Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
-
Upload
national-academies-of-science-engineering-and-medicine -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 1/40
ThinkingEvolu-onarily:
TheEvidenceBase
RossNehm
AssociateProfessor,Educa5on&EEOB
TheOhioStateUniversity
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 2/40
Outlineoftoday’stalk
• 1.Bird’seyeviewoftheevidencebase
• 2.Thinkingevolu5onarily:whatweknowaboutnovicetoexpertreasoning
paKerns
• 3.Recentdiscoveriesaboutnovices’evolu5onarythinkingpaKerns
• 4.Implica5onsofpriorresearchfor‘evolu5onacrossthecurriculum’
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 3/40
Today’stalk
• 1.Bird’seyeviewoftheevidencebase
• 2.Thinkingevolu5onarily:noviceto
expertreasoningpaKerns
• 3.Recentdiscoveriesaboutnovices’evolu5onarythinkingpaKerns
• 4.Implica5onsforevolu5onacrossthecurriculum
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 4/40
Lowlevelsofevolu5onaryknowledgeandhigh
levelsofmisconcep-onsareubiquitous
Generalpublic(e.g.,Brooks,2001;Newport,2004)
Highschoolstudents(e.g.,Demastesetal.,199)
Undergraduatestudents(e.g.,Bishop&Anderson,1990)
Undergraduatebiologymajors(e.g.Nehm&Reilly2007);
Scienceteachers(e.g.,Nehm&Schonfeld,2007;Nehmetal.,2009).
Medicalstudents(e.g.,Brumby,1984)
I n c r
e a s i n g e d u c a t i on
Source:Nehm&Schonfeld(2007)
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 5/40
Moreeduca5on,samemisconcep5ons
Increasing education
Nehm&Schonfeld(2007)
Biology teacher misconceptions:
Nature of Science Secondary students College undergraduates Teachers
Theories become facts when they are well-supported
Evolution can't be "proven"
Evolution can't be refuted by any observation
For evolution to be true it must be observed
Evolution is weak because it is a theory
Evolution
Chance cannot be a factor in the origin of complex traitsNo fossil species found between humans and "apes"
Mutations are harmful and cannot give rise to new traits
Humans and dinosaurs coexisted
Fossil record lacks intermediates
Natural selection
Use and disuse explains the appearance/disappearance of traits
Traits appear only when they are needed
Populations develop new traits rather than individuals
When sight is lost other senses evolve to be more sensitive
Mutations are caused by mutagenic substances in environment Change is caused by the environment
Deadman & Kelly (1978);
Demastes, Settlage, & Good
(1995); Hallden (1988); Settlage
(1994).
Johnson & Peeples (1987);
Sinclair, Pendarvis, & Baldwin
(1997)
Author & Sheppard (2003);
Eve and Dunn (1990),
Sharmann et al. (2003),
Sharmann and Harris (1992)
Eve and Dunn (1990);
Zuzovsky (1994); Author &
Sheppard (2003)
Jimenez (1992); Greene
(1990); Zuzovsky (1994)
Bishop & Anderson (1990);
Brumby (1979, 1984); Dagher &
BouJaoude (1997); Jensen and
Finley (1995, 1997); Sinclair &
Pendarvis (1997/8); Sinclair,
Pendarvis, & Baldwin (1997)
Also documented in samples of:
Johnson & Peeples (1987);
Sinclair, Pendarvis, & Baldwin
(1997)
Ryan & Aikenhead (1992)
Deadman & Kelly (1978),
Lawson & Worsnop (1992)
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 6/40
Whatworkstoaddresstheseproblems?
Typesofevidence
• RCT(Randomizedcontroltrials)(causa5on,possiblegeneraliza5on)
• Interven5onswithcomparisongroups(causalimplica)ons,possiblegeneraliza5on)
• Interven5onwithnocomparisongroup(pre-postchange;associa5ons)
• Surveyresearch(associa5ons)
• Casestudies,interviews,qualita5veresearch(variableiden5fica5on,possibleassocia5ons)
C a u s a l c l a i m s
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 7/40
Research studies in evolution education
Intervention studies with control groups
(subject randomization)
Intervention studies with comparison
groups
200
Intervention studies
Evolution education studies sampled
6
24
Data from Nehm, 2006
0
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 8/40
Interven5onstudies
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 9/40
Intervention efficacy tests depend on
measurement quality and task authenticity
Less…
Assessmentofthemosteasilymeasured
knowledgeelements
…fragmentsofisolatedknowledge
…recogni5onofideas,explana5ons
…mul5plechoice
More…
Assessmentofthemostvaluableskillsand
performances
…knowledgeselec5on,organiza5on,and
assembly
…communica5onofideas,explana5ons
…constructedresponse
NRC(2001:):‘‘[a]ssessmentsneedtoexaminehowwellstudentsengagein
communica5veprac5cesappropriatetoadomainofknowledgeandskill,what
theyunderstandaboutthoseprac5ces,andhowwelltheyusethetools
appropriatetothatdomain’’
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 10/40
Interven5onassessments:scienceteachers
Ha,Nehm,andBaldwin,inreview
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 11/40
Part1Summary:
Problemsarewell-established;solu5onsarenot
• Researchhasestablishedkeyvariablesthatshouldbeinves5gatedandmanypossiblebeneficialinstruc5onalinterven5ons
• …butwelackrobust,generalizable,causalclaims
rela5ngtopar5cularpedagogicalstrategiesandinterven5ons.
