共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Louis S. Nadelson 《Evolution》2009,2(3):490-504
The learning and teaching of biological evolution is conceptually challenging. To fully comprehend evolution, it is posited
that individuals also need to understand the roles that the nature of science and situations of chance play in the process.
The consistent detection of misconceptions of evolution suggests that new approaches to increasing understanding need to be
explored. I predicted that preservice teachers’ ideas for teaching biological evolution could be influenced by three brief
web-based interventions, one focused on the common misconceptions of evolution, one on the nature of science, and one on situations
of uncertainty in the context of evolution. An experimental group received a combination of the three web-based tutorials
while a control group received the misconceptions and nature of science instruction and a time on task filler tutorial. Participants
were directed to develop a lesson idea applying the knowledge they learned from the tutorials. The lesson ideas were examined
for evidence of the influence of the web-based instruction, participant understanding and misconceptions of concepts, and
their ideas about teaching evolution. The results of this study revealed that the participating preservice teachers held a
wide range of conception and misconception of evolution, were somewhat influenced by the tutorials, and had an array of visions
for teaching evolution. The outcomes support the need for further investigation into the multifaceted nature of preparing
preservice teachers to teach evolution. 相似文献
2.
Acceptance of evolution by educators of prospective teachers remains superficially studied despite their role in having mentored
schoolteachers whose weak support of evolution is known. Here, we contrast the views of New England educators of prospective
teachers (n = 62; 87% Ph.D./doctorate holders in 32 specializations) with those of the general faculty (n = 244; 93% Ph.D./doctorate holders in 40 disciplines), both members of 35 colleges and universities, and with college students
(n = 827; subsample of the 35 institutions) who were polled on: (1) the controversy evolution vs. creationism vs. intelligent
design (ID), (2) their understanding of how science/evolution works, and (3) their religiosity. The educators held intermediate
positions in respect to the general faculty and the students: 94% of the general faculty, 75% of the educators, and 63% of
the students said they accepted evolution openly; and 82% of the general faculty, 71% of the educators, and 58% of the students
thought that evolution is definitely true. Only 3% of the general faculty in comparison to 19% of the educators and 24% of
the students thought that evolution and creationism are in harmony. Although 93% of the general faculty, educators, and students
knew that evolution relies on common ancestry, 26% of the general faculty, 45% of the educators, and 35% of the students did
not know that humans are apes. Remarkably, 15% of the general faculty, 32% of the educators, and 35% of the students believed,
incorrectly, that the origin of the human mind cannot be explained by evolution; and 30% of the general faculty, 59% of the
educators, and 75% of the students were Lamarckian (=believed in inheritance of acquired traits). For science education: 96%
of the general faculty, 86% of the educators, and 71% of the students supported the exclusive teaching of evolution, while
4% of the general faculty, 14% of the educators, and 29% of the students favored equal time to evolution, creationism and
ID; note that 92% of the general faculty, 82% of the educators, and 50% of the students perceived ID as either not scientific
and proposed to counter evolution based on false claims or as religious doctrine consistent with creationism. The general
faculty was the most knowledgeable about science/evolution and the least religious (science index, SI = 2.49; evolution index,
EI = 2.49; and religiosity index, RI = 0.49); the educators reached lower science/evolution but higher religiosity indexes
than the general faculty (SI = 1.96, EI = 1.96, and RI = 0.83); and the students were the least knowledgeable about science/evolution
and the most religious (SI = 1.80, EI = 1.60, and RI = 0.89). Understanding of science and evolution were inversely correlated
with level of religiosity, and understanding of evolution increased with increasing science literacy. Interestingly, ≈36%
of the general faculty, educators and students considered religion to be very important in their lives, and 17% of the general
faculty, 34% of the educators, and 28% of the students said they prayed daily. Assessing the perception of evolution by educators
of prospective teachers vs. the general faculty and the students of New England, one of the historically most progressive
regions in the U.S., is crucial for determining the magnitude of the impact of creationism and ID on attitudes toward science,
reason, and education in science. 相似文献
3.
Many students reject evolutionary theory, whether or not they adequately understand basic evolutionary concepts. We explore
the hypothesis that accepting evolution is related to understanding the nature of science. In particular, students may be
more likely to accept evolution if they understand that a scientific theory is provisional but reliable, that scientists employ
diverse methods for testing scientific claims, and that relating data to theory can require inference and interpretation.
In a study with university undergraduates, we find that accepting evolution is significantly correlated with understanding
the nature of science, even when controlling for the effects of general interest in science and past science education. These
results highlight the importance of understanding the nature of science for accepting evolution. We conclude with a discussion
of key characteristics of science that challenge a simple portrayal of the scientific method and that we believe should be emphasized in classrooms. 相似文献
4.
Troy A. Ladine 《Evolution》2009,2(3):386-392
Students at private Christian colleges tend to have a viewpoint that incorporates faith and belief in God. Whether due to
misconceptions about evolution, lack of knowledge of the nature of science, or belief that their faith cannot allow them to
accept evolution, there tends to be a great deal of confusion about evolution. This study investigates the attitudes toward
evolution of students at a small Christian liberal arts university located in east Texas (East Texas Baptist University, ETBU)
and how they would feel most comfortable being approached about evolution in the college science classroom. The majority of
students at ETBU are from either Texas or Louisiana. In high school, both states require at least one science course to be
taken and evolution to be taught at some level of understanding. Students show a fair understanding that science includes
only naturalistic explanations . However, a greater number of science courses and maturity level of the student resulted in significant differences (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.002, respectively) in the understanding of science. Nevertheless, there was a general assertion that God should be included
in the definition of science by the majority of students (64.4%), indicating a misunderstanding of the nature of science.
Students responded that they would be most comfortable with being approached in the classroom about evolution through the
presentation of the science supporting evolution (19.6%), and being shown how creationism and intelligent design are not science
(29.8%). A number of students responded that the professor should accept creationism and intelligent design as science and
teach them as such (38.2%). This paper will present methods to address students that respond to evolution in this manner. 相似文献
5.
Louis Nadelson Rex Culp Suzan Bunn Ryan Burkhart Robert Shetlar Kellen Nixon James Waldron 《Evolution》2009,2(3):458-473
State and national standards call for teaching evolution concepts as early as kindergarten, which provides motivation to continue
developing science instruction and curriculum for young learners. The importance of addressing students’ folk theories regarding
science justifies teaching evolution early in K-12 education. In this project, we developed, implemented, and researched standards-based
lessons to teach elements of evolution (speciation and adaption) to kindergarteners and second graders. Our lessons attended
to the students’ prior knowledge, and utilized inquiry and modeling to teach and assess their ability to recognize patterns
of similarity and differences among organisms. Using their products and comments as evidence, it was apparent the students
were able to communicate recognition of patterns and effectively apply their knowledge in near transfer activities, indicating
they achieved our learning objectives. This provides support for teaching evolution concepts in the early grades and evidence
of the ability for young children to effectively engage in supported inquiry and modeling for learning science. 相似文献
6.
Public acceptance of evolution in Northeastern U.S. is the highest nationwide, only 59%. Here, we compare perspectives about
evolution, creationism, intelligent design (ID), and religiosity between highly educated New England faculty (n = 244; 90% Ph.D. holders in 40 disciplines at 35 colleges/universities) and college students from public secular (n = 161), private secular (n = 298), and religious (n = 185) institutions: 94/3% of the faculty vs. 64/14% of the students admitted to accepting evolution openly and/or privately,
and 82/18% of the faculty vs. 58/42% of the students thought that evolution is definitely true or probably true, respectively.
