Advertisement

Science & Education

, Volume 16, Issue 7–8, pp 849–881 | Cite as

Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students’ understanding of genetics

  • Niklas Markus GerickeEmail author
  • Mariana Hagberg
Original Paper

Abstract

Models are often used when teaching science. In this paper historical models and students’ ideas about genetics are compared. The historical development of the scientific idea of the gene and its function is described and categorized into five historical models of gene function. Differences and similarities between these historical models are made explicit. Internal and external consistency problems between the models are identified and discussed. From the consistency analysis seven epistemological features are identified. The features vary in such ways between the historical models that it is claimed that learning difficulties might be the consequence if these features are not explicitly addressed when teaching genetics. Students’ understanding of genetics, as described in science education literature, is then examined. The comparison shows extensive parallelism between students’ alternative understanding of genetics and the epistemological features, i.e., the claim is strengthened. It is also argued that, when teaching gene function, the outlined historical models could be useful in a combined nature of science and history of science approach. Our findings also raise the question what to teach in relation to preferred learning outcomes in genetics.

Keywords

Historical models Models Gene Gene function Genetics Students’ understanding of genetics Nature of science History of science Epistemology 

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick F, Lederman NG (2000) The influence of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. J Res Sci Teach 37(10):1057–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bahar M, Johnstone AH, Hansell MH (1999) Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. J Biol Educ 33(2):84–86Google Scholar
  3. Banet E, Ayuso E (2000) Teaching genetics at secondary school: a strategy for teaching about the location of inheritance information. Sci Educ 84(3):313–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boulter C, Buckley B (2000) Constructing a typology of models for science education. In: Gilbert J, Boulter C (eds) Developing models in science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 41–58Google Scholar
  5. Cadogan A (eds) (2000) Biological nomenclature—standard terms and expressions used in the teaching of biology, 3rd edn. The Institute of Biology, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlson EA (1966) The gene: a critical history. W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia and LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Carlson EA (1991) Defining the gene: an evolving concept. J Hum Genet 49(2):475–487Google Scholar
  8. Carlson EA (2004) Mendel’s legacy: the origin of classical genetics. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Cavallo AML (1996) Meaningful learning, reasoning ability, and students understanding and problem solving of topics in genetics. J Res Sci Teach 33(6):625–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dietrich MR (2000) From gene to genetic hierarchy: richard goldschmidt and the problem of the Gene. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 91–114Google Scholar
  11. Dutilh BE, Huynen MA, Snel B (2006) A global definition of expression context is conserved between orthologs, but does not correlate with sequence conservation. BMC Genomics 7(10), http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471–2164/7/12
  12. Falk R (2000) The gene—a concept in tension. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 317–348Google Scholar
  13. Finkel EA (1996) Making sense of genetics: students’ knowledge use during problem solving in a high school genetics class. J Res Sci Teach 33(4):345–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fogle T (1990) Are genes units of inheritance? Biol Philos 5(3):349–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fogle T (2000) The dissolution of protein coding genes in molecular biology. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 3–25Google Scholar
  16. Forissier T, Clément P (2003) Teaching biological identity as genome/environment interactions. J Biol Educ 37(2):85–90Google Scholar
  17. Fox Keller E (2000) Decoding the genetic program: or, some circular logic in the logic of circularity. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 159–177Google Scholar
  18. Gaudillière JP, Rheinberger HJ (2004) Introduction. In: Gaudillière JP, Rheinberger HJ (eds) From molecular genetics to genomics: the mapping cultures of twentieth-century genetics. Routledge, London and New York, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  19. Gayon J (2000) From measurement to organization: a philosophical scheme for the history of the concept of heredity. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 69–90Google Scholar
  20. Giere RN (1988) Explaining science. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  21. Giere RN (1994) The cognitive structure of scientific theories. Philos Sci 61:276–296Google Scholar
  22. Gifford F (2000) Gene concepts and genetic concepts. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 40–66Google Scholar
  23. Gilbert JK, Boulter C, Rutherford M (1998) Models in explanations, part 1: horses for courses? Int J Sci Educ 20(1):83–97Google Scholar
  24. Gilbert J, Boulter C, Elmer R (2000) Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education. In: Gilbert J, Boulter C (eds) Developing models in science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 3–17Google Scholar
  25. Gilbert SW (1991) Model building and a definition of science. J Res Sci Teach 28(1):73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Griesemer JR (2000) Reproduction and the reduction of genetics. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 240–285Google Scholar
  27. Griffiths PE (2002) Lost: one gene concept. Reward to finder. Biol Philos 17(2):271–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Griffiths PE, Neumann-Held EN (1999) The many faces of the gene. Bioscience 49:656–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Grosslight L, Unger C, Jay E, Smith C (1991) Understanding models and their use in science; conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. J Res Sci Teach 28(9):799–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Halldén O (1990) Questions asked in common sense contexts and in scientific contexts. In: Lijnse PL, Licht P, de Vos W, Waarlo AJ (eds) Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles. CD-β Press, Utrecht, pp. 119–130Google Scholar
  31. Halloun IA (2004) Modeling theory in science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  32. Harré R (1970) The principles of scientific thinking. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago ILGoogle Scholar