• …welackmeasurementinstrumentsthatmeetbasicqualitycontrolstandards(i.e.,AERA,1996)(Nehm&Schonfeld,2008)andcaptureauthen5cdisciplinaryprac5ces.
• ..welackconsistentapplica5onofmeasurementinstrumentsacrossdifferentpopula5ons (applesandorangesmeasurementissues).
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 12/40
Today’stalk
• 1.Bird’seyeviewoftheevidencebase
• 2.Thinkingevolu5onarily:
progressionsfromnovicetoexpert
• 3.Recentdiscoveriesaboutnovices’evolu5onarythinkingpaKerns
• 4.Implica5onsforevolu5onacrossthecurriculum
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 13/40
Thinkingevolu5onarily:
progressionsfromnovicetoexpert
• Howdodifferentgroups(e.g.,novicetoexpert)think
aboutthesameproblemsusingperformance-based
measures(explainingevolu5onarychange).
• Arecentlycompletedlarge-scalestudyof>400
individuals,fromnon-majorcollegestudentstofull
professorsofevolu5onarybiology(Nehm&Ha,in
prepara5on)revealsusefulinsightsintolearningevolu5on.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 14/40
Competency: explaining evolutionary change
Beingabletoclearlyandlogicallyexplainscien5ficphenomenafreeof
naïveideasisacorecompetency
thatishighlyvaluedbyscien5stsand
educatorsbutisdifficulttomeasure.
Studentshaveaharder5me
explainingevolu5onarychange(in
wri5ngororally)thanrecognizingaccuratescien5ficelementsofan
explana5ononamul5ple-choicetest
(NehmandSchonfeld,2008).
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 15/40
Views of competence
Identifying the appropriate
elements of an evolutionaryexplanation (MC tests)
Building a robust and functioningevolutionary explanation (CR)
Knowing the parts and tools needed to
assemble furniture does not mean that you can actually built it effectively.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 16/40
Naïve model Mixed model Scientific model
“One day there was a mutation
[Variation] that produced apoison. The poisonous snail
was better able to producemore offspring [Differential
survival] in the environmentpassing on his trait [Heredity].”
“One day snails had to [Need]
a mutation for poison[Variation]. The poisonous
snail had gradually adapted totheir environment [Adapt] so
the population of the snailincrease [Change of pop.].”
“One day snails had to have a
poison in order to fightpredator [Need]. Then,
environmental pressure thencaused them to have poison
[Pressure]. Therefore, they allhas changed into poisonoussnails [Essentialism].”
Competenceandmul5ple-choicetests:
asecondconcern
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 17/40
0
2
4
6
8
10
eyconcept Misconcep5on
0
20
40
60
80
4 3 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
2~3
Scientificmodels
Mixedmodels
Naïvemodels
2-3 core concepts
(%)
(%)
**
Key concepts Misconceptions
**
Non-majors Majors Advanced majors Experts
** p<0.01
A
C
B
**
** D
0
2
4
6
8
10
1Non-adaptive concepts
(%)
N=428(107eachgroup);fromNehm&Ha,inprepara5on
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 18/40
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
Differential survivalVariance
Teleology
Adapt Heredity
Limited resource
Change of pop.
CompetitionIntentionality
(%)
Pressure
Energy Use/disuse
Differential survival
Variance
Teleology
Adapt
Heredity
Limited resource
Change of pop.
CompetitionIntentionality
Use/disuse
Energy
Differential survival
Variance
Teleology
Adapt
Heredity
Limited resource
Change of pop.
Use/disusePressure
Competition
Energy
Differential survival
Variance
Teleology
Heredity
Limited resource
Change of pop.
Use/disuse
Non-majors Majors Advancedmajors
Expert
Languageofevolu5onaryexplana5on(n=428)
N=428
(107each
group);fromNehm
&Ha,in
prepara5on
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 19/40
40%
30%
20%10%
5%
Non-majorsR
V
D
T
MajorsR
V
D
T
Advancedmajors
R
D
V
T
ExpertsR
V
D
T
P
Scientific concept
V: VariabilityH: Heritability
D: Differential survival
Naïve idea
T: Need/GoalU: Use/disuse
I: IntentionalityA: Adapt
E: EnergyP: Pressure
N=107each
group
Nehm&Ha,in
prepara5on
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 20/40
WhataccountsforthesepaKerns?
• Whatfactorsarecausingdifferencesinnovice
andexpertevolu5onaryreasoningpaKerns?
P bl l i h i th i d i
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 21/40
Explanatory
model “A”
Expert biological
thinking
Problem solving research in other science domains
Explanatorymodel “N”
Explanatorymodel “B”
Explanatory
model “C”
Item a
Item b
Item c
Novice biological
thinking
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 22/40
Cognitiveresource
Description Consistency*of Expert use
Consistency*
of Noviceuse
Key concept 6 Differential survival 70% 36%
Key concept 1 Causes of variation 60% 4%
Key concept 2 Heritability 60% 8%
Naïve concept 1 Needs drive change n/a 0%
Naïve concept 2 Pressure forces change n/a 0%
Naïve concept 3 Use an disuse explain change n/a 0%
Naïve concept 4 Acclimation = adaptation n/a 0%
Naïve concept 5 Inheritance of acquired traits n/a 0%
Naïve concept 6 Intentionality explains change n/a 0%
Natural selection elements were linked consistently (more coherent) inexperts, but haphazardly applied in novices.
Naïve ideas absent in experts, no coherence whatsoever in novices
Nehm & Ridgway, in press
Coherence in evolutionary explanation
N i bi l i l
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 23/40
Explanatorymodel “N”
Explanatory
model “A”
Explanatorymodel “B”
Explanatory
model “C”
Item a
Item b
Item c
Expert biological
thinking
Novice biological
thinkingCoherencehypothesis
• Novices solveproblems using
concrete surfacefeatures.
• Experts solve
problems usingdomain principles
(e.g., naturalselection).
• Significant
coherence
characterizes experts,multiple explanatory
models characterize
novices.
Nehm&Ridgway,inpress,
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 24/40
Part2Summary:
Expertsandnovices“see”evolu5ondifferently
• Surfacefeaturepercep5onsaccountfordifferencesinproblemsolvingperformancebetweennovicesandexperts.
• Whilestudentsknowtheelementsofthetheoryofnaturalselec5on,theydonotusetheseelementstogetherinaconsistentmanneracrossdifferentproblems.
• Evenaercomple5nganevolu5oncourse,only0%ofstudentshave“expert-like”percep5onofevolu5onaryproblems.
• Asstudentsprogressthroughbiology,wedoliKletohelpthemreasonacrosscases.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 25/40
Today’stalk
• 1.Theknowledgebase:Evidence-basedevolu5oneduca5on
• 2.Thinkingevolu5onarily:noviceto
expertreasoningpaKerns
• 3.Recentdiscoveriesaboutnovices’evolu5onarythinkingpaKerns
• 4.Implica5onsforevolu5onacrossthecurriculum
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 26/40
ItemResponse
Structure
SurfaceFeatures
CognitiveResources
(conceptual
procedural
analytical,
factual)
Key concepts
Naïve ideas
Cognitive biases
Cueing, Framing
Contextualproblem space
Recruitment
Theory: Contextualized reasoning
S t o r a g e
P r o c e s s
C o n t e x t
A n s w
e r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
I
T
E
U
A
P
Nehm&Ridgway,inpress,Nehm,inprepara5on
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 27/40
Whichsurfacefeaturesareproblema5c?