Only 3% of the faculty vs. 23% of the students thought that evolution and creationism are in harmony. Although 92% of faculty
and students thought that evolution relies on common ancestry, one in every four faculty and one in every three students did
not know that humans are apes; 15% of the faculty vs. 34% of the students believed, incorrectly, that the origin of the human
mind cannot be explained by evolution, and 30% of the faculty vs. 72% of the students was Lamarckian (believed in inheritance
of acquired traits). Notably, 91% of the faculty was very concerned (64%) or somehow concerned (27%) about the controversy
evolution vs creationism vs ID and its implications for science education: 96% of the faculty vs. 72% of the students supported
the exclusive teaching of evolution while 4% of the faculty vs. 28% of the students favored equal time to evolution, creationism
and ID; 92% of the faculty vs. 52% of the students perceived ID as not scientific and proposed to counter evolution or as
doctrine consistent with creationism. Although ≈30% of both faculty and students considered religion to be very important
in their lives, and ≈20% admitted to praying daily, the faculty was less religious (Religiosity Index faculty = 0.5 and students = 0.75) and, as expected, more knowledgeable about science (Science Index faculty = 2.27 and students = 1.60) and evolution (Evolution Index faculty = 2.48 and students = 1.65) than the students. Because attitudes toward evolution correlate (1) positively with understanding
of science/evolution and (2) negatively with religiosity/political ideology, we conclude that science education combined with
vigorous public debate should suffice to increase acceptance of naturalistic rationalism and decrease the negative impact
of creationism and ID on society’s evolution literacy. 相似文献
7.
A great number of research papers in the English literature of science education present difficulties pupils have in understanding
natural selection. Studies show that children have essentialist and teleological intuitive ideas when dealing with organisms
and that these biases hinder their ability to understand the theory of evolution by natural selection. Consequently, it is
interesting to ascertain if and how the school education offered today deals with the problem, i.e., helps the children confront
these biases. To that purpose, this study answered the two following research questions: (a) How is biological evolution presented—from
the past to the present day—in the official documentation of primary school education, namely the science curricula and the
textbooks of Greece? and (b) what are the conceptions held by Greek primary school teachers of the concepts of evolutionary
theory and relevant issues that they have to teach? Our research found that not only are the intuitive ideas not “confronted”
but they are also “affirmed” in Greek primary education. This phenomenon, as some other international studies have shown,
must not be only a Greek one. A drastic change in the content and structure of primary school curricula and the training of
educators is necessary in order to improve and facilitate the teaching of biological evolution. 相似文献
8.
Joseph Fail Jr. 《Evolution》2008,1(1):56-64
Understanding the basic mechanism of evolution by natural selection together with examples of how it works in nature is crucial
for explaining and teaching the workings of biology and ecology to young students. Dobzhansky said it best in his advice to
educators of biology: “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” This premise is true at all levels
of biology but especially so in the elementary years where foundations of science knowledge are laid. Elementary students
are capable of learning cohesive and connected stories of biological principles and learning them within a no-holds-barred
arena wherein concepts and processes usually reserved for high school years are taught with special care, appropriate exercises,
and patient explanations. This story must include solid introductions to the fundamental principles of evolution by natural
selection that are threaded within and alongside those of basic biology and ecology. This paper attempts to make the case
for the inclusion of connected stories of biology in the earliest years of education and to include within that education
the unifying theme of all biology and ecology studies—evolution. 相似文献
9.
Brian Alters 《Evolution》2010,3(2):231-235
Instructors’ apprehensions and the decisions instructors make about pedagogy are often linked when it comes to teaching evolution.
