Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Twenty-First-Century Genetics and Genomics: Contributions of HPS-Informed Research and Pedagogy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching

Abstract

A primary focus of the present chapter is the history and philosophy of science (HPS) and the ways that issues connected to HPS can inform genetics instruction. The chapter begins with an overview of the history of genetics which focuses on the scientific search for and the differing understandings of the gene concept. Thereafter the history of genetics is related to important philosophical issues of genetics such as reductionism, genetic determinism, and the relationship between biological function and structure. In the second part of the chapter, genetic education research is reviewed, focusing on how it is informed by issues from HPS. We identify contributions of HPS-informed genetics education scholarship to the following: (1) teaching and learning genetics, (2) teaching about the nature of science, (3) humanizing science, and (4) enhancing reasoning, argumentation, and thinking skills. The primary conclusion of this review is that HPS is a much underutilized but potentially fruitful lens for approaching genetics instruction.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 749.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See, for example, Beurton and colleagues (2000), Davis (2003), Falk (2010), Keller (2005), and Sapp (2003).

  2. 2.

    Galton introduced the idea of latent and patent elements that both contributed to the structureless elements of heredity. By making information transfer unidirectional, Galton was attempting to rule out Lamarckism (Schwartz 2008).

  3. 3.

    The cis-trans complementation test is a test used to determine whether two mutations are alleles or not, i.e., whether they are forms of the same or different genes. By this test, two mutations are not alleles, i.e., are in two different genes; the wild type (nonmutant) phenotype (the mutations “complement” each other) results when the two mutations appear in a single chromosome (“cis”; denoted a1a2/++), whereas if the two mutations appear on separate homologues (in “trans”), the mutant phenotype appears.

  4. 4.

    See, for example, El-Hani (2007), Falk (2010), Fogle (2000), Rosenberg (1985), and Smith and Adkinson (2010).

  5. 5.

    (allowing for some possible “reverse flow” from RNA to DNA).

  6. 6.

    For expanded treatments of the historical development of genetics within HPS frameworks, the reader is directed to Burian 2005; Carlson 1966, 2004; Davis 2003; Keller 2005; Portin 1993; and Sapp 2003, as well Burian 2013; Flannery 1997; Gericke and Hagberg 2007; Kampourakis 2013; Mahadeva and Randerson 1985; Smith and Adkinson 2010; and Vigue 1976 in science education.

  7. 7.

    See, for example, Ayala and Arp (2010), Beuerton and colleagues (2000), Burian (2005), and van Regenmortel and Hull (2002).

  8. 8.

    See, for example, Duncan and Reiser (2007), Lewis and Kattmann (2004), Lewis and colleagues (2000a), Marbach-Ad (2001), Martinez-Gracia and colleagues (2006), Smith and Williams (2007), Venville and Treagust (1998), and Venville and colleagues (2005).

  9. 9.

    See, for example, Abrams and colleagues (2001), Donovan and Venville (2012), Lewis and Kattmann (2004), Marbach-Ad (2001), Shaw and colleagues (2008), Venville and Donovan (2005), Williams and Smith (2010), and Wood-Robinson (1994).

  10. 10.

    See, for example, Allchin (2003), Clough (2009), Clough and Olson (2004), and Metz and colleagues (2007).

  11. 11.

    www.viten.no

  12. 12.

    www.genome.gov

  13. 13.

    www.ashg.org/education/resources.shtml

  14. 14.

    See, for example, Cavallo (1996), Finkel (1996), Hafner and Culp (1996), Mitchell and Lawson (1988), Smith (1983), Smith and Good (1984), Stewart (1983, 1988), Stewart and van Kirk 1990, and Wynne and colleagues (2001).

  15. 15.

    For more background see the following references: Finkel and Stewart (1994), Hafner and Stewart (1995), Passmore and Stewart (2002), Stewart and colleagues (1992), and Thomson and Stewart (2003).

  16. 16.

    www.emescience.com/bio-software-catlab.html

  17. 17.

    www.concord.org/biologica

  18. 18.

    www.biologylabsonline.com

  19. 19.

    www.bioquest.org/indexlib.html

  20. 20.

    http://telscenter.org/curricula/explore

  21. 21.

    http://avida-ed.msu.edu/

  22. 22.

    www.stauffercom.com/evolve4/

  23. 23.

    www.worldmaker.cite.hku.hk/worldmaker/pages/icce98-wrldmkr2.doc

  24. 24.

    http://intro.bio.umb.edu/VGL/

  25. 25.

    See, for example, Carlson (1966, 2004), Davis (2003), Keller (2005), Moss (2003), Portin (1993), Sapp (2003), and Schwartz (2008).

