Instead they are asking for experts to prepare written statements. They are asking for responses to eight questions:
Subcommittee wants questions addressed in papers
1. Discuss your understanding of the definition of science, particularly with reference to the majority and minority definitions.
2. Discuss your understanding of a hypothesis and theory, particularly with regard to evolution and how an individual hypothesis and theory is used and supported and what happens when competing hypotheses and theories are at odds.
3. Discuss the idea that the best scientific inquiry is performed in the fashion of empirical science, that is, observable, measurable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable.
4. Discuss the scientific evidence concerning the idea that natural selection and/or mutations produce speciation.
5. Discuss the scientific evidence concerning the idea that there is a common biological ancestor.
6. Discuss the scientific evidence concerning the idea of what can falsify the Theory of Biological Evolution, particularly how radiometric dating and the fossil record interacts with the idea of falsification.
7. Discuss the idea that students (after moving from concrete thinking and being able to think in the abstract) should be able to explain, in scientific terms, the philosophy of science and various theories of science, as well as various scientific criticisms.
8. U.S. education, particularly with regard to mathematics and science, has been criticized for being a mile wide and an inch deep and thus not promoting critical thinking and/or problem-solving skills. With regard to science education, is this a valid concern? Discuss the idea of how teachers need to or need not address this situation.
IMHO the questions are great but the response to each question would take a complete book. If they do get some great responses though I believe the responses themself would make a great text and cover much if not most of the course material for a highschool science class.
Source
Aslan is not a Tame Lion