A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools

By Cynthia Passmore, J. Stewart. 2002

239 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, History and Philosophy of Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/58b5ec2a2ef7a6e21ae5c7c5c48add498809e5e2

How researchers see this paper

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

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

In History and Philosophy of Science

Citations in the corpus

The Role of Domain-Specific Knowledge in Generative Reasoning About Complicated Multileveled Phenomena (2007, unknown): “This approach has been advocated by many science educators (Horwitz, 1996; Jackson, Stratford, Krajcik, & Soloway, 1995; Pallant & Tinker, 2004; Passmore & Stewart, 2002; Stieff & Wilensky, 2002; Stratford, 1997).”
Conceptual Change and Evolutionary Biology: A Developmental Analysis (2008, result): “…instruction that include students’ understanding of the nature of science and the nature of knowledge has yielded more promising results (Bell, Lederman, & Abd-El-Khalick 2000; Passmore & Stewart, 2002; Sandoval & Morrison, 2003; Sandoval & Reiser, 2004; Scharmann, 2005; Sinatra et al., 2003).”
Teaching evolutionary biology (2004, background): “…most, if not all, research has shown that the result of the teaching of evolutionary theories is not generally positive in different parts of the world (Brumby, 1984; Bishop and Anderson, 1990; Aleijandre, 1994; Anderson et al., 2002; Passmore and Stewart, 2002), including Brazil (Bizzo, 1994).”
Understanding Natural Selection: Essential Concepts and Common Misconceptions (2009, background): “…and some do help to improve the level of understanding among students (e.g., Bishop and Anderson 1986; Jensen and Finley 1995, 1996; Firenze 1997; Passmore and Stewart 2002; Sundberg 2003; Alters 2005; Scharmann 1990; Wilson 2005; Nelson 2007, 2008; Pennock 2007; Kampourakis and Zogza 2008).”
Students’ intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations (2008, background): “Many studies have documented that secondary students, and undergraduates, tend to attribute the origin of the traits that several organisms possess to a predetermined end or to individual purposeful change (Clough and Wood-Robinson 1985; Bishop and Anderson 1990; Jimenez 1992; Settlage 1994; Demaste”
Supporting Students' Construction of Scientific Explanations by Fading Scaffolds in Instructional Materials (2006, methodology): “If students do not initially provide their reasoning, prompting can result in students articulating their thoughts about how and why something occurs (Chinn & Brown, 2000).”
Darwin's missing link—a novel paradigm for evolution education (2006, unknown): “…Good, & Peebles, 1995, 1996; Greene, 1990; Halