230
Biyoloji Öğretmen Adaylarının Evrim…
Misconceptions of Prospective Biology…
NEF-EFMED Cilt 11, Sayı 2, Aralık 2017/
NFE-EJMSE Vol. 11, No. 2, December 2017
teachers do not see the theory of evolution as a scientific theory. In their study, Lord and
Marino (1993) have found that almost 20% of the study population does not see theory of
evolution as a scientific theory. Yates's (2011) study reveals a higher level of misconception
carried by students compared to teachers that evolution is lack of supporting proof.
Conclusion
Misconceptions about adaptation and natural selection that describe the process of
evolution are noteworthy (Shtulman, 2006). 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). Difficulty for students in
understanding the theory of evolution results from the difficulty in understanding the concepts
of genetics. Students' background knowledge in genetics would facilitate their understanding
of the mechanisms of evolution, in particular the role of intra-species variation in evolution
(Halden, 1989).
Some studies argue that conceptual understanding of the theory of evolution would
influence the individual's acceptance of proofs about the theory of evolution (Rutledge &
Mitchell 2002; Rutledge & Warden 2000). Above all, comprehensive understanding of the
nature of science, observations and proofs supporting evolution, methods employed in studies
about evolution, the explanatory and predictive power of evolution would be more influential
in understanding the theory of evolution's scientific status (American Association for the
Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993; NAS, 2008; NSTA, 2000).
One of the primary reasons of the failure of correcting such misconceptions is that
some pedagogic approaches pursued by teachers are not suitable for the correction of such
misconceptions in students (Cunningham & Wescott, 2009). Williams (2009) argues that,
since such misconceptions occur during the early period of the individual's life, it is difficult
to correct them due to social pressure, and particularly due to the fact that such concepts are
remote from daily life experiences. If such misconceptions are clearly explained to students
without giving the opportunity to fix them throughout the educational year, such
misconceptions would exactly reinstate at the end of the year (Greene 1990; Hellden &
Solomon 2004; Mintzes et al. 2000; Wandersee et al. 1989). 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. Identifying misconceptions would also help the teacher to
deliver a proper introduction in the class (Modell, Michael & Wenderoth 2005; Wilson 2001).
KESKİN, B. & ÖZAY KÖSE, E.
231
Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi
Necatibey Faculty of Education, Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education
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 students; however they do not have the time and competence
necessary to develop a self-test for identifying the misconceptions (Morrison & Lederman,
2000). Our teachers need reliable misconception tests with construct validity that may be
employed in the education (Anderson, 2002). 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 (Cunningham & Wescott, 2009).
In particular, many researchers have found a positive correlation between people's
opinions in science and nature of science and their level of understanding and accepting the
theory of evolution (Dagher & BouJaoude, 2005; Lombrozo et al. 2008; Rutledge & Warden
2000; Scharmann & Harris 1992; Trani 2004). Another finding of the study is that prospective
biology teachers have misconceptions about the nature of science. prospective biology
teachers argued that there is a hierarchical relationship between the theory and the law. The
fact that evolution is a theory has caused doubt on prospective teachers in "evolution", and
led them to, as Graf et al. (2011) argued, treat evaluation as a piece of weak scientific
knowledge. Therefore, as also emphasized by many researchers (Akerson & Volrich, 2006;
Başıbüyük, 2007; Dagher & Boujaoude, 1997; Sinatra, Southerland, McConaughy &
Demastes, 2003) prior information should be presented on the definition and philosophy of
science, scientific methods and process, hypothesis, theory, and the structure of the concepts
of law early in teaching evolution.
To what extent propective teachers understand and accept the theory of evolution will
determine how they will present the subject of evolution to their students during their
subsequent teaching career (Aguillard 1999; Rutledge & Mitchell 2002; Shankar & Skoog
1993). Heddy and Nadelson (2012) argue that, acceptance of the theory of evolution by
people would yield a global rise in the field of science and technology. Again, some other
studies have revealed that, teachers rejecting the theory of evolution limit the ability of
students to understand the theory of evolution (Graf et al. 2011; Rutledge & Mitchell 2002;
Sanders 2010). Moreover, it is also shown in the studies that students are greatly affected by
the knowledge and world view of their teachers (Diekhoff 1983; Rutledge & Mitchell 2002).
In conclusion, prospective biology teachers were found to have myriad of conceptions
about biological evolution. The general outcome revealed is not very encouraging. Again,