References

  • Abrams, E., Southerland, S., & Cummins, C. (2001). The how’s and why’s of biological change: how learners neglect physical mechanisms in their search for meaning. International Journal of Science education, 23(12), 1271–1281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abrougui, M., & Clément, P. (1997). Human genetics in French and Tunisian secondary textbooks: presentation of a textbook analysis method. In H. Bayerhuber, & F. Brinkman (Eds.), What – Why – How? Research in didaktik of biology (pp. 103 – 114). Kiel, Germany: IPN – Materialen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allchin, D. (2000). Mending Mendelism. The American Biology Teacher, 62(9), 633–639.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific Myth-Conceptions. Science Education, 87, 329–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (2001). Atlas of science literacy. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2008). AAAS Project 2061 high school biology textbooks evaluation. Retrieved November 23, 2008, from: http://www.project2061.org/publications/textbook/hsbio/summary/default.htm

  • Anderson, W. (2008). Teaching ‘race’ at medical school: Social scientists on the margin. Social Studies of Science, 38, 785–800.

    Google Scholar 

  • Araz, G., & Sungur, S. (2007). Effectiveness of problem-based learning on academic performance in genetics. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35(6), 448–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, O.T., MacLeod, C.M., & McCarty, M. (1944). Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneumococcal types: Induction of transformation by a desoxyribonucleic acid fraction isolated from Pneumococcus type III. The Journal of Experimental Medicine (79), 137–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayala, F.J. & Arp, R. (2010). Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahar, M., Johnstone, A.H., & Hansell, M.H. (1999). Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. Journal of Biological Education, 33(2), 84–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W.P. & Lawson, A.E (2001). Complex instructional analogies and theoretical concept acquisition in college genetics. Science Education, 85, 665–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, B., & Dupré, J. (2008). Genomes and what to make of them. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J. M. S. & Sterling, D. (2003). “A short history of the polymerase chain reaction”. PCR Protocols, 226, 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartol, J. (2012). Re-examining the gene in personalized genetics. Science & Education, doi 10.1007/s11191-012-9484-2

    Google Scholar 

  • Beadle, G.W. & Ephrussi, B. (1937). Development of eye colors in Drosophila: Diffusible substances and their interrelations. Genetics, 22, 76–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beadle, G.W. & Tatum, E.L. (1941). The genetic control of biochemical reactions in Neurospora. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 27, 499–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benzer S., (1955). Fine structure of a genetic region in bacteriophage. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 41, 344–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beurton, P., Falk, R., & Rheinberger, H. J. (2000). The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizzo, N. & El-Hani C.N. (2009). Darwin and Mendel: evolution and genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 43(3), 108–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, D.D. (1994). Revolution or reversal: Genetics – Ethics curriculum. Science & Education, 3, 373–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blank, C.E. (1988). Human heredity: Genetic mechanisms in humans. Journal of Biological Education, 22(2), 139–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerwinkel, D.J., Knippels, M.C.P.J., & Waarlo, A.J. (2011). Raising awareness of pre-symptomatic genetic testing. Journal of Biological Education, 45(4), 213–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerwinkel, D.J. & Waarlo, A.J. (2009). Rethinking science curricula in the genomics era. Proceedings of the invitational workshop, 4–5 December 2008, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boerwinkel, D.J. & Waarlo, A.J. (2011). Genomics education for decision-making. Proceedings of the second invitational workshop, 2–3 December 2010, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonetta, L. (2008). Detailed analysis – tackling the epigenome. Nature, 454, 795–798.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boujemaa, A., Clément, P., Sabah, S., Salaheddine, K., Jamal, C., & Abdellatif, C. (2010). University students’ conceptions about the concept of gene: Interest of historical approach. US-China Education review, 7(2), 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. & Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18(4), 237–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, B.C., Gobert, J.D., Kindfield, A.C.H., Horwitz, P., Tinker, R.F., Gerlits, B., Wilensky, U., Dede, C. & Willett, J. (2004). Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogicaTM: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science and Technology, 13(1), 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burian, R. (2005). On conceptual change in biology: The case of the gene. In R. Burian (Ed.), The epistemology of development, evolution, and genetics (pp. 126–144). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burian, R. (2013). On gene concepts and teaching genetics: episodes from classical genetics. Science & Education, Science & Education, 22 (2), 325–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, E.A. (1966). The gene: A critical history. Philadelphia & London: W.B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, E.A. (1991). Defining the gene: an evolving concept. Journal of Human Genetics, 49(2), 475–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, E.A. (2001). The Unifit: A history of a bad idea. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, E.A. (2004). Mendel’s legacy: The origin of classical genetics. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, E.A. (2011). Mutation: The history of an idea from Darwin to Genomics. New York: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartier, J.L. & Stewart, J. (2000). Teaching the nature of inquiry: Further developments in a high school genetics curriculum. Science & Education, 9, 247–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartier, J.L., Stewart, J. & Zoellner, B. (2006). Modeling & inquiry in a high school genetics class. American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 334–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, R., Waldahl, R., & Breivik, J. (2008). Frame that gene – A tool for analyzing and classifying the communication of genetics to the public. EMBO reports, 9(10), 943–947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castéra, J., Bruguiére, C., & Clément, P. (2008a). Genetic diseases and genetic determinism models in French secondary school biology textbooks. Journal of Biological Education, 42(2), 53–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castéra, J., & Clément, P. (2012). Teachers’ conceptions about the genetic determinism of human behaviour: A Survey in 23 countries. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9494-0

