Twenty-First-Century Genetics and Genomics: Contributions of HPS-Informed Research and Pedagogy

Gericke, Niklas; Smith, Mike U.

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7654-8_15

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 194 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, genes are overlapping and can give rise to several different products (making the proteome qualitatively different from the genome), and there is no obvious relation between the amount of DNA in an organism and its morphological or behavioral complexity (for discussion, see, for example, El-Hani 2007;Falk 2014;Gericke and Hagberg 2007;Gericke and Smith 2014;Meyer et al 2011;Portin 2009). Gene-D is not Bcontrolling^or Bpurposively acting^in a specific direction but is a component among others within biochemical, physiological, developmental processes.…”

Section: Genetic Determinism and Its Relationship To Geneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetic determinism can be described as the attribution of the formation of traits to genes, where genes are ascribed more causal power than what scientific consensus suggests. Belief in genetic determinism is an educational problem because it contradicts scientific knowledge, and is a societal problem because it has the potential to foster intolerant attitudes such as racism and prejudice against sexual orientation. In this article, we begin by investigating the very nature of belief in genetic determinism. Then, we investigate whether knowledge of genetics and genomics is associated with beliefs in genetic determinism. Finally, we explore the extent to which social factors such as gender, education, and religiosity are associated with genetic determinism. Methodologically, we gathered and analyzed data on beliefs in genetic determinism, knowledge of genetics and genomics, and social variables using the BPublic Understanding and Attitudes towards Genetics and Genomics^(PUGGS) instrument. Our analyses of PUGGS responses from a sample of Brazilian university freshmen undergraduates indicated that (1) belief in genetic determinism was best characterized as a construct built up by two dimensions or belief systems: beliefs concerning social traits and beliefs concerning biological traits; (2) levels of belief in genetic determination of social traits were low, which contradicts prior work; (3) associations between knowledge of genetics and genomics and levels of belief in genetic determinism were low; and (4) social factors such as age and religiosity had stronger associations with beliefs in genetic determinism than Sci & Educ (2017) 26:1223-1259 https://doi

show abstract

Section: Genetic Determinism and Its Relationship To Geneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a wealth of research in the area of genetics education for a variety of reasons. Genetics is widely considered a difficult subject to both teach and learn (Fisher, ; Friedrichsen & Stone, ; Gericke & Smith, ; Horwitz, ; Kindfield, ; Knippels, ; Lewis & Kattmann, ; Lewis & Wood‐Robinson, ; Marbach‐Ad & Stavy, ; Stewart, Cartier, & Passmore, ; Stewart & van Kirk, ; Wynne, Stewart, & Passmore, ), but it is an integral piece of biology content and curriculum around the world. Genetics is also a rapidly advancing field with recent advances such as human genome sequencing, genetic screenings, genetically modified organisms, and stem cell research, among others.…”

Section: Background and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With the recent science education reform documents and standards and the inclusion of learning progression research, we investigated how 10th grade students align with the proposed molecular genetics learning progression by Duncan, Rogat, and Yarden (). The content area of molecular genetics was chosen because it is widely considered a difficult subject to both teach and learn, it is an integral piece of biology content and curriculum around the world, and it is a rapidly advancing field with literacy in this area becoming increasingly important as new technologies emerge (reviewed by Gericke & Smith, ). Currently, 10th graders represent the upper bounds of the progression (Duncan, Rogat, & Yarden, ); however, from our pilot studies, we observed 10th grade students hold naive ideas of molecular genetics (at or below the lowest level of each construct) prior to instruction.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Empirical refinements of a molecular genetics learning progression: The molecular constructs

Todd

Kenyon

2015

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes revisions to four of the eight constructs of the Duncan molecular genetics learning progression [Duncan, Rogat, & Yarden, (2009)]. As learning progressions remain hypothetical models until validated by multiple rounds of empirical studies, these revisions are an important step toward validating the progression. Our revisions are based on empirical data obtained from tenth grade students in three classroom contexts (n ¼ 121); although our study was done with students at the upper bounds of the progression, students held naive ideas prior to instruction which allowed us to track their ideas through all the levels of each construct during the course of one academic year. We revised the four constructs that center around the molecular model of genetics using students' pre/post assessments and interviews. We found that tenth grade students do hold ideas consistent with the hypothesized levels in the progression as well as several intermediate ideas not included. Our revisions include adding student ideas that are important conceptual stepping stones in each construct as well as other modifications such as splitting and combining levels, moving ideas to other constructs, changing the conceptual progression of a construct and splitting a construct. Along with the revisions, we identified challenges in each construct. Even after instruction, students had difficulties understanding that genes code for proteins, that proteins connect genes and traits, and how differential gene expression leads to different repertoires of proteins inside of specialized cells. Our findings indicate that classroom instruction should focus more on proteins: how they are created, what their functions are, and how cells express different proteins.

show abstract

“…Moreover, in a conceptual explanation, the relationships between concepts are shown in a causal rather than a mechanistic way, as sketched in Figure 1 . Much research on life science education has focused on the conceptual aspects of learning and has shown that students find these aspects very challenging ( Gericke and Smith, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptual Demography in Upper Secondary Chemistry and Biology Textbooks’ Descriptions of Protein Synthesis: A Matter of Context?

Wahlberg

Gericke

2018

LSE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates how the domain-specific language of molecular life science is mediated by the comparative contexts of chemistry and biology education. We study upper secondary chemistry and biology textbook sections on protein synthesis to reveal the conceptual demography of concepts central to the communication of this subject. The term “conceptual demography” refers to the frequency, distribution, and internal relationships between technical terms mediating a potential conceptual meaning of a phenomenon. Data were collected through a content analysis approach inspired by text summarization and text mining techniques. Chemistry textbooks were found to present protein synthesis using a mechanistic approach, whereas biology textbooks use a conceptual approach. The chemistry texts make no clear distinction between core terms and peripheral terms but use them equally frequently and give equal attention to all relationships, whereas biology textbooks focus on core terms and mention and relate them to each other more frequently than peripheral terms. Moreover, chemistry textbooks typically segment the text, focusing on a couple of technical terms at a time, whereas biology textbooks focus on overarching structures of the protein synthesis. We argue that it might be fruitful for students to learn protein synthesis from both contexts to build a meaningful understanding.

show abstract

Twenty-First-Century Genetics and Genomics: Contributions of HPS-Informed Research and Pedagogy

Cited by 31 publications

References 194 publications

Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors

Exploring Relationships Among Belief in Genetic Determinism, Genetics Knowledge, and Social Factors

Empirical refinements of a molecular genetics learning progression: The molecular constructs

Conceptual Demography in Upper Secondary Chemistry and Biology Textbooks’ Descriptions of Protein Synthesis: A Matter of Context?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About