty at school something was done for him immediately. Richard was put on Ritalin and continued to be monitored closely, both by the school system and his caretakers. He will most likely finish high school and may go on to college.

Taylor’s story, unfortunately, is not uncommon. Unlike Melissa and Richard he was likely born with damaged receptors for sensory input so common in “crack babies.” He was shuffled from family member to family member because none of them could manage the behaviors his disability caused. It wasn’t until his second try at sixth grade that he came to live with his grandmother. She forced him to take his medication at home and tried to work with the school, but Taylor’s behaviors were already learned.

Why didn’t his teachers help him? Taylor spent so little time at one school that his teachers didn’t know him. He should have been placed in a more restricted environment soon after kindergarten. But, it takes several months, sometimes a whole school year, to get a student placed in a more restrictive environment. There are no short cuts in a system that attempts to protect children. Even when glaring signs of trouble in school and with the law were evident, Taylor still floundered in the regular educational system until age fifteen. Taylor didn’t have someone to advocate for him.

There are few clinical psychiatrists trained to diagnose and treat mental disorders in children. School counselors, pediatricians, and family physicians step up to the plate out of necessity. These pinch hitters do not have the specialized training of a clinical psychologist or the time necessary to do a follow up evaluation requiring several hours. Children suffering from ADHD symptoms are medicated with no further treatment.

Many educators believe that ADHD is over diagnosed and overmedicated. They feel that ADHD is the result of bad teaching, bad parenting, and willful disobedience by children. On the contrary, ADHD is a real neurological disorder that must be treated as such. According to Harvard Medical School, Attention Deficit Disorder is caused by insufficient availability of the neurotransmitter norepinephrine in the central nervous system. Stimulant medications, such as Ritalin, can increase the levels of norepinephrine and help relieve the symptoms of inattention, boredom and impulsiveness.

ADHD may be caused by underdeveloped connections in the brain related to the number and size of brain cells and the number of connections between them. If the brain lacks the neurons to process incoming information it will process some, but the rest will be lost, like a computer unable to run software due to lack of available memory. Some programs may run, but they must be shut down before running others or the system will overload and the computer will freeze. An ADHD student’s mind becomes overloaded with information, and the student becomes distracted.

Teachers and parents of children with ADHD work miracles every day in the least restrictive environment and in the home. Pediatricians and physicians do the only thing they can do: prescribe medication. Social workers, psychologists and psychiatrists that work with children are underpaid and overworked. The government and child welfare protect our children while scientists continue working to find a “cure” for this perplexing disorder called ADHD.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/10327