    Google Scholar 

  • Castéra, J., Clément, P., & Abrougui, M. (2008b). Genetic determinism in school textbooks: A comparative study among sixteen countries. Science Education International, 19(2), 163–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cavallo, A.M.L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students’ understanding and problem solving of topics in genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 625–656.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chamany, K., Allen, D., & Tanner, K. (2008). Making biology learning relevant to students: Integrating people, history, and context into college biology teaching. CBE – Life Science Education, 7(3), 267–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chargaff, E. (1951). Some recent studies on the composition and structure of nucleic acids. Journal of Cellular Physiology. Supplement. 38(Suppl. 1), 41–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M.P. (2009). Humanizing science to improve post-secondary science education. Paper presented at the International History, Philosophy and Science Teaching Conference, South Bend, IN, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clough, M.P. & Olson, J.K. (2004). ‘The Nature of Science’: Always part of the science story. The Science Teacher, 71(9), 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condit, C.M., Ferguson, A., Kassel, R., Tadhani, C., Gooding, H.C., & Parrot, R. (2001). An explanatory study of the impact of news headlines on genetic determinism. Science Communication, 22, 379–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condit, C.M., Ofulue, N., & Sheedy, K.M. (1998). Determinism and mass-media portrayals of genetics. American Journal of human Genetics, 62, 979–984

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, R.S. (2008). Medical genetics is not eugenics. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(36), B14-B16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crick, F. (1970). Central dogma of molecular biology. Nature, 227(5258), 561–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouse, D.T. (2007). X-Ray diffraction and the discovery of the structure of DNA. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(5), 803–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. (1868). The variation of animals and plants under domestication. London: John Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L.C. (1993). Origin of the Punnett square. American Biology Teacher, 55(4), 209–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R.H. (2003). The microbial models of molecular biology; from genes to genomes. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V.M., & Venville, G. (2009). High-school students’ informal reasoning and argumentation about biotechnology: An indicator of scientific literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 31(11), 1421–1445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, V.M. & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich, M.R. (2000). From gene to genetic hierarchy: Richard Goldschmidt and the problem of the Gene. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 91–114). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dikmenli, M., Cardak, O., & Kiray, S.A. (2011). Science student teacher’s ideas about the ’gene’ concept. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2609–2613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dogru-Atay, P. & Tekkaya, C. (2008). Promoting students’ learning in genetics with the learning cycle. The Journal of Experimental Education, 76(3), 259–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, J. & Venville, G. (2012). Blood and bones: The influence of the mass media on Australian primary school children’s understandings of genes and DNA. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9491-3