• Scale(intraspecific,interspecific)
– (Nehm&Ha,2011)
• Polarity(traitgain,traitloss) – (Nehm&Ha,2011)
• Taxon(animal,plant)
– (Opfer,Nehm,Ha,etal.2011)
• Familiarity(Doddervs.Rose)
– (Opfer,Nehm,Ha,etal.2011)
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 28/40
Experimentaldesign
• Par5cipantrandomiza5on
• Largesamplesofnovices(>200par5cipants)
• Controlofallaspectsoflanguageanditemfeatures
• Manipula5onofoneevolu5onaryproblemfeature
• Nehm&Ha(2011)JRST
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 29/40
G ai n
L o s s
G ai n
L o s s
G ai n
L o s s
Plant Animal Bacteria
Scale,polarity,andfamiliarityeffects
onevolu5onaryreasoning
S l i ifi i ifi
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 30/40
0
2
4
6
8
EGALT-B EGALT-W
A c
c u r a t e e l e m e
n t s
Between species Between populationsof same species
Gain
Loss
Nehm&Ha
(2011)
Scale:intraspecificvs.interspecific
Polarity:traitgainvs.traitloss
(Same:organismsandtraits)
S l i t ifi i t ifi
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 31/40
Scale:intraspecificvs.interspecific
Polarity:traitgainvs.traitloss
(Same:organismsandtraits)
0
2
4
6
8
EGALT-B EGALT-W
M i s
c o n c e p t i o n s
Between Within
Gain
Loss
Nehm&Ha
(2011)
F ili it (P i i R )
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 32/40
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
Plant Animal
K e y c o n c e p t s
Taxa
Familiar
Unfamiliar
Familiarity effects:
plants vs. animals
Familiarity(Prosimianvs.Rose)
Taxon(Plantvs.animal)
(Same:interspecifictraitgain)
Opfer,Nehm,Ha,etal.(2011)
A Within species B Between species
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 33/40
A. Within species B. Between species
C. Trait Gain D. Trait loss
V V
V V
H
H H
H
D D
D D
Scientific concept
V: Variability
H: HeritabilityD: Differential survival
Naïve idea
N: Need/GoalU: Use/disuse
I: IntentionalityA: Adapt
E: EnergyP: Pressure
N N
N N
P P
P P
E
E E
E
A A
A A I I
I I
U U
U U
p<0.01 (+)
p<0.05 (+)
p<0.01 (-)
p<0.05 (-)
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 34/40
Part3Summary:
ProblemsurfacefeaturesdeservemajoraKen5on
• Specificsurfacefeaturesofevolu5onaryproblemsplayahugerolehownovicesthinkaboutevolu5on.
• Biologyeduca5oncanbemorepreciseininstruc5onaltargets.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 35/40
Today’stalk
• 1.Theknowledgebase:Evidence-basedevolu5oneduca5on
• 2.Thinkingevolu5onarily:noviceto
expertreasoningpaKerns
• 3.Recentdiscoveriesaboutnovices’evolu5onarythinkingpaKerns
• 4.Implica5onsforevolu5onacrossthecurriculum
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 36/40
Pointstoconsider1:
• Studentsappeartoprogressfromnaïvemodelsmixedmodelsscien5ficmodels,andprogressisveryslow(2%ofadvancedmajors—studentswhohave
completedanevolu5onclassandaddi5onalcoursework--havemixedmodels).
• Learningevolu5onischaracterizedbyaddingscien5ficideastonaïveideas,andyetmostassessmentsdon’tallowthisop5on.
Points to consider 2
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 37/40
Pointstoconsider2:
• Thesurfacefeaturesofevolu5onaryproblemsplayahugerolehow
novicesthinkaboutevolu5on(Nehm&Ridgway,inpress).
• Misconcep5onsaresurface-featurespecific,soinstruc5onalexamplesmustbechosencarefully.
• Taxon(animal/plant),traitchangepolarity(gain/loss),scale(withinvs.
betweenspecies),andfamiliaritypresentuniquereasoningchallengesforstudents(Nehm&Ha,2011;Opfer,Nehm,Ha,etal.,2011).
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 38/40
Takehomepoints3:
• Assessmentsofcompetencymustincludeauthen5cproduc5ontasks,suchasexplaininghowevolu5onarychangeoccurs,notjustfragmentedknowledgeselec5ontasks(Nehm&
Schonfeld2010).
• Evolu5onassessmentsmustbedevelopedthatmeetqualitycontrolstandardsestablishedbytheeduca5onalmeasurementcommunity(AERAetal.,1999);otherwise,robustclaims(causalorotherwise)cannotbemade.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 39/40
Takehomepoints4:
• Aminorityofresearchstudiesinevolu5oneduca5oninvolveinterven5onswithcomparisongroups,limi5ngrobust
guidelinesforprac5ce.
• Whileevidencecomesinmanyforms,causalclaimsmustbeestablished;RCTstudies,or
interven5onstudieswithcomparisongroups,aredesperatelyneeded.
8/3/2019 Thinking Evolutionarily: The Evidence Base
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/thinking-evolutionarily-the-evidence-base 40/40
Thankyou
• NSFCAREERprogram;NSFCCLIprogram;NSFTUESprogram;NSFREESEprogramforresearchsupport
• Numerouscollaboratorsandstudents,par5cularlyMinsuHa,IrvinSchonfeld,HendrikHaer5g,LeahReilly,MeghanRector,fortheirimportantcontribu5ons.
• Papers:www.nehmlab.org