Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Current Status of Research in Teaching and Learning Evolution: I. Philosophical/Epistemological Issues

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Scholarship that addresses teaching and learning about evolution has rapidly increased in recent years. This review of that scholarship first addresses the philosophical/epistemological issues that impinge on teaching and learning about evolution, including the proper philosophical goals of evolution instruction; the correlational and possibly causal relationships among knowing, understanding, accepting, and believing; and the factors that affect student understanding, acceptance, and/or belief. Second, I summarize the specific epistemological issues involved, including empiricism, naturalism, philosophical vs methodological materialism, science vs religion as non-overlapping magisteria, and science as a way of knowing. Third, the paper critically reviews the strengths and weaknesses of the research tools available to measure the nature of science, epistemological beliefs, and especially the acceptance of evolution. Based on these findings, further research in these areas, especially study of the factors that cause lack of explanatory coherence as well as replications of studies that promise to explain current confusing findings about the interrelationships among student understanding, acceptance, and belief in evolution, are called for. In addition, this review calls for more longitudinal studies to delineate causal connections as well as improved measurement tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For more information about this project, contact the author of this article, Gale Sinatra (sinatra@unlv.nevada.edu), or Sara Brem, Ph.D. (drbrem@ml1.net).

  2. Although I recognize that there is substantial disagreement among philosophers about exactly what constitutes the nature of science and, in fact, whether or not the definite article “the” should be used at all, in this paper I will use this phrase for the sake of simplicity and based on my conviction that such disagreements have little if any place in introductory evolution instruction.

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alters, B. J., & Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56, 1891–1901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asghar, A., Wiles, J. R., & Alters, B. (2007). Canadian pre-service elementary teachers’ conceptions of biological evolution and evolution education. McGill Journal of Education, 42, 189–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brem, S. K., Ranney, M., & Schindel, J. (2003). Perceived consequences of evolution: College students perceive negative personal and social impact in evolutionary theory. Science Education, 87, 181–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colburn, A., & Henriques, L. (2006). Clergy views on evolution, creationism, science, and religion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 419–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. A. (2001). The goal of evolution instruction: Should we aim for belief or scientific literacy? Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 21, 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, C. L., Demastes, S. S., & Hafner, M. S. (1994). Evolution: biological education's under-researched unifying theme. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 445–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagher, Z. R., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). Scientific views and religious beliefs of college students: The case of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 429–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagher, Z. R., & BouJaoude, S. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the nature of evolutionary theory. Science Education, 89, 378–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagher, Z. R., Brickhouse, N. W., Shipman, H., & Letts, W. J. (2004). How some college students represent their understandings of the nature of scientific theories. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 735–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deniz, H., Donnelly, L. A., & Yilmaz, I. (2008). Exploring the factors related to acceptance of evolutionary theory among Turkish preservice biology teachers: Toward a more informative conceptual ecology for biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 420–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downie, J. R., & Barron, N. J. (2000). Evolution and religion: Attitudes of Scottish first year biology and medical students to the teaching of evolutionary biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34, 139–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckstrand, I. A. (1998). NABT and the society for the study of evolution collaborate to improve quality of evolution education in schools. The American Biology Teacher, 60, 482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, E. M. (2008). Conceptual change and evolutionary biology: A developmental analysis. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 263–294). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fysh, R., & Lucas, K. B. (1998). Science and religion: Acknowledging student belief. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 44, 60–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, R. G., Trowbridge, J. E., Demastes, S. S., Wandersee, J. H., Hafner, M. S., & Cummins, C. L. (1992). Toward a research base for evolution education: Report of a national conference. In Proceedings of the 1992 evolution education research conference. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge. Available from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/13/0d/bf.pdf. Accessed Mar 20, 2009.

