Şablon template
Yüklə 316,62 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- NFE-EJMSE Vol. 11, No. 2, December 2017
- KESKİN, B. ÖZAY KÖSE, E . 233
232 Biyoloji Öğretmen Adaylarının Evrim… Misconceptions of Prospective Biology… NEF-EFMED Cilt 11, Sayı 2, Aralık 2017/ NFE-EJMSE Vol. 11, No. 2, December 2017
these results suggest that education on evolution is poor. Williams (2009) argues that late and limited inclusion of education on evolution in school's curriculum may underlie these misconceptions. Today, misconceptions revealed by this study and other studies in the literature are virtually identical to those revealed by Bishop and Anderson (1990). Prevalence of such misconceptions for more than 20 years despite positive enhancements in curricula, educational approaches, integration of technological innovations and other aspects of human education may be attributed to the intrinsically challenging preconceptions since the initial evolution of mankind as Geary (2007) argues. Such intrinsic formations may foster quite faster grip of socially-conveyed arguments that generally conflict with science by human mind (Coley & Muratore, 2012). Even though misconceptions are very resistant against correction, educators should devise ways to invert such misconceptions into true scientific knowledge (Driver, Guesne & Tiberghien, 1985; ReaRarnirez & Clement, 1997; Richard, 2004; Strike & Posner, 1992). Weeks (2013) argues that we need to find teaching methods that are much more creative than those employed in the teaching of evolution today. In some studies, it is argued that offering the evolution class throughout the whole year would create the sufficient period of time necessary to identify and cure the misconceptions (Richard, 2004). Weeks (2013) argues that much more time should be allocated to correct misconceptions and deliver an in-depth teaching of the theory of evolution, requiring the service of much more experienced teachers. Also alternative methods can be employed in teaching evolution. For example, according to the results of a study by Spiegel et al., (2012) even a single tour to a museum themed biological evolution enhances in itself the understanding of students in evolution. Another alternative method on natural selection developed by Abraham et al. (2009) through computer-aided simulation has enhanced the learning of students. Such constructive alternative teaching methods may be an alternative to today's conventional method of teaching evolution (Weeks, 2013). The study by a group of scientists has revealed that, in case student-centered teaching methods are employed, students' misconceptions are reduced, and evolutionary concepts used by students to explain natural selection quantitatively grow (NRC, 1998; Moore et al., 2002; Özyeral, 2008). As suggested by Wescott and Cunningham (2005), each teacher should have a test in hand to identify the misconceptions that may be carried by students. As reported by Wilson (2001), once the misconceptions of students are identified and explained, students' interest in the class grow. Certainly many teachers intend to identify the misconceptions carried by their
KESKİN, B. & ÖZAY KÖSE, E. 233 Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi Necatibey Faculty of Education, Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education students; however they do not have the time and competence necessary to develop a self-test for identifying the misconceptions. Our teachers need reliable misconception tests with construct validity that may be employed in the education. Misconceptions identified through appropriate tests should be revealed to the students, and they should be provided with the opportunity of substituting such misconceptions with true scientific facts so that their understanding of evolution is enhanced. If students are encouraged to use the scientific language more during the class, it is believed that students would focus on the scientific content of such concepts, leading to the reduction of misconceptions resulting from the effect of daily use (Dagher, Brickhouse, Shipman & Letts, 2004). Given the argument of Dobzhansky (1973), "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution", misconceptions in biology teachers require a higher level of consideration. If prospective teachers do not gain a good understanding of the theory of evolution, it is obvious that they would not be able to effectively teach it to their students in the future (Sanders 2010). And even in case the results of such researches are introduced to the prospective teachers to render them familiar with potential experiences in the future, they may build better learning settings for their own students.
Abraham, J. K., Meir, E., Perry, J., Herron, J. C., Maruca, S., & Stal, D. (2009). Addressing undergraduate student misconceptions about natural selection with an interactive simulated laboratory. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(3),: 393-404. Aguillard, D. (1999). Evolution education in Louisiana Public Schools: a decade following Edwards v. Aguillard. The American Biology Teacher, 61(3), 182-188. Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching nature of science explicitly in a first ‐grade
internship setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377-394. Alles, D. (2001). Using evolution as the framework for teaching biology. The American Biology Teacher, 63(1), 20-24. Alters B. J. & Alters S. M. (2001). Defending evolution: A guide to the creation/ evolution controversy. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press. Yüklə 316,62 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|