Whether it is the reticence of K-12 teachers that their instruction may affect their students’ religious beliefs detrimentally
or that they may become caught up in some administrative, media, parental, or school political turmoil or whether it is the
apprehension of college students who perceive that their religious beliefs are being explicitly challenged, such fears can
be reduced by understanding their roots and by honing pedagogy in ways that reduce perceived threats. This article describes
why it is prudent to address these often secretly held apprehensions and how to help instructors feel free to employ their
best pedagogical methods to teach evolution without lingering fear. Some suggestions are given for pre-college and college
instructors interested in combining effective pedagogy with as little perceived threat as possible. Methods are offered that
allow instructors to focus on underlying scientific misconceptions even if those misconceptions are ultimately facilitated
by non-scientific sources, while giving creationist or creationist-leaning students a chance to learn the appropriate scientific
conceptions without their religious beliefs being explicitly threatened in a science course. 相似文献
10.
In a questionnaire-based survey, the proportion of Glasgow University first year biology students who rejected evolution in
2009–2011 was about 7%, similar to the previously reported average figure for 1987–1999. However, by final year, evolution
rejection was absent in students who studied evolution beyond first year and 4% among those who did not. Evolution rejection
was closely related to accepting a religion-based alternative, whereas acceptance was related to finding the evidence convincing.
Although many religious students accepted evolution, 50% of Islamic students were rejecters, compared to 25% of Christians.
A question testing acceptance of several scientific propositions showed no evidence that evolution rejecters were generally
more skeptical of science than accepters. Rejecters were overall less secure than accepters in their identification of the
correct definition for terms related to evolution and creationism, but, surprisingly, more than 10% of final year students
chose a Lamarckian definition for Darwinian evolution. Accepters and rejecters responded equally poorly to a question on Darwin’s
history, but level 4 was much better. A breakdown of evolution into three components (human origins, macroevolution, and microevolution)
found that some evolution rejecters accepted some components, with microevolution having the highest acceptance and human
origins the lowest. These findings are discussed in terms of strategies for evolution education and the phenomenon of evolution
rejection worldwide. 相似文献
11.
Here we address three misconceptions stated by Rice et al. in their observations of our article Paz-y-Mi?o and Espinosa (Evo
Edu Outreach 2:655–675, 2009), published in this journal. The five authors titled their note “The Theory of Evolution is Not an Explanation for the Origin of Life.” First, we argue that it is fallacious to believe that because the formulation of the theory of evolution, as conceived
in the 1800s, did not include an explanation for the origin of life, nor of the universe, the concept of evolution would not
allow us to hypothesize the possible beginnings of life and its connections to the cosmos. Not only Stanley Miller’s experiments
of 1953 led scientists to envision a continuum from the inorganic world to the origin and diversification of life, but also
Darwin’s own writings of 1871. Second, to dismiss the notion of Rice et al. that evolution does not provide explanations concerning
the universe or the cosmos, we identify compelling scientific discussions on the topics: Zaikowski et al. (Evo Edu Outreach
1:65–73, 2008), Krauss (Evo Edu Outreach 3:193–197, 2010), Peretó et al. (Orig Life Evol Biosph 39:395–406, 2009) and Follmann and Brownson (Naturwissenschaften 96:1265–1292, 2009). Third, although we acknowledge that the term Darwinism may not be inclusive of all new discoveries in evolution, and also that creationists and Intelligent Designers hijack the
term to portray evolution as ideology, we demonstrate that there is no statistical evidence suggesting that the word Darwinism
interferes with public acceptance of evolution, nor does the inclusion of the origin of life or the universe within the concept
of evolution. We examine the epistemological and empirical distinction between the theory of evolution and the concept of evolution and conclude that, although the distinction is important, it should not compromise scientific logic. 相似文献
12.
When we teach evolution to our students, we tend to focus on “constructive” evolution, the processes which lead to the development of novel or modified structures. Most biology students are familiar with the subjects of finches’ beaks, giraffes’ necks, and hair in mammals. Of course, there is nothing inherently wrong with a constructivist approach to teaching evolution, but if it is our only focus, we may overlook the flip side of the coin. By the flip side of the coin, of course, we are referring to regressive evolution: the loss or degeneration of a trait. Regressive evolution does not often make its way into biology textbooks, but it is of great relevance nonetheless. In all likelihood, when a new trait evolves or an existing one is modified, something is sacrificed in return. In order to develop a flipper, a marine mammal must sacrifice individual digits. You may be familiar with one or more of the following familiar characters lost through regressive evolution: teeth in birds, scales in mammals, and tails in higher primates. For aficionados of cave biology like us, one of the most interesting examples of regressive evolution concerns cave fish: Why do cave fish lose their eyes? 相似文献
13.