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, M.J., (2009). Closing the gap: Inverting the genetics curriculum to ensure an informed public. American Journal of Human Genetics, 85, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, M.J., Pleasants, C., Solow, L, Wong, A., & Zhang, H. (2011). A comprehensive analysis of high school genetics standards: Are states keeping pace with modern genetics? CBE-Life Sciences Education, 10, 318–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R.G. (2007). The role of domain specific knowledge in generative reasoning about complicated multileveled phenomena. Cognition and Instruction, 25(4), 271–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R.G., & Reiser, B.J. (2007). Reasoning across ontologically distinct levels: Students’ understanding of molecular genetics. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 938–959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R.G., Rogat, A.D., & Yarden, A. (2009). A Learning Progression for deepening students' understandings of modern genetics across the 5th-10th Grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 655–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R.G, & Tseng, A.K., (2011). Designing project-based instruction to foster generative and mechanistic understandings in genetics. Science Education, 95(1), 21–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Echevarria, M. (2003). Anomalies as a catalyst for middle school students' knowledge construction and scientific reasoning during science inquiry. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 357–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekborg, M. (2008). Opinion building on a socio-scientific issue: the case of genetically modifies plants. Journal of Biological Education, 42(2), 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Hani, C.N. (2007). Between the cross and the sword: The crisis of the gene concept. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 30(2), 297–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Hani, C. N., Roque, N., & Rocha, P. B. (2007). Brazilian high school biology textbooks: Results from a national program. In Proceedings of the IOSTE International Meeting on Critical Analysis of School Science Textbook (pp. 505–516). Hammamet, Tunisia: University of Tunis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elrod, S.L. & Somerville, M.M. (2007). Literature-based scientific learning: A collaboration model. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 684–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R. (1986). What is a gene? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 17(2), 133–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R. (2010). What is a gene?-Revisited. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological Sciences, 41, 396–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falk, R. (2012). The allusion of the gene: misunderstandings of the concepts heredity and gene. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9510-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, E.A. (1996). Making sense of genetics: Students’ knowledge use during problem solving in a high school genetics class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(4), 345–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, E.A., & Stewart, J. (1994). Strategies for model-revision in a high school genetics classroom. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 1(3), 168–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finley, F. N., Stewart, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982) Teachers’ perception of important and difficult science content: the report of a survey. Science Education, 66(4), 531–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flannery, M.C. (1997). The many sides of DNA. American Biology Teacher, 59(1), 54–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flodin, V. (2009). The necessity of making visible concepts with multiple meanings in science education: The use of the gene concept in a biology textbook. Science & Education, 18(1), 73–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogle, T. (1990) Are genes units of Inheritance? Biology and Philosophy, 5, 349–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogle, T. (2000). The dissolution of protein coding genes in molecular biology. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 3–25). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forissier, T., & Clément, P. (2003). Teaching ‘biological identity’ as genome/environment interactions. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 85–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, M. (1996). Breaking the genetic code in a letter by Max Delbruck. Journal of Collage Science Teaching, 15(5), 324–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, G., & Bogner, F.X. (2011a). Conceptual change in students’ molecular biology education: Tilting at Windmills? Journal of Educational Research, 104(1), 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, G., & Bogner, F.X. (2011b). Cognitive influences of students’ alternative conceptions within a hands-on gene technology module. Journal of Educational Research, 104(3), 158–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freidenreich, H.B., Duncan, R.G., & Shea, N. (2011). Exploring middle school students’ understanding of three conceptual models in genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 33(17), 2323–2349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furberg, A., & Arnseth, C.H. (2009). Reconsidering conceptual change from a socio-cultural perspective: analyzing students’ meaning making in genetics in collaborative learning activities. Cultural Studies of Science education, 4, 157–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaudillière, J.P., & Rheinberger H.J. (2004). From molecular genetics to genomics: The mapping cultures of twentieth-century genetics. London & New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayon, J. (2000). From measurement to organization: a philosophical scheme for the history of the concept of heredity. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 69–90). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelbart, H., Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2009). The impact of a web-based research simulation in bioinformatics on students’ understanding of genetics. Research in science education, 39, 725–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelbart, H., & Yarden, A. (2006). Learning genetics through an authentic research simulation in bioinformatics. Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 107–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelbart, H., & Yarden, A. (2011). Supporting learning of high-school genetics using authentic research practices: the teacher’s role. Journal of Biological Education, 45(3), 129–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genome News Network (2012). Retrieved 23th of March 2012. URL: http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/resources/sequenced_genomes/genome_guide_p1.shtml

  • Gericke, N.M. (2008). Science versus School-science; Multiple models in genetics – The depiction of gene function in upper secondary textbooks and its influence on students’ understanding. Karlstad: Karlstad University studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2007). Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students’ understanding of genetics. Science & Education, 16(7 – 8), 849 – 881.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010a). Conceptual incoherence as a result of the use of multiple historical models in school textbooks. Research in Science Education, 40 (4): 605–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010b). Conceptual variation in the depiction of gene function in upper secondary school textbooks. Science & Education, 19(10): 963–994.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N. M., Hagberg, M., & Jorde, D. (2013) Upper secondary students’ understanding of the use of multiple models in biology textbooks—The importance of conceptual variation and incommensurability. Research in Science Education, 43(2): 755–780.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N.M., Hagberg, M., Santos, V.C., Joaquim, L.M., & El-Hani, C.N. (2012). Conceptual variation or incoherence? Textbook discourse on genes in six countries. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9499-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gericke, N.M. & Wahlberg, S. (2013). Clusters of concepts in molecular genetics: a study of Swedish upper secondary science students’ understanding. Journal of Biological Education, 47(2): 73–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerstein, M.B., Bruce B., Rozowsky J.S., Zheng, D., Du, J., & Korbel, J.O. et al. (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome Research, 17, 669–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., Pietrocola, M., Zylbersztajn, A., & Franco, C. (2000). Science and education: Notions of reality, theory and model. In J.K. Gilbert, & C. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 19–40). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleason, M.L., Melancon, M.E. & Kleine, K.L.M. (2010). Using critical literacy to explore genetics and its ethical, legal, and social issues with in-service secondary teachers. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9, 422–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodney, D.E. & Long, C.S. (2003). The collective classic: A case for the reading of science. Science & Education, 12, 167–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, B.H. (2009). The real “toll” of A. G. Bell: Lessons about eugenics. Sign Language Studies, 9(3), 258–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths P. E. (2002) Lost: One Gene Concept. Reward to Finder. Biology and Philosophy, 17, 271–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E. & Stotz, K. 2006. Genes in the postgenomic era. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27, 499–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsson, K.-H. (2004). Några milstolpar i genetikens historia. Retrieved November 19, 2008, from Uppsala University, Institute for genetics and pathology: http://www.genpat.uu.se/node58

