Of course, the selection of six experts to review the standards drafts, with “both sides” represented 3:3, reinforces the spectacle noted here and here of representing this as a two-sided controversy. That in itself is scandalous, since there may be a 2-sided controversy over whether to teach science, but there’s no such controversy in biology over the standing of evolution.
There’s another scandal here, however. A ten-year review of all the science standards, for all grades, is a huge deal, with a galaxy of potential concerns other than how evolution should be taught. If someone is selected because of their stance on evolution (especially those chosen specifically for opposing evolution as the established framework for biology), are they qualified on that basis to review the standards with a view toward all the concerns that should be brought to bear at this stage of the process?
The SBOE seems to have abdicated its responsibility for the overall quality of the standards, in its single-minded pursuit of the anti-evolution agenda.
But that should be no surprise, in light of what they did with the ELAR standards.