Conceptual Profile of Adaptation: A Tool to Investigate Evolution Learning in Biology Classrooms

  • Claudia Sepulveda
  • Eduardo F. Mortimer
  • Charbel N. El-Hani
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education book series (CTISE, volume 42)

Abstract

In this chapter, we argue that a conceptual profile of adaptation may be a theoretical-methodological tool for investigations about the understanding of Darwinist explanatory models in the sociocultural sphere of the classroom, when used as a tool for classroom discourse analysis, integrated to the analytical structure developed by Mortimer and Scott (Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press, Maidenhead, 2003). We report the process of construction of a conceptual profile model of adaptation, its application to the discursive analysis of episodes of evolution teaching produced in the context of high school biological education, and its improvement through the characterization of ways of speaking about adaptation employed by students and teachers when negotiating meanings around explanations for evolutionary changes. Contributions of this study to the research program on conceptual profiles and its implications to the construction of pedagogical practice in the science classroom are also discussed.

Keywords

Ontological Commitment Dental Arch Profile Model Organic Diversity Transformational Perspective 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Amaral, E. M. R., &; Mortimer, E. F. (2006). Uma metodologia para estudar a dinâmica entre as zonas de um perfil conceitual no discurso da sala de aula [A methodology to study the dynamic among conceptual profile zones in the classroom discourse]. In F. M. T. dos Santos &; I. M. Greca (Eds.), A pesquisa em ensino de ciências no Brasil e suas metodologias (pp. 239–296). Ijuí: Editora UNIJUÍ.Google Scholar
  2. Ash, D. (2008). Thematic continuities: Talking and thinking about adaptation in socially complex classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1–30. doi: 10.1002/tea.20199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakhtin, M. (1981). Estética da criação verbal [aesthetics of verbal creation] (P. Bezerra, Trans.). Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária.Google Scholar
  4. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres &; other late essays (C. Emerson &; M. Holquist, Eds., V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bishop, B. A., &; Anderson, C. W. (1990). Student conception of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415–427. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660270503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bizzo, N. M. V. (1994). From down house Landlord to Brazilian high school students: What has happened to evolutionary knowledge on the way. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 537–556. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660310508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bock, W. J., &; Wahlert, G. (1998). Adaption and the form-function complex. In C. Allen, M. Bekoff, &; G. Lauder (Eds.), Nature’s purposes: Analysis of function and design in biology (pp. 117–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Burian, R. M. (2005). The epistemology of development, evolution and genetics: selected essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Caponi, G. (2000). La regla de Darwin [The rule of Darwin]. Principia, 4, 27–77.Google Scholar
  10. Caponi, G. (2002). Explicación seleccional y explicación funcional: la teleología en la Biología contemporanea [Selectional and functional explanation: The teleology in contemporary biology]. Episteme, 14, 57–88.Google Scholar
  11. Caponi, G. (2005). O darwinismo e seu outro: a teoria transformacional da evolução [Darwinism and its other, the transformational theory of evolution]. Scientiae Studia, 3, 233–242. doi: 10.1590/S1678-31662005000200004.Google Scholar
  12. Clough, E. E., &; Wood-Robinson, C. (1985). How secondary students interpret instances of biological adaptation. Journal of Biological Education, 19, 125–130. doi: 10.1080/00219266.1985.9654708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cummins, R. ([1975]1998). Functional analysis. In C. Allen, M. Bekoff, &; G. Lauder (Eds.), Nature’s purposes: Analyses of function and design in biology (pp. 169–196). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Demastes, S. S., Settlage, J., &; Good, R. (1995). Students’ conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution: Cases of replication and comparison. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 535–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. El-Hani, C. N., &; Mortimer, E. F. (2007). Multicultural education, pragmatism, and the goals of science teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 657–702. doi:10.1007/s11422-007-9064-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Futuyma, D. J. (Ed.). (2002). Evolução, ciência e sociedade [Evolution, science and society). São Paulo: SBG.Google Scholar
