It looks like somebody either never heard of Dover, or refused to learn from their lesson. It seems the local ID supporters of Chesterfield County aren't happy:
So far, the official actions of the CCSB have been limited to issuing a rather vague and confusing statement. ID proponents had hoped to influence the selection of science textbooks, but they started their campaign too late, and the CCSB approved the selection of standard biology texts. But there is still much concern about the situation in Chesterfield. ID supporters, backed by a local conservative group called the Family Foundation, are energetic and well-organized, as evidenced by their ability to deliver a petition with more than 1,100 people who questioned the use of "evolution-only" science texts.
Energetic and well-organized supporters of pseudoscience... sounds like a one-way ticket to another budget-busting, unwinnable multimillion dollar lawsuit. Virginia, you can do better than these guys.
The Alliance for Science has the full story. If you are a Virginia resident and want to get involved, please contact them. Also, visit the link to learn much more about the story, and also about Shawn Smith's blog that tracks the Intelligent Design Creationism movement in Chesterfield County. Let's keep sound science in Virginia science classes and get the jump on things before the anti-science ID creationist movement can stir up trouble.
For the interested, I translated that vague statement from the bureaucratese to plain English.
The CCSB statement is hilarious. It's the wink-wink, nudge-nudge approach to directing that creationism is to be discussed and promoted in class. I hope that the Superintendent is a science professional. He could have so much fun with the Board's assignments. He could report back to them as coyly as they're being with him. Imagine their frustration in not hearing what they want to hear and yet not being free to ask specific questions.
Stop the IDists from spreading their silly propaganda. Do not allow them to trick people into accepting an opinion about ID as though the opinion constitutes a definition of ID.