  • Gould, S. J. (1997). Nonoverlapping magisterria. Natural History, 106, 60–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermann, R. S. (2008). Evolution as a controversial issue: A review of instructional approaches. Science & Education, 17, 1011–1032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84, 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hokayem, H., & BouJaoude, S. (2008). College students’ perceptions of the theory of evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 395–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D. L. (1973). Darwin and his critics: The reception of Darwin’s theory of evolution by the scientific community. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingram, E. L., & Nelson, C. E. (2006). Relationship between achievement and students’ acceptance of evolution or creation in an upper-level evolution course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jungwirth, E. (1975). Preconceived adaptation and inverted evolution: A case of distorted concept formation in high school biology. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 21, 95–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2009). Preliminary evolutionary explanations: A basic framework for conceptual change and explanatory coherence in evolution. Science & Education, 16, 393–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. E. (1983). Predicting science achievement: The role of developmental level, disembedding ability, mental capacity, prior knowledge, and beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 117–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. E., & Weser, J. (1990). The rejection of nonscientific beliefs about life: Effects of instruction and reasoning skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 589–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–880). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Wade, P. D., & Bell, R. L. (1998). Assessing the nature of science: What is the nature of our assessments? Science & Education, 7, 595–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lombrozo, T., Shtulman, A., & Weisberg, M. (2006). The intelligent design controversy: Lessons from psychology and education. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 56–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, A. (2004). Believers and disbelievers in evolution. Politics and the Life Sciences, 23, 55–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKeachie, W. J., Lin, Y. G., & Strayer, J. (2002). Creationist vs evolutionary beliefs: Effects on learning biology. The American Biology Teacher, 64, 189–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, L., Doster, E., & Jackson, D. F. (2000). Managing the conflict between evolution & religion. The American Biology Teacher, 62, 102–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam-Webster. (1998). Merriam-Webster dictionary. Mass: Springfield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. R. (2008). Only a theory: Evolution and the battle for America’s soul. New York: Viking Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. A. (1984). Science as a way of knowing—evolutionary biology. American Zoologist, 24, 467–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J. A. (1991). Science as a way of knowing—VII: A conceptual framework for Biology Part III. American Zoologist, 31, 349–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R., Mitchell, G., Bally, R., Inglis, M., Day, J., & Jacobs, D. (2002). Undergraduates’ understanding of evolution: Ascriptions of agency as a problem for student learning. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences, Working Group on Teaching Evolution. (1998). Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieswandt, M., & Bellomo, K. (2009). Written extended-response questions as classroom assessment tools for meaningful understanding of evolutionary theory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 333–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. Holt. and Winston, New York: Rinehart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, W. G, Jr. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 76–116). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, C. (2007). Designing intelligent knowledge: Epistemological faith and the democratization of science. Educational Theory, 57, 123–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph, J. L., & Stewart, J. (1998). Evolution and the nature of science: On the historical discord and its implications for education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 1069–1089.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, M. L., & Mitchell, M. A. (2002). High school biology teachers’ knowledge structure, acceptance & teaching of evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 64, 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, M. L., & Sadler, K. C. (2007). Reliability of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) instrument with university students. The American Biology Teacher, 69, 332–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, M. L., & Warden, M. A. (1999). The development and validation of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 13–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, M., & Warden, M. (2000). Evolutionary theory, the nature of science & high school biology teachers: Critical relationships. The American Biology Teacher, 62, 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schomer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwab, J. J. (1962). The concept of the structure of a discipline. The Educational Record, 43, 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwabb, J. J. (1968). The concept of the structure of a discipline. In L. J. Herbert & W. Murphy (Eds.), Structure in the social studies (pp. 43–56). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. W. (2003). Intentions and beliefs in students’ understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 510–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, A., Pendarvis, M. P., & Baldwin, B. (1997). The relationship between college zoology students’ beliefs about evolutionary theory and religion. Journal of Research and Development Education, 30, 118–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators. Science Education, 83, 493–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. (2008). A multi-year program developing an explicit reflective pedagogy for teaching pre-service teachers the nature of science by ostention. Science & Education, 17, 219–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding: What goals for science education? Science & Education, 13, 553–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U., Enderle, P. J., & Golden, B. W. (2009). How does Darwin’s understanding of the nature of science align with current science education? Use of the terms knowledge, belief, acceptance, and understanding in the Origin of Species. Science Education (submitted).

  • Sober, E. (1988). Reconstructing the past: Parsimony, evolution, and inference. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (2005). The shifting roles of acceptance and dispositions in understanding biological evolution. In S. Alsop (Ed.), Beyond Cartesian dualism: Encountering affect in the teaching and learning of science (pp. 69–78). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southerland, S. A., Sinatra, G. M., & Matthews, M. R. (2001). Belief, knowledge, and science education. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 325–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sprinkle, R. H. (2006). Unremembered intimacies. [Review of beasts of the earth: Animals, humans and Disease by Torrey EF, Yolken RH]. Bioscience 56, 166–167.

  • Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2009). Accessed date: August 27, 2009. Available from: http://plato.stanford.edu/.

  • Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. A. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 127, 161–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trani, R. (2004). I won’t teach evolution: It’s against my religio. And now for the rest of the story. The American Biology Teacher, 66, 419–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tweney, R. D. (2009). Toward a cognitive understanding of science and religion. In Taylor & M. Ferrari (Eds.), Epistemology and science education: Understanding the evolution vs. intelligent design controversy (in press).

  • Wood, P., & Kardash, C. (2002). Critical elements in the design and analysis of studies of epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 233–262). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mercer University School of Medicine, Macon, GA, 31201, USA

    Mike U. Smith

Authors
  1. Mike U. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mike U. Smith.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, M.U. Current Status of Research in Teaching and Learning Evolution: I. Philosophical/Epistemological Issues. Sci & Educ 19, 523–538 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9215-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9215-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation