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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
When using our profile model of adaptation in the context of higher education – dealing with both preservice biology teachers and future biological researchers – we add to the model two other ways of thinking, conceived as two alternative interpretations of the variational zone. On the one hand, we have an adaptationist interpretation, mostly focused on adaptive evolution by natural selection, and, on the other, a pluralist approach, which gives more attention to the role of other evolutionary factors, such as constraints, drift, and niche construction (see Sepulveda 2010).
- 3.
Mayr (1982, 1988) proposes that every biological phenomenon is the result of two kinds of causes, proximate and ultimate causes. The former refers to the causation of physiological, developmental, and behavioural processes and is part of responses to questions with the form ‘how?’ They concern how organisms function. The latter refers to evolutionary processes and events, answering questions with the form ‘why?’ They explain why organisms are structured and function the way we observe today.
References
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.
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.
Bakhtin, M. (1981). Estética da criação verbal [aesthetics of verbal creation] (P. Bezerra, Trans.). Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres &; other late essays (C. Emerson &; M. Holquist, Eds., V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
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.
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.
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.
Burian, R. M. (2005). The epistemology of development, evolution and genetics: selected essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Caponi, G. (2000). La regla de Darwin [The rule of Darwin]. Principia, 4, 27–77.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Futuyma, D. J. (Ed.). (2002). Evolução, ciência e sociedade [Evolution, science and society). São Paulo: SBG.
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.
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.
Levins, R., &; Lewontin, R. (1985). The dialectical biologist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lewontin, R. (1983). The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Scientia, 118, 63–82.
Lewontin, R. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mayr, E. (1982). The growth of biological thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mayr, E. (1988). Toward a new philosophy of biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Meyer, D., &; El-Hani, C. N. (2005). Evolução: o sentido da Biologia [Evolution: The sense of biology]. São Paulo: Editora UNESP.
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.
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.
Mortimer, E. F., &; Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sober, E. (1993). The nature of selection: Evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
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.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sepulveda, C., Mortimer, E.F., El-Hani, C.N. (2014). Conceptual Profile of Adaptation: A Tool to Investigate Evolution Learning in Biology Classrooms. In: Mortimer, E., El-Hani, C. (eds) Conceptual Profiles. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 42. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9246-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9246-5_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9245-8
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9246-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)