» Articles » PMID: 37906687

Students Explain Evolution by Natural Selection Differently for Humans Versus Nonhuman Animals

Overview
Date 2023 Oct 31
PMID 37906687
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Evolution is foundational to understanding biology, yet learners at all stages have incomplete and incorrect ideas that persist beyond graduation. Contextual features of prompts (e.g., taxon of organism, acquisition vs. loss of traits, etc.) have been shown to influence both the learning process and the ideas students express in explanations of evolutionary processes. In this study, we compare students' explanations of natural selection for humans versus a nonhuman animal (cheetah) at different times during biology instruction. We found "taxon" to be a significant predictor of the content of students' explanations. Responses to "cheetah" prompts contained a larger number and diversity of key concepts (e.g., variation, heritability, differential reproduction) and fewer naïve ideas (e.g., need, adapt) when compared with responses to an isomorphic prompt containing "human" as the organism. Overall, instruction increased the prevalence of key concepts, reduced naïve ideas, and caused a modest reduction in differences due to taxon. Our findings suggest that the students are reasoning differently about evolutionary processes in humans as compared with nonhuman animals, and that targeted instruction may both increase students' facility with key concepts while reducing their susceptibility to contextual influences.

References
1.
Goransson A, Orraryd D, Fiedler D, Tibell L . Conceptual Characterization of Threshold Concepts in Student Explanations of Evolution by Natural Selection and Effects of Item Context. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2020; 19(1):ar1. PMC: 8697645. DOI: 10.1187/cbe.19-03-0056. View

2.
Dunk R, Barnes M, Reiss M, Alters B, Asghar A, Carter B . Evolution education is a complex landscape. Nat Ecol Evol. 2019; 3(3):327-329. DOI: 10.1038/s41559-019-0802-9. View

3.
Emmons N, Kelemen D . Young children's acceptance of within-species variation: Implications for essentialism and teaching evolution. J Exp Child Psychol. 2015; 139:148-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.05.011. View

4.
Shtulman A, Schulz L . The relation between essentialist beliefs and evolutionary reasoning. Cogn Sci. 2011; 32(6):1049-62. DOI: 10.1080/03640210801897864. View

5.
Cooper M, Caballero M, Ebert-May D, Fata-Hartley C, Jardeleza S, Krajcik J . Challenge faculty to transform STEM learning. Science. 2015; 350(6258):281-2. DOI: 10.1126/science.aab0933. View