  • Hafner, R. & Culp, S. (1996). Elaborating the structures of a science discipline to improve problem-solving instruction: an account of classical genetics’ theory structure, function and development. Science & Education, 5, 331–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafner, R. & Stewart, J. (1995). Revising explanatory models to accommodate anomalous genetic phenomena: Problem solving in the “context of discovery”. Science Education, 79(2), 111–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halldén, O. (1990). Questions asked in common sense contexts and in scientific contexts. In P.L. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. de Vos, & A.J. Waarlo (Eds.), Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles (pp. 119–130). Utrecht, Netherlands: CD-β Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henig, R.M. (2000). The monk in the garden: The lost and found genius of Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics. New York, US: Houghton Mifflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershey A. & Chase, M. (1952). Independent functions of viral protein and nucleic acid in growth of bacteriophage. Journal of Genetic Physiology, 36(1), 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, D.T., Kindfield, A.C.H., Horwitz, R & Christie, M.A. (2003). Integrating curriculum, instruction, assessment, and evaluation in a technology-supported genetics learning environment. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 495–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickey, D.T., Wolfe, E.W. & Kindfield, A. C-H (2000). Assessing learning in a technology-supported genetics environment: Evidential and systematic validity issues. Educational Assessment, 6(3), 155–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmeyer, J. (1988) Naturen i huvudet. Simrishamn, Sweden: Rabén & Sjögren.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holden, C. (2006). Darwin’s place on campus is safe – But not supreme. Science, 301, 769–771.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, N.H. (1995). “One-Gene-One-Enzyme: Remembering Biochemical Genetics”. Protein Science, 4(5), 1017–1019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hott, A.M., Huether, C.A., McInerney, J.D., Christianson, C., Fowler, R., Bender, R., Jenkins, J., Wysocki, A., Markle, G., & Karp, R. (2002). Genetics content in introductory biology courses for non-science majors: Theory and practice. Bioscience 52, 1024–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L. (2002). Genes versus molecules: How to, and how not to, be a reductionist. In M.H.V Regenmortel & D.L. Hull (Eds.), Reductionism in the biomedical sciences (pp. 161–173). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, P.D. (1978). The Historical/Philosophical Background of Education in Human Genetics in the United States. Biological Sciences Curriculum Study Journal, 1 (1), 3–8,

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibáñez-Orcajo, T., & Martínez-Aznar, M. (2005). Solving problems in Genetics II: Conceptual restructuring. International Journal of Science Education, 27(12), 1495–1519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibáñez-Orcajo, T., & Martínez-Aznar, M. (2007). Solving problems in Genetics, part III: Change in the view of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(6), 747–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • IHGSC (International Human Genome sequencing Consortium), (2004). Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome. Nature 431, 931–945.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, A.H., & Mahmoud, N.A. (1980). Isolating topics of high perceived difficulty in school biology. Journal of Biological Education, 14(2), 163–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorde, D., Strømme, A., Sørborg, Ø., Erlien, W., & Mork, S. M. (2003). Virtual Environments in Science, Viten.no, (No. 17). Oslo, Norway: ITU. Retrieved November 14, 2008 from: http://www.itu.no/filearchive/fil_ITU_Rapport_17.pdf

  • Kampourakis, K. (2013). Mendel and the path to genetics: Portraying science as a social process. Science & Education, 22(2), 293–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, G. & Rogers, L.J. (2003). Gene worship. New York, US: Other Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E., F. (2000). Decoding the genetic program: or, some circular logic in the logic of circularity. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 159–177). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2005). The century beyond the gene. Journal of Biosciences, 30(1), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E.F. & Harel, D. (2007). Beyond the gene. PLOS one, 2(11), e1231. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001231

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S.Y. & Irving, K.E. (2010). History of science as an instructional context: Student learning in genetics and nature of science. Science & Education, 19, 187–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnear, J. (1991). Using an historical perspective to enrich the teaching of linkage in genetics. Science Education, 75(1), 69–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P. (1982). Genes. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 33(4), 337–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J.K., & Smith, M.K. (2010). Different but equal? How nonmajors and majors approach and learn genetics. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9, 34–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knippels, M.C.P.J., (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education – The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy. Utrecht, Netherlands: CD-β Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knippels, M.C.P.J., Waarlo, A.J., & Boersma, K.Th. (2005). Design criteria for learning and teaching genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 39(3), 108–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1974) Second Thoughts on Paradigms, In F. Suppe (Ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories. Urbana (pp. 459–482). US: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Law, N. & Lee, Y. (2004). Using an iconic modeling tool to support the learning of genetics concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 38(3), 118–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P.A. (1992). The making of a fly: the genetics of animal design. London: Blackwell Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N.G., Antik, A. & Bartos, S. (2012). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientific literate citizenry. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, B. (2000). Genes VII. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. (2012). From flavr savr tomatoes to stem cell therapy: Young people’s understanding of gene technology, 15 years on. Science & Education, doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9523-z

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., & Kattmann, U. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: Re-visiting students’ understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 195–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1267–1287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., Leach, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000a). All in the genes? – Young people’s understanding of the nature of genes. Journal of Biological Education, 34(2), 74–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., Leach, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000b). Chromosomes: the missing link – Young people’s understanding of mitosis, meiosis, and fertilisation. Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 189–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance – do students see any relationship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, R. C.; Rose, S., & Kamin, L. J. (1984). Not in our genes: Biology, ideology, and human nature. New York-NY: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, C.Y., Cheng, J.H., & Chang, W.H. (2010). Making science vivid: using a historical episodes map. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2521–2531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindahl, M.G. (2009). Ethics or morals: Understanding students’ values related to genetic tests on humans. Science & Education, 18, 1285–1311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lock, R. (1997). Post-16 biology – some model approaches? School Science Review, 79(286), 33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magen, A. & Ast, G. (2005). The importance of being divisible with by three in alternative splicing. Nucleic Acid Research, 33, 5574–5582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahadeva, M. & Randerson, S. (1985). The rise and fall of the gene. Science Teacher, 52(8), 15–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G. (2001). Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 183–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., Rotbain, Y., & Stavy, R. (2008). Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students’ achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 273–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2000). Students’ cellular and molecular explanations of genetic phenomena. Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 200–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Gracia, M. V., Gil-Quilez, M. J., & Osada, J. (2006). Analysis of molecular genetics content in Spanish secondary school textbooks. Journal of Biological education, 40(2), 53–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, I., & Ogborn, J. (1997). Metaphorical reasoning about genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 19(1), 47–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, M.R. (1994/2014). Science teaching: The Role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mbajiorgu, N.M., Ezechi, N.G., & Idoko, E.C. (2007). Addressing non-scientific presuppositions in genetics using a conceptual change strategy. Science Education, 91(3), 419–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, P. (2000). Human Eugenics: Whose Perception of Perfection? History Teacher, 33(2), 222–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metz, D., Klassen, S., Mcmillan, B., Clough, M., & Olson, J. (2007). Building a foundation for the use of historical narratives. Science & Education, 16(3–5), 313–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, N.L.M., Bomfim, G.C., & El-Hani, C.N. (2011). How to Understand the Gene in the Twenty-First Century? Science & Education, 22(2), 345–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, A. & Lawson, A.E. (1988). Predicting genetics achievement in non majors college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 23–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. (2001). The “rediscovery” of Mendel’s work. Bioscene, 27(2), 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morange, M. (2002). Genes versus molecules: How to, and how not to, be a reductionist. In M.H.V Regenmortel & D.L. Hull (Eds.), The gene: Between holism and generalism (pp. 179–187). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, T.H. (1911). Chromosomes and associative inheritance. Science, 34, 636–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, T.H. (1934). The relation of genetics to physiology and medicine. Nobel Lecture, June 4, 1934. Available at: http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1933/morgan-lecture.pdf

  • Moss, L. (2003). What genes can’t do. Cambridge-MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mysliwiec, T.H. (2003). The genetic blues: Understanding genetic principles using a practical approach and a historical perspective. American Biology Teacher, 65(1), 41–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelkin, D. & Lindee, S.M. (1995). The DNA mystique: The gene as a cultural icon. New York, NY: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohly, K.P. (2002). Changing the ‘Denkstil’ – A case study in the history of molecular genetics. Science & Education, 11, 155–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olby, R. (1985). Origins of Mendelism, 2nd ed. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Othman, J.B. (2008). What Reading “The double helix” and “The dark lady of DNA” can teach students (and their teachers) about science. Teaching Science, 54(1), 50–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pashley, M. (1994). A-level students: Their problem with gene and allele. Journal of Biological Education, 28(2), 120–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passmore, C., & Stewart, J. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 185–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pata, K., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). A comparison of reasoning processes in a collaborative modeling environment: Learning about genetics problems using virtual chat. International Journal of Science education, 28(11), 1347–1368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, H. (2006). What is a gene? Nature, 441(25), 399–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portin, P. (1993). The concept of the gene: Short history and present status. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 68(2), 173–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Portin, P. (2009). The elusive concept of the gene. Hereditas, 146, 112–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramling, N. & Säljö R. (2007). Scientific knowledge, popularization, and use of metaphors: Modern genetics in popular science magazines. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(3), 275–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quessada, M-P. & Clément, P. (2006). An Epistemological approach to French Syllabi on human origins during the 19th and 20th centuries. Science & Education, 16, 991–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodwell, G. (1997). Dr. Caleb Williams Saleeby: The Complete Eugenicist. History of Education, 26(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roseman, J.E., Caldwell, A., Gogos, A., & Kurth, L. (2006). Mapping a coherent learning progression for the molecular basis of heredity. Paper presented at National Association for the Advancement of Science (NARST) annual meeting 2006 in San Francisco, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, A. (1985). The structure of biological science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G. & Stavy, R. (2005). Understanding molecular genetics through a drawing-based activity. Journal of Biological Education, 39(4), 174–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2006). Effect of bead and illustrations models on high school students’ achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 500–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rundgren, C-J, Chang Rundgren, S-N, Tseng, Y-H, Lin, P-L, & Chang, C-Y (2012). Are you SLim? Developing an instrument for civic scientific literacy measurement (Slim) based on media coverage. Public Understanding of Science, doi: 10.1177/0963662510377562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T.D. (2011). Foreword. In T.D. Sadler (Eds.) Socio-scientific issues in the classroom; Teaching, learning and research. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T.D., & Zeidler, D.L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and Resolution of Genetic Engineering Dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadler, T.D., & Zeidler, D.L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues.. Science Education, 89(1), 71–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, S. & Bizzo, N. (2005). From “new genetics” to everyday knowledge: Ideas about how genetic diseases are transmitted in two large Brazilian families. Science Education, 89, 564–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Santos, V. C., Joaquim, L. M. & El-Hani, C. N. (2012). Hybrid deterministic views about genes in biology textbooks: A key problem in genetics teaching. Science & Education, 21(4), 543–578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sapp, J. (2003). Genesis; The evolution of biology. New York, US: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar, S. (2002). Genes versus molecules: How to, and how not to, be a reductionist In M.H.V Regenmortel & D.L. Hull (Eds.), The gene: Between holism and generalism (pp. 191–209). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherrer, K., & Jost, J. (2007). Gene and genon concept: coding versus regulation. A conceptual and information-theoretic analysis of genetic storage and expression in the light of modern molecular biology. Theory in Biosciences, 126(2), 65–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schönborn, K.J. & Bögeholz, S. (2009). Knowledge transfer in biology and translation across external Representations: Experts' views and challenges for learning International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 931–955.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. (2008). In pursuit of the gene: from Darwin to DNA. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. (2000). The differential concept of the gene: Past and present. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 24–40). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, K.E., Horne, K.V., Zhang, H. & Boughman J. (2008). Essay contest reveals misconceptions of high school students in genetics content. Genetics, 178, 1157–1168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, P.E. & Lunetta, V.N. (1993). Problem-solving behaviors during a genetics computer simulation: Beyond the expert/ novice dichotomy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(2), 153–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, E.J. (2002). Human gene therapy: genes without frontiers? American Biology Teacher, 64(4), 264–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, J. (2002). Analysis of classroom debating strategies in the field of biotechnology. Journal of Biological Education, 37(1), 9–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonneaux, J. (2008). Argumentation in Socio-Scientific contexts. In S. Erduran, & M.P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in Science education (pp. 179–199). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A.L., & Williams, M.J., (2007) “It’s the X and Y thing”: Cross-sectional and longitudinal changes in children’s understanding of genes. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 407–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.U. (1983). A comparative analysis of the performance of experts and novices while solving selected classical genetics problems (Doctoral dissertation). The Florida State University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 44, 451A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. U. & Adkinson, L.R. (2010). Updating the model definition of the gene in the modern genomic era with implications for instruction. Science & Education, 19(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.U. & Good, R. (1984). Problem solving and classical genetics: Successful vs. unsuccessful performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 895-912.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.U., & Kindfield, A.C.H. (1999). Teaching cell division: Basics and recommendations. American Biology Teacher, 61, 366–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M.U. & Scharmann, L.C. (2006). A multi-year program developing an explicit reflective pedagogy for teaching pre-service teachers the nature of science by ostention. Science & Education, 17(1–2), 219–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soderberg, P. & Jungck, J.R. (1994). Genetics construction kit: A tool for open-ended investigation in transmission genetics. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 5(2), 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soderberg, P., & Price, F. (2003). An examination of problem-based teaching and learning in population genetics and evolution using EVOLVE, a computer simulation. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 33–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler, P. F., Prohaska, S. J., Forst, C. V., & Krakauer, D. C. (2009). Defining genes: A computational framework. Theory in Biosciences, 128(3), 165–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J. (1983). Student problem solving in high school genetics. Science Education, 66(5), 523–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J. (1988). Potential learning outcomes from solving genetics problems: A typology of problems. Science Education, 72(2), 237–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J., Cartier, J.L., & Passmore, P.M. (2005). Developing understanding through model-based inquiry. In M.S. Donovan & J.D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn (pp. 515–565). Washington D.C.: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J., Hafner, R., Johnson, S., & Finkel, E. (1992). Science as models building: Computers and high school genetics. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 317–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, J., & van Kirk, J. (1990). Understanding and problem-solving in classical genetics. International journal of Science Education, 12(5), 575–588.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stolarsky, M., Ben-Nun, & Yarden, A. (2009). Learning molecular genetics in teacher-led outreach laboratories. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K., Griffiths, P.E., & Knight, R. (2004). How biologists conceptualize genes: An empirical study. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 35, 647–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, N., & Stewart, J. (2003). Genetics inquiry: Strategies and knowledge geneticists use in solving transmission genetics problems. Science Education, 87(2), 161–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tibell, L.A.E. & Rundgren, C-J (2010). Educational challenges of molecular life science: characteristics and implications for education and research. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 9, 25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, Y-H, Chang, C-Y, Chang Rundgren, S-N, & Rundgren, C-J. (2010). Mining concept maps from news stories for measuring civic scientific literacy in media. Computers & Education, 55, 165–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D.F. (2003a). Genetics reasoning with multiple external representations. Research in Science Education, 33, 111–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D.F. (2003b). Learning genetics with computer dragons. Journal of biological Education, 37(2), 96–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D.F. (2004a). Motivational aspects of learning genetics with interactive multimedia. American Biology Teacher. 66(4), 277–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, C.-Y. & Treagust, D.F. (2004b). Conceptual change in learning genetics: an ontological perspective. Research in Science Education, 22(2), 185–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D.F., (2010). Evaluating secondary students’ scientific reasoning in genetics using a two-tier diagnostic instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1073–1098.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tudge, C. (1993). The engineer in the garden. London, UK: Jonathan Cape.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uddenberg, N. (2003) Idéer om livet – En biologi historia band II. Stockholm, Sweden: Bokförlaget Natur och Kultur.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Mil, M.H.V., Boerwinkel, D.J. & Waarlo, A.J. (2013). Modelling molecular mechanisms: A framework of scientific reasoning to construct molecular-level explanations for cellular behavior. Science & Education, 22(1), 93–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Regenmortel, M.H.V. & Hull, D.L. (2002). Reductionism in the biomedical sciences. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G., & Dawson, V. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952–977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2005). Searching for clarity to teach the complexity of the gene concept. Teaching Science, 51(3), 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2006). Analogies for life: a subjective view of analogies and metaphors used to teach about genes and DNA. Teaching Science, 52(1), 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2007). Developing year 2 students’ theory of biology with concepts of the gene and DNA. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1111–1131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Donovan, J. (2008). How pupils use a model for abstract concepts in genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 43(1), 6–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G., Gribble, S.J., & Donovan, J. (2005). An exploration of young children’s understandings of genetics concepts from ontological and epistemological perspectives. Science Education, 89(4), 614–633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Milne, C. (1999). Three woman scientists and their role in the history of genetics. Australian Science Teacher Journal, 45(3), 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Treagust, D.F. (1998). Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1031–1055.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G. & Treagust, D.F. (2002). Teaching about the gene in the genetic information age. Australian Science Teachers’ Journal, 48(2), 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeff, R., Boerwinkel, D.J, & Waarlo, A.J. (2009). Genomics in school. EMBO reports, 10(2), 120–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verhoeff, R., Waarlo, A.J. & Boersma, K.Th. (2008). Systems modelling and the development of coherent understanding of cell biology. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 543–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigue, C.L. (1976). A short history of the discovery of gene function. American Biology Teacher, 38(9), 537–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Zastrow, C. (2009). Mounting a curricular revolution: an interview with Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Education Digest: Essential readings condensed for quick review. 75(3), 17–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters, K. C. (1994) Genes Made Molecular. Philosophy of Science, 61, 163–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J.D. & Crick, F.H. (1953). Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid. Nature. 171 (4356), 737–738.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1998). Representing genes: Classical mapping techniques and the growth of genetic knowledge. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 29, 295–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, J. (1999). Time, Love, Memory: A Great Biologist and His Quest for the Origins of Behavior. New York, US: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieder, W. (2006). Science as story: “Communicating the nature of science through historical perspectives on science”. American Biology Teacher, 68(4), 200–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, M.R, Pasquali, C., Appel, R.D, Ou, K., Golaz, O., Sanchez, J-C., Yan, J.X., Gooley, A.A., Hughes, G., Humphery-Smith, I., Williams, K.L., & Hochstrasser, D.F. (1996). From Proteins to Proteomes: Large Scale Protein Identification by Two-Dimensional Electrophoresis and Amino Acid Analysis. Nature Biotechnology 14 (1): 61–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M.J., & Smith, A.L. (2010). Concepts of kinship relations and inheritance in childhood and adolescence. British journal of Developmental Psychology, 28, 523–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1953/2001). Philosophical Investigations. Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood-Robinson, C. (1994). Young people’s ideas about inheritance and evolution. Studies in Science Education, 24, 29–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, C.F., Stewart, J., & Passmore, C. (2001). High school students’ use of meiosis when solving genetics problems. International journal of Science Education, 23(5), 501–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yarden, A., Brill, G. & Falk, H. (2001). Primary literature as a basis for high-school biology curriculum, Journal of Biological Education, 35(4), 190–195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwart, H. (2008). Understanding the human genome project: a biographical approach. New Genetics & Society, 27(4), 353–376.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental and Life Sciences, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden

    Niklas M. Gericke

  2. Department of Community Medicine/Public Health, Mercer University School of Medicine, Macon, GA, 31207, USA

    Mike U. Smith

Authors
  1. Niklas M. Gericke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mike U. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niklas M. Gericke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

    Michael R. Matthews

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gericke, N.M., Smith, M.U. (2014). Twenty-First-Century Genetics and Genomics: Contributions of HPS-Informed Research and Pedagogy. In: Matthews, M. (eds) International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation