My seventh grade science teacher taught me that “science is a way of doing things.” There’s a method to science, a discipline if you will, that is consistant no matter what the subject:
- Observe a phenomenon or group of phenomenon.
- Form a hypothesis to explain the observation.
- Perform experiments to confirm hypothesis.
- Change hypothesis based on experimental results.
Repeat steps 3 and 4 until your hypothesis accounts for the observations and becomes a theory. This is what is being taught in science classes to get the scientific method into the formative brains of this world so they can approach new ideas and observations in a non-judgemental way.
Belief and it’s spritual cousin faith is not science and that’s the crux of many current culture war discussions especially around the origins of humanity. When the unobservable comes along, when things defy description we can rely on our faith in a higher power to try to come to terms with what is happening. To degrade something as personal as faith by dragging it down into the mundane is to change what faith is. Faith is not observable, you can’t experiment on the existance of a controlling all-powerful force. To present the idea of God’s creation of the universe on par with the sceintific process is a disservice to science and a disservice to faith.
But science and faith are not mutually exclusive. You can believe what you want to believe. Your faith is your own, but science is universal. Those experiments up in step 3 need to be repeatable and confirmed by others. Faith requires no such confirmation, just your own personal devotion. Thus a physicist can have their own faith that God created the universe while still following the discipline of science that shows what we know and can observe today.
Faith is taught in our families, our communities, and our places of worship. The discipline of science is taught in our schools. Don’t confuse the issue by putting the two together. Teach the discipline of science in our schools not faith. Teach our youth how to observe, hypothesize, experient, and theorize so they can continue to explain this wonderous place we all exist in. Then when school is done teach them also about faith and belief in the unknown, but keep discipline of science pure so we can all learn from science instead of only arguing about points of view in our beliefs and faith.
I think your step one is a bit confining, or, perhaps, a bit premature. I think science, or the scientific method, often begins not as a result of observing phenomenon, but as a result of questioning. Why is the grass green? Why is the sky blue? How can this mold prevent illness? From where did this universe we inhabit come? After the initial questioning, we then more closely observe the phenomenon and a hypothesis follows. However, what happens when, even after repeating step three numerous times, we are unable to change our hypothesis into something that suitably answers our initial question? This is were faith enters the equation. All of the experiments (step three) lead to the belief that something bigger, God, must have been at work. God (or gods or whatever higher power one believes in) picks up where science falls short. It is our school’s responsibility to answer those questions that might arise, and if science cannot adequately answer them, why not introduce faith into the classroom? Science answers questions, faith answers questions.