Measuring knowledge of natural selection: A comparison of the CINS, an open‐response instrument, and an oral interview

By Ross H. Nehm, I. Schonfeld. 2008

242 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, History and Philosophy of Science, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4de20c5a44676f99212fbd3b9a8ab834b5b8c749

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Minsu Ha
2. David L. Haury
3. Knut Neumann
4. I. Neumann
5. John E Opfer
6. Ross H. Nehm
7. Rafael E. Núñez

In History and Philosophy of Science

1. Minsu Ha
2. David L. Haury
3. I. Neumann
4. Knut Neumann
5. John E Opfer
6. Ross H. Nehm

In Social Psychology

1. Minsu Ha
2. David L. Haury
3. I. Neumann
4. Knut Neumann
5. John E Opfer
6. Ross H. Nehm

Citations in the corpus

• Does the Segregation of Evolution in Biology Textbooks and Introductory Courses Reinforce Students’ Faulty Mental Models of Biology and Evolution? (2009, background): “…about evolution persist after instruction suggests that these courses neither foster accurate mental models of evolution’s mechanisms nor instill an appreciation of evolution’s centrality to an understanding of the living world (Miller et al. 2006; Nehm and Reilly 2007; Nehm and Schonfeld 2008).”
• Evaluating Instrument Quality in Science Education: Rasch‐based analyses of a Nature of Science test (2011, methodology): “Robust conclusions about the effects of varying magnitudes of NOS knowledge on learning outcomes will require the application of rigorously validated and reliable measurement instruments (AERA, APA, & NCME, 2004; Nehm, 2006; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2008, 2010).”
• Feeling of certainty: Uncovering a missing link between knowledge and acceptance of evolution (2012, background): “Despite displaying some psychometric problems (Battisti, Hanegan, Sudweeks, & Cates, 2010; Nehm & Schonfeld, 2008), the CINS is generally recognized as a valid tool for measuring evolutionary knowledge.”
• Cognitive foundations for science assessment design: Knowing what students know about evolution (2012, background): “…of evolutionary understanding (i.e., multiple choice tests like the CINS) can radically overestimate students’ understanding by asking them to choose between a scientifically valid and invalid explanation of evolutionary change (see Nehm & Schonfeld, 2008 for empirical evidence of this pattern).”