In the year since the December 2005 Dover, PA court decision forbidding mention of intelligent design in science classrooms the sound of conflict over what should and should not be permitted content and discussion in America's public school science classrooms appears to have subsided. But, has the question truly been put to rest in favor of excluding intelligent design and other “non-scientific” content and subjects in favor of evolution and other mainstream Western scientific thought? The history of this issue would argue against such an interpretation as would opinion polls taken in large parts of the United States and in many countries around the world. Identifying the context for the next flashpoint affords the scientific community the opportunity to become a positive partner with science educators in attempts to resolve the question of how best to advance learning of science by public school students without fueling costly legal battles that demoralize communities and rob precious education dollars from affected school systems. Can the arena for the next battle over intelligent design be predicted?

One likely venue arises from a disconnection between the scientific community's understanding of what constitutes science and the priorities for science education compiled in the National Science Education Standards which serve as a model for many school curricula. In their current form, the National Science Education Standards make future attempts to include intelligent design and other alternative belief systems inevitable by offering a significant path to their successful inclusion. Within the current educational climate favoring multiculturalism and advocacy for alternative and non-Western cultural knowledge and ways of knowing, the separation of church and state is unlikely to be a sufficient barrier to at least partial inclusion of such content. Perceptions of the relevant portions of the National Science Education Standards held by college students from various parts of the U.S. will be examined.