Science & Education

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 27–47 | Cite as

Students’ intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations

  • Kostas Kampourakis
  • Vasso Zogza
Original Paper


This paper reports data from a study aiming to explore secondary students’ preconceptions and explanations about evolutionary processes. Students may exhibit both alternative and scientifically acceptable conceptions and bring different ones into play in response to different problem contexts. Hence, the examination of their explanations before instruction within different problem contexts is expected to highlight the concepts that instruction should put more emphasis on. To achieve this, an open-ended questionnaire in conjunction with semi-structured interviews was used to allow students to express their own views on issues related to evolution. Students’ explanations highlighted their lack of knowledge of important evolutionary concepts such as common descent and natural selection. In addition, many students explained the origin of traits as the result of evolution through need via purposeful change or as carefully designed adaptations. Rather than evolutionary, final causes formed the basis for the majority of students’ explanations. In many cases students provided different explanations for the same process to tasks with different content. It seems that the structure and the content of the task may have an effect on the explanations that students provide. Implications for evolution education are discussed and a minimal explanatory framework for evolution is suggested.


Evolutionary explanations Intuitive explanations Teleological explanations Causes Homologies Adaptations 


  1. 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. Int J Sci Educ 23:1271–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alters B (2005) Teaching biological evolution in higher education: Methodological, religious and nonreligious issues. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. Ariew A (1998) Are probabilities necessary for evolutionary explanations? Biol Philos 13:245–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ariew A (2002) Platonic and Aristotelian roots of teleological arguments in cosmology and biology. In: Ariew A, Cummins R, Perlman M (eds) Functions: New essays in the philosophy of psychology and biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 7–32Google Scholar
  5. Ariew A (2003) Ernst Mayr’s ‘Ultimate/Proximate’ distinction reconsidered and reconstructed. Biol Philos 18:553–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balashov Y, Rosenberg A (eds) (2002) Philosophy of science: Contemporary readings. Routledge, London and New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Banet E, Ayuso GE (2003) Teaching of biological inheritance and evolution of living beings in secondary school. Int J Sci Educ 25(3):373–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beatty J (1994) The proximate/ultimate distinction in the multiple careers of Ernst Mayr. Biol Philos 9:333–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Beatty J (1995) The evolutionary contingency thesis. In: Wolters G, Lennox JG (eds) Concepts, theories, and rationality in the biological sciences, the second Pittsburgh–Konstanz colloquium in the philosophy of science, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, 45–81Google Scholar
  10. Beckner M (1969) Function and teleology. J Hist Biol 2(1):151–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bishop BA, Anderson CW (1990) Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. J Res Sci Teach 27:415–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brandon RN (1981) Biological teleology: questions and explanations. Stud Hist Philos Sci 12(2):91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Clough EE, Wood-Robinson C (1985) How secondary students interpret instances of biological adaptation. J Biol Education 19:125–130Google Scholar
  14. Darwin C (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, 1st edn. John Murray, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Demastes SS, Good RG, Peebles P (1996) Patterns of conceptual change in evolution. J Res Sci Teaching 33(4):407–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Evans EM (2001) Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: creation versus evolution. Cognitive Psychol 42:217–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forber P (2005) On the explanatory roles of natural selection. Biol Philos 20:329–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Friedman M (1974) Explanation and scientific understanding. J Philos 71(1):5–19. Reprinted in Pitt (1988),188–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Godfrey-Smith P (2003) Theory and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of science. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  20. Gould SJ (2000) [1989] Wonderful life: the Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, Vintage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary theory. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts and London, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  22. Hempel C, Oppenheim P (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philos Sci 15:135–175. Reprinted in Pitt (1988), 9–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Inagaki K, Hatano G (2004) Vitalistic causality in young children’s naive biology. Trends Cognit Sci 8(8):356–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jensen MS, Finley FN (1996) ‘Changes in Students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. J Res Sci Teaching 33(8):879–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jimenez-Aleixandre MP (1992) Thinking about theories or thinking with theories: a classroom study with natural selection. Int J Sci Educ 14(1):51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kampourakis K, Zogza V (2006) ‘Students’ preconceptions about evolution: How accurate is the characterization as “Lamarckian” when considering the history of evolutionary thought? Sci & Educ (online first article)Google Scholar
