Advertisement

Darwinian and Lamarckian Models Used by Students and Their Representation

  • Maria Pilar Jimenez Aleixandre
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (volume 148)

Abstract

As a part of a larger study on the learning of natural selection by secondary school and university students, an attempt was made to identify conceptions that belong to the Darwinian model, taught in school science, and the Lamarckian model, the alternative view most widely used by students. This paper focuses on the different conceptions that make part of the frameworks used for explaining biological change, and the way they are related or structured. These relations are represented here as conceptual maps, intended to be used as tools in instruction and teacher training.

Keywords

Knowledge representation Natural selection Conceptual maps Students’ ideas Functional knowledge 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ausubel, D., Novak, J. & Hanesian, H.: Educational Psychology: cognitive view, Holt, Rinehart and Winston 1979.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beddall, B.: Wallace, Darwin and Natural Selection: a study in the development of ideas and attitudes. J. of History of Biology, 1, 261–323, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bishop, B. & Anderson, C.: Students Conceptions of Natural Selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (5), 415–427, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brumby, M.: Students’ perceptions and learning styles associated with the concept of Evolution by Natural Selection. Ph. D. Thesis, Surrey, 1979.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clough, E.E. & Driver, R.: A study of consistency in the use of students’ conceptual frameworks across different task context. Science Education, 70 (4), 473–496, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clough, E.E. & Wood-Robinson, C.: How secondary students interpret instances of biological adaptation. J. Biological Educ., 19 (2), 125–130, 1985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Darwin, C. & Wallace, A.: 1859 On the tendency of species to form varieties and on the perpetuation of varieties and species by natural means of Selection. J. of the Linnean Society of London (Zoology), 3, 45–62 in Harris Evolution, Genesis and Revelation, State Univ. of NY Press 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deadman, J. A. & Kelly, P. J.: What do secondary school boys understand about evolution and heredity before they are taught the topics? Journal of Biological Education, 12 (1), 7–15, 1978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisher, K.: Semantic Networking: the new kid on the block. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1001–1018, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gruber, H.: Darwin on man. A Psychological study of scientific creativity. The University of Chicago Press 1981.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hallden, O.: The Evolution of species: pupil perspectives and school perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 10 (5), 541–552, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hewson, P.: Epistemological commitments in the learning of Science: examples from dynamics. Eur.J. of Science Education, 7(2), 163–172, 1985.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hewson, P. & Thorley, R.: The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11 (5), 541–553, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jimenez Aleixandre, M.P.: Los esquemas conceptuales sobre la Seleccion Natural: análisis y propuestas para un cambio conceptual. Doctoral Thesis, University Complutense, Madrid 1990.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jimenez Aleixandre, M.P.: Thinking about theories or thinking with theories? A classroom study with Natural Selection. International Journal of Science Education, 14(1), 51–61, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jimenez, M.P. & Fernandez, J.: Selection or adjustment? Explanations of University Biology Students for Natural Selection Problems. In: Proc. Int. Sem. Misconc. & Educ. Strategies in Science & Math ( Novak, ed.), Vol II, pp. 224–232. Cornell University, 1987.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lawson, A. & Thompson, L.: Formal reasoning ability and misconceptions concerning genetics and natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25 (9), 733–746, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McClelland, J.: Alternative frameworks: interpretation of evidence. European Journal of Science Educ, 6(1),, 1–6, 1984.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nersessian, N.: Conceptual change in science and in Science Education. Synthese 80, 163–183, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Novak, J.: Concept mapping: a useful tool for science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27 (10), 937–949, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pozo, J.I.: Aprendizaje de la ciencia y pensamiento causal. Visor, Madrid 1987.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    West, L., Fensham, P. & Garrard, J.: Describing the cognitive structures of learners following instruction in chemistry. In: Cognitive structure and conceptual change ( West & Pines, eds.). Orlando: Academic Press 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Vertag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Pilar Jimenez Aleixandre
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Didactica das Ciencias ExperimentaisUniversidade de Santiago de CompostelaSantiagoSpain

Personalised recommendations