Lawrence M. Krauss 《Evolution》2010,3(2):193-197
Just as biological evolution is the heart of modern biology, cosmic evolution is the heart of modern cosmology. For instructors
to be confident in teaching science, it is helpful for them to appreciate the current understanding of the composition and
development of the universe, especially the revolutionary changes that have taken place in our understanding over the last
two decades. Biological evolution requires the products of cosmic evolution—the elements of which life is composed were formed
in the cores of stars—and the two areas of science are thus crucially, and even inspiringly, connected. 相似文献
14.
Barbara Bajd 《Evolution》2012,5(3):405-411
This article discusses the importance and benefits of providing lower secondary school students with some knowledge of human evolution and its educational context. The author surveyed science teaching in secondary and upper secondary schools in Slovenia and concluded that evolution in general, and human evolution in particular, do not feature prominently in the curriculum and so are not represented by many teaching contact hours. Neither are popular, well-designed, and up-to-date books on the subject--whether by Slovene authors or in translation--readily available to interested students. And yet, paleoanthropology??the study of human evolution in its wider context??is a rapidly developing, high-profile branch of science with major popular appeal. Recent discoveries??many of them spectacular??have provided a much more detailed picture of human evolutionary history, significantly modifying earlier ideas about our ancestry. The subject not only attracts much public interest but also has major educational benefits: human evolution exemplifies many general evolutionary principles, illustrates the synergy of focused multidisciplinary approaches in the life sciences, and reinforces teaching of environmental conservation, human relations, and social responsibility. Because of the subject??s importance, the author provides some suggestions on how the teaching of human evolution might be incorporated into the school curriculum and considers some of the educational resources available to support its teaching. 相似文献
15.
Hernán L. Cofré David P. Santibáñez Juan P. Jiménez Angel Spotorno Francisca Carmona Kasandra Navarrete 《Journal of biological education》2018,52(3):248-261
The results of studies of the nature of science (NOS) as a factor that enhances students’ understanding of evolution have been inconclusive. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to test the role of NOS instruction in enhancing students’ learning about evolution. We used a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-tests to investigate the impact of teaching evolution with and without NOS in two classes with 15–16-year-old students, who were randomly assigned to these two classes. To measure their understanding of NOS and their acceptance and understanding of evolution, we used three different instruments that have been shown to generate reliable and valid inferences in comparable populations. The main results of this study were that, in the class in which the teaching of evolution included NOS instruction, the students’ understanding of NOS and their acceptance of evolution significantly improved. However, irrespective of the use of NOS instruction, both classes increased their understanding of evolution. These results support the claim that NOS instruction may influence students’ acceptance of evolution but not their understanding of evolution and natural selection. 相似文献
16.
Steven R. Jakobi 《Evolution》2010,3(3):416-419
In an informal survey, only five percent of 306 college freshmen students in an introductory biology course provided a correct
scientific definition for the theory of evolution. The other respondents provided answers that ranged from “organisms improving
themselves” (42 percent) to “monkeys becoming humans” (seven percent). Some of the potential reasons for the lack of understanding
of the concept of evolution are explored. 相似文献
17.