  27. Kampourakis K (2006) ‘The Finches’ beaks: introducing evolutionary concepts. Sci Scope 29(6):14–17Google Scholar
  28. Keil, FC (1992) The origins of an autonomous biology. In: Gunnar MR, Maratsos M (eds) Modularity and constraints in language and cognition. Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology, vol. 25. Erlbaum, pp 103–138Google Scholar
  29. Kelemen D, DiYanni C (2005) Intuitions about origins: purpose and intelligent design in children’s reasoning about nature. J Cognition Develop 6(1):3–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kelemen D (1999) The scope of teleological thinking in pre-school children. Cognition 70:241–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kelemen D (2004a) Function, goals and intentions: children’s teleological reasoning about objects. Trends Cogn Sci 3(12):461–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kelemen D (2004b) Are children ‘‘Intuitive Theists’’?: reasoning about purpose and design in nature. Psychol Sci 15(5):295–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kitcher P (1981) Explanatory unification. Philos Sci 48(4):507–531. Reprinted in Pitt (1988), 167–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kitcher P (1989) Explanatory unification and the causal structure of the world. In: Kitcher P, Salmon WC (eds) Scientific explanation. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 410–505. Reprinted in Balashov, Rosenberg, (2002), 71–91Google Scholar
  35. Lennox JG (1992a) Philosophy of biology. In: Salmon M, Earman J, Glymour C, Lennox J, Machamer P, McGuire J, Norton J, Salmon W, and K Schaffner, KF (eds) Introduction to the philosophy of science. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp 269–309Google Scholar
  36. Lennox JG (1992b) Teleology. In: Keller EF, Lloyd EA (eds) Keywords in evolutionary biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts and London, England, pp 324–333Google Scholar
  37. Lennox JG (1993) Darwin was a teleologist. Biol & Philos 8:409–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lennox JG (2001) Aristotle’s philosophy of biology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Lewis D (1986) Causal explanation. In: Lewis D (ed) Philosophical papers, vol. 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 214–240Google Scholar
  40. Lewontin RC (1969) The bases of conflict in biological explanation. J Hist Biol 2(1):35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lombrozo T, Carey S (2006) Functional explanation and the function of explanation. Cognition 99:167–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mayr E (1961) Cause and effect in biology. Science 134:1501–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Okasha S (2002) Philosophy of science: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  44. Palmer DH (1999) Exploring the link between students’ scientific and nonscientific conceptions. Sci Educ 83(6):639–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Passmore C, Stewart J (2002) A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. J Res Sci Teaching 39(3):185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pitt J (ed) (1988) Theories of explanation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  47. Rosenberg A (2005) Philosophy of science: A contemporary introduction, 2nd edn. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Salmon WC (1984) Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton University Press. Chapters 5 and 6 reprinted in Pitt (1988), pp 79–118Google Scholar
  49. Salmon WC (1990) Scientific explanation: causation and unification. Critica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía 22(66):3–21. Reprinted in Balashov & Rosenberg (2002), pp 92–105Google Scholar
  50. Samarapungavan A, Wiers RW (1997) Children’s thoughts on the origin of species: a study of explanatory coherence. Cogn Sci 21(2):147–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Scriven M (1959) Explanation and prediction in evolutionary theory. Science 130:477–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Scriven M (1962) Explanations, predictions, and laws. In: Feigl H, Maxwell G (eds) Scientific explanation, space, and time, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, vol 3. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 170–230. Reprinted in Pitt (1988), 51–74Google Scholar
  53. Scriven M (1969) Explanation in biological sciences. J Hist Biol 2(1):187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Settlage J (1994) Conceptions of natural selection: a snapshot of the sense-making process. J Res Sci Teaching 31(5):449–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Strevens M (2004) The causal and unification accounts of explanation unified—causally. Noûs 38:154–176Google Scholar
  56. Strevens M (2005) ‘Scientific Explanation’, in Macmillan Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2nd ed.)Google Scholar
  57. Waters KC (2003) The arguments in the origin of species. In: Hodge J, Radick G (eds) Cambridge companion to Darwin. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 116–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Woodward J (2003) Scientific Explanation. In Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford Encyclopaedia of PhilosophyGoogle Scholar
  59. Wright L (1973) Functions. Philos Rev 82(2):139–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Geitonas SchoolAthensGreece
  2. 2.Department of Educational Sciences and Early Childhood EducationUniversity of PatrasPatrasGreece

Personalised recommendations