  17. Gee, J. P., &; Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119–169. doi: 10.3102/0091732X023001119.Google Scholar
  18. Jensen, M. S., &; Finley, F. N. (1996). Changes in students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 879–900. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199610)33:8<879::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Levins, R., &; Lewontin, R. (1985). The dialectical biologist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lewontin, R. (1983). The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Scientia, 118, 63–82.Google Scholar
  21. Lewontin, R. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Mayr, E. (1988). Toward a new philosophy of biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Meyer, D., &; El-Hani, C. N. (2005). Evolução: o sentido da Biologia [Evolution: The sense of biology]. São Paulo: Editora UNESP.Google Scholar
  25. Molina, A. A. (2007). Analogias, pensamiento científico infantil y revalorización de las teleologias y el antopomorfismo [Analogies, child scientific thought and revaluation of teleology and anthropomorphism]. Tecné, episteme y didaxis, Número extraordinário Tecer Congreso Internacional sobre formación de profesores de Ciencias, 88–107. Google Scholar
  26. Mortimer, E. F., &; Scott, P. (2002). Atividades discursivas nas salas de aula de ciências: uma ferramenta sociocultural para analisar e planejar o ensino [Discursive activity in science classroom: A sociocultural tool for analysing and planning teaching]. Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 7, 283–306.Google Scholar
  27. Mortimer, E. F., &; Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Purves, W. K., Sadava, D., Orians, G., Heller, H. C. (2005). Vida: a ciência da biologia [Life: The science of biology] (Vol. 3, 6th ed.). Porto Alegre: Artmed.Google Scholar
  29. Rodrigues, R. H. (2005). Os gêneros do discurso na perspectiva dialógica da linguagem: A abordagem de Bakhtin [The discourse genre in the dialogic perspective of language: The Bakhtin’s approach]. In J. J. Meurer, A. Bonini, &; D. Motta-Roth (Eds.), Gêneros: teorias, métodos e debates (pp. 184–2005). São Paulo: Parábola Editorial.Google Scholar
  30. Rojo, R. (2005). Gêneros do discurso e gêneros textuais: questões teóricas e aplicadas [Discourse genres and textual genres: Theoretical and applied issues]. In J. J. Meurer, A. Bonini, &; D. Motta-Roth (Eds.), Gêneros: teorias, métodos e debates (pp. 184–207). São Paulo: Parábola Editorial.Google Scholar
  31. Rommetveit, R. (1979). On the architecture of intersubjectivity. In R. Rommetveit &; R. M. Blakar (Eds.), Studies of language, thought, and verbal communication (pp. 93–108). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  32. Sepulveda, C. (2010). Perfil conceitual de adaptação: Uma ferramenta para a análise de discurso em salas de aula de biologia em contextos de ensino de evolução [Conceptual profile of adaptation: A tool for analysing biology classroom discourse in the context of teaching evolution]. Doctoral dissertation, Federal University of Bahia and State University of Feira de Santana, Graduate Studies Program in History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching, Salvador.Google Scholar
  33. Sober, E. (1993). The nature of selection: Evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  34. Wertsch, J. V., &; Hickmann, M. (1987). Problem solving in social interaction: A microgenetic analysis. In M. Hickmann (Ed.), Social and functional approaches to language and thought (pp. 251–266). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  35. West-Eberhard, M. J. (1992). Adaptation: Current usages. In E. F. Keller &; E. A. Lloyd (Eds.), Keywords in evolutionary biology (pp. 13–18). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Sepulveda
    • 1
  • Eduardo F. Mortimer
    • 2
  • Charbel N. El-Hani
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of EducationState University of Feira de SantanaFeira de SantanaBrazil
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationFederal University of Minas GeraisBelo HorizonteBrazil
  3. 3.Institute of BiologyFederal University of BahiaSalvadorBrazil

Personalised recommendations