Ronald S. Hermann 《Evolution》2012,5(4):619-628
High school science students are often unwilling to learn about evolution due to a perceived conflict with their religious beliefs. Other students are able to understand evolution despite the fact that they do not believe in evolution. According to Cobern (Sci Educ 80:579?C610, 1996), students can wall off that which is believed from that which is not believed in a process he called cognitive apartheid. A mixed-methods study was conducted to determine the extent to which understanding of evolution differed among high school Advanced Placement science students who did and did not believe in evolution. Two students who demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of evolution despite their admonition that they do not believe in evolution were then interviewed. Eight themes emerged from the interview that provide insight into the views of students learning of evolution despite the fact that they do not believe in evolution. Based on these themes, several implications for the teaching of evolution are presented. 相似文献
18.
Nate K. McVaugh Jeffrey Birchfield Margaret M. Lucero Anthony J. Petrosino 《Evolution》2011,4(2):286-292
Evolution is the underlying framework upon which all biology is based; however, when it comes to learning evolutionary concepts,
many students encounter obstacles. There are many reasons as to why these obstacles occur. These reasons deal with evolution
being treated as a discrete topic among many within a biology curriculum, misunderstanding the nature of science, and personal
difficulties with understanding due to evolution’s seemingly abstract nature. In this article, we propose a different way
of thinking about and teaching evolution in grades K-12, and it surrounds four core areas essential to the understanding of
evolution: variation, selection, inheritance, and deep time. Possibilities for how these areas can affect learning are described
and implications for assessment are also discussed. 相似文献
19.
A firm grasp of evolution is invaluable for understanding our own species in addition to the rest of the biological world;
however, not only does much of the American public reject evolution, but many thinkers within the scientific community resist
its application to their own disciplines. In an attempt to overcome these challenges through education, the Evolutionary Studies
(EvoS) program at Binghamton University (B.U.) strives to present evolution as a theory relevant to all human-related subjects.
Here, we present the cornerstone of this program, “Evolution for Everyone,” an introductory-level, general education course
with an academically diverse student population. The curriculum delves into Darwin’s theory and uses it to illustrate not
only classical biology but how the same ideas pertain to the full range of human-related disciplines. This material is framed
in terms of scientific inquiry, including direct participation in research. An evaluation of the course has demonstrated that
it increases both understanding and acceptance of evolution and its relevance to human-related academic disciplines and everyday
life. The EvoS program has received National Science Foundation funding to expand into a nationwide consortium, providing
a strong infrastructure for the development of similar courses at other institutions. 相似文献
20.
Ozgur Taskin 《Evolution》2011,4(3):467-477
This qualitative research aims at first defining how pre-service science teachers think regarding the theory of evolution
(TOE) with a particular hands-on and minds-on activity (The article by O’Brien (Am Biol Teach 62(8):578–582, 2000) entitled A toilet paper timeline of evolution: 5 E cycle on the concept of scale is modified and applied in the present
research as an intervention process.) Finally, specific suggestions in instructional techniques are offered based on a geological
time scale. At the end of intervention, the research follows how participants respond to what they found out or came across.
If participants had common misconceptions regarding the TOE, these are revealed. The present research was conducted in two
spring semesters of 2009 and 2010 in a geology course. The participant number of the study was 129. The research lasted three weeks.
Research results showed that participants were generally misinformed regarding conceptual knowledge of the TOE. Approximately
half of the participants did not believe (the term believing in or acceptance of the TOE does not affect research findings)
in the TOE. Mostly, they thought that there is no place for human evolution in Islam. Few of them could reconcile scientific
information with their own Islamic point of view. Even though they did not believe in the TOE, most of them accepted that
they did not have adequate knowledge regarding the TOE. They mostly said they were shocked about the first appearance of human
beings in the geological time scale, which is the main issue in the present research. After intervention, conceptual change
was considerable, though this is a secondary concern. The results also show that even though students were quite prejudiced
regarding the TOE, they were ready to explore it deeply. Such concrete activities might be helpful to push students to think
over the TOE. However, there are numerous barriers such as ill-prepared science textbooks and websites, unwillingness of instructors,
and official policy of the Ministry of National Education. 相似文献