Enhancing student explanations of evolution: Comparing elaborating and competing theory prompts

Donnelly, Dermot Francis; Namdar, Bahadır; Vitale, Jonathan M.; Lai, Kevin; Linn, Marcia C.

doi:10.1002/tea.21331

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, similar to the research of McNeill et al () and Jimenez‐Aleixandre and Pereiro‐Munoz's (), these types of explanations had “claims that were logically bound by the evidence provided” (Berland & Reiser, , p. 22). Donnelly, Namdar, Vitale, Lai, and Linn () were interested in helping middle school students distinguish between competing claims. They found that when seventh grade students' wrote explanations related to competing views of evolution, different types of prompts supported learning.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjusting claims as new evidence emerges: Do students incorporate new evidence into their scientific explanations?

Novak¹,

Treagust

2017

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constructing explanations of complex phenomena is an important part of doing science and it is also an important component of learning science. Students need opportunities to make claims based on available evidence and then use science concepts to justify why evidence supports the claim. But what happens when new evidence emerges for the same phenomenon? The “claim” portion of the claim, evidence, and reasoning explanation framework is viewed as the most accessible to students. When new evidence suggests that students adjust their current thinking however, do students incorporate this new information and modify their claims? This research utilized a time series research design to explore how students modify their claim over four iterations of one explanation, termed an evolving explanation. As new data were collected and analyzed to provide additional evidence, students needed to evaluate their current claim to see if it took into account all available evidence. This research explores that process including the supports that the teacher provided and the challenges that students faced in developing one claim, over time. The findings indicate that many students face challenges adjusting their claims when new, conflicting evidence emerges, even with class discussion, teacher feedback, and written scaffolds. Several possible reasons exist to account for this challenge. Students may (1) ignore new evidence, (2) find “undoing” their initial idea too cognitively demanding, or (3) simply not have any similar experience from which to build. Providing students with experiences of writing evolving explanations reflects what scientists do, while simultaneously preparing students to become more scientifically proficient.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adjusting claims as new evidence emerges: Do students incorporate new evidence into their scientific explanations?

Novak¹,

Treagust

2017

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is supported by the significant correlation that was identified in the current study between students’ ability to provide explanations and the cognitive level of their learning outcomes. The importance of engaging students in scientific explanation activities is well recognized as it requires the examination of data from different perspectives, looking for patterns, and connecting data to claims, evidence, and theory (Donnelly et al, 2016 ; McNeill & Krajcik, 2012 ). In this study, the students were engaged in looking for patterns while creating optional answers for the multiple-choice questions and in providing feedback during the peer assessment process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These activities require students to think about a justification for their feedback and provide clear and rationalized comments (Barak & Rafaeli, 2004 ; Fu-Yun & Wan-Shan, 2020 ; Hardy et al, 2014 ). Providing explanations requires information processing and the activation of mental schemes that depend on a deep understanding of the scientific topic (Barak & Rafaeli, 2004 ; Donnelly et al, 2016 ; Herscovitz et al, 2012 ). Our results correspond with studies that showed that the promotion of students’ scientific explanations is a complex process which requires a higher degree of participation and reinforcement (Donnelly et al, 2016 ; McNeill & Krajcik, 2012 ; Zhu et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Location-Based Learning and Its Effect on Students’ Understanding of Newton’s Laws of Motion

Asakle

Barak

2022

J Sci Educ Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Location -based learning refers to place-based education conducted online with the use of geographic information systems and mobile devices; with the shift to distance learning, its integration in science education warrants careful evaluation. The goal of this study was to examine the effect of location-based learning on students’ understanding of Newton’s laws of motion and to characterize the learning outcomes. The participants were 373 eighth-grade students, divided into two groups: control ( n = 167) — teacher-centered, textbook-oriented instruction — and experimental ( n = 206) — student-centered, location-based learning. The study applied a quasi-experimental research design, within a framework of a mixed-methods approach, in which data were collected through pre- and post-questionnaires and the analysis of students’ learning outcomes. The findings indicated a significant positive effect for the location-based learning approach on students’ ability to generate and answer science-related questions, provide reasoned explanations, and connect scientific topics to daily life. Significant relationships were indicated between students’ ability to generate questions and their ability to provide reasoned explanations. The study points to the importance of engaging students in location-based learning and in the process of generating science-related questions, information points on a digital map, and multimedia features.

show abstract

“…Second, it is important for teachers to examine additional methods that may increase one's rational engagement. For instance, when middle‐school students examined competing ideas about evolution (e.g., Darwin vs. Lamarck), increased guidance from the instructor lead to better understanding of evolution over intuitive Lamarckism (Donnelly, Namdar, Vitale, Lai, & Linn, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rational engagement buffers the effect of conservatism on one's reported relevance of the theory of evolution

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has noted one's knowledge of and attitudes toward the theory of evolution is negatively predicted by one's political ideology, specifically how conservative the individual identifies, and positively predicted by one's level rational thinking. The present research expands on this past research by examining the roles of political conservatism and rational thinking in predicting one's reported relevance of evolutionary theory in a multi‐study design. In Study 1, a sample of undergraduate college students (N = 198) completed a survey with measures of conservatism, rational and intuitive thinking styles, including both engagement and ability, and attitudes toward the relevance of evolutionary theory. A multiple mediator model revealed that conservatism was a negative predictor rational engagement, rational engagement was a positive predictor of relevance of evolution, and the indirect effect of conservatism on relevance of evolution through rational engagement was significant. In Study 2, a new sample of college students (N = 146) completed an experiment where rational engagement was manipulated. Conservatism negatively predicted relevance of evolution for individuals who were not primed to engage in rational thought and were below average in rational ability. Conversely, conservatism was not a significant predictor of relevance of evolution for individuals who were primed to engage in rational thought, and who had below average rational ability scores. These results suggest that when individuals are lower in rational ability, priming for rational engagement may be effective at buffering the effect of conservatism on one's reported relevance of evolution. Thus, examining additional procedures for increasing one's rational engagement may be useful for educators and researchers interested in reducing the effects of political ideology on one's knowledge of and attitudes toward evolution.

show abstract

Enhancing student explanations of evolution: Comparing elaborating and competing theory prompts

Cited by 15 publications

References 74 publications

Adjusting claims as new evidence emerges: Do students incorporate new evidence into their scientific explanations?

Adjusting claims as new evidence emerges: Do students incorporate new evidence into their scientific explanations?

Location-Based Learning and Its Effect on Students’ Understanding of Newton’s Laws of Motion

Rational engagement buffers the effect of conservatism on one's reported relevance of the theory of evolution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About