  33. Harrison AG, Treagust DF (2000) A typology of school science models. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):1011–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hoffmeyer J (1988) Naturen I huvudet. Rabén & Sjögren, Simrishamn, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnstone AH, Mahmoud NA (1980) Isolating topics of high perceived difficulty in school biology. J Biol Educ 14(2):163–166Google Scholar
  36. Justi R (2000) Teaching with historical models. In: Gilbert J, Boulter C (eds) Developing models in science education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 209–228Google Scholar
  37. Justi R, Gilbert JK (1999) A cause of a historical science teaching: use of hybrid models. Sci Educ 83(2):163–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kincaid H (1990) Molecular biology and the unity of science. Philos Sci 57:575–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kinnear J (1991) Using an historical perspective to enrich the teaching of linkage in genetics. Sci Educ 75(1):69–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kitcher P (1982) Genes. Br J Philos Sci 33(4):337–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knippels MCPJ (2002) Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education. CD-β Press, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  42. Kuhn D, Amsel E, O’Loughlin M (1988) The development of scientific thinking skills. Academic Press Inc., LondonGoogle Scholar
  43. Kuhn TS (1996) The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd edn. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  44. Lawrence PA (1992) The making of a fly: the genetics of animal design. Blackwell Scientific, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Leatherdale WH (1974) The role of analogy, model and metaphor in science. North-Holland Publishing Company, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  46. Lederman NG (1992) Students and teachers conceptions of the nature of science: a review of the research. J Res Sci Teach 29(4):331–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lewis J, Leach J, Wood-Robinson C (2000a) All in the genes?—young people’s understanding of the nature of genes. J Biol Educ 34(2):74–79Google Scholar
  48. Lewis J, Leach J, Wood-Robinson C (2000b) Chromosomes: the missing link – young people’s understanding of mitosis, meiosis, and fertilisation. J Biol Educ 34(4):189–199Google Scholar
  49. Lewis J, Kattmann U (2004) Traits, genes, particles and information: re-visiting students’ understandings of genetics. Int J Sci Educ 26(2):195–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lewis J, Wood-Robinson C (2000) Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance—do students see any relationship. Int J Sci Educ 22(2):177–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marbach-Ad G (2001) Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. J Biol Educ 35(4):183–189Google Scholar
  52. Marbach-Ad G, Stavy R (2000) Students cellular and molecular explanations of genetic phenomena. J Biol Educ 34(4):200–205Google Scholar
  53. Martins I, Ogborn J (1997) Metaphorical reasoning about genetics. Int J Sci Educ 19(1):47–63Google Scholar
  54. Matthews M (1992) History, philosophy and science teaching: the present rapprochement. Sci Educ 1(1):11–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mayr E (1982) The growth of biological thought: diversity, evolution and inheritance. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  56. Mayr E (1997) This is biology: the science of the living world. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  57. Nersessian NJ (1992) How do scientists think? capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In: Giere RN (ed) Cognitive models of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp. 3–44Google Scholar
  58. Pashley M (1994) A-level students: their problem with gene and allele. J Biol Educ 28(2):120–126Google Scholar
  59. Passmore C, Stewart J (2002) A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. J Res Sci Teach 39(3):185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Portin P (1993) The concept of the gene: short history and present status. Q Rev Biol 68(2):173–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rheinberger HJ (2000) Gene concepts: fragments from the perspective of molecular biology. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 219–239Google Scholar
  62. Rosenberg A (1985) The structure of biological science. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  63. Rosenberg A (2000) Philosophy of science: a contemporary introduction. Routledge, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  64. Roth M (1995) Authentic school science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  65. Sarkar S (1999) From Reaktionsnorm to the adaptive norm: the norm of reaction, 1909–1960. Biol Philos 14:235–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schwartz S (2000) The differential concept of the gene: past and present. In: Beurton P, Falk R, Rheinberger HJ (eds) The concept of the gene in development and evolution: historical and epistemological perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 24–40Google Scholar
  67. Singer M, Berg P (1991) Genes and genomes: a changing perspective. University Science Books, Mill ValleyGoogle Scholar
  68. Stewart J, Hafner R (1991) Extending the conception of problem in problem-solving research. Sci Educ 75(1):105–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stewart J, Rudolph JL (2001) Considering the nature of scientific problems when teaching science curricula. Sci Educ 85(3):207–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Van Driel JH, Verloop N (1999) Teachers knowledge of models and modelling in science. Int J Sci Educ 21(11):1141–1153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Venville GJ, Treagust DF (1998) Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. J Res Sci Teach 35(9):1031–1055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Waters KC (1994) Genes made molecular. Philos Sci 61(2):163–185Google Scholar
  73. Weber M (1998) Representing genes: classical mapping techniques and the growth of genetic knowledge. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 29:295–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Weber M (2004) Walking on the chromosome: Drosophila and the molecularization of development. In: Gaudillière JP, Rheinberger HJ (eds) From molecular genetics to genomics: the mapping cultures of twentieth-century genetics. Routledge, London and New York, pp. 63–78Google Scholar
  75. Wimsatt WC (1987) False models as means to truer theories. In: Nitecki MH, Hoffman A (eds) Neutral models in biology. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, pp. 23–55Google Scholar
  76. Wood-Robinson C (1994) Young people’s ideas about inheritance and evolution. Stud Sci Educ 24:29–47Google Scholar
  77. Wood-Robinson C, Lewis J, Leach J (2000) Young peoples understanding of genetic information in the cells of an organism. J Biol Educ 35(1):29–35Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyKarlstad University Faculty of Social and Life SciencesKarlstadSweden
  2. 2.Teacher Education Faculty officeKarlstad UniversityKarlstadSweden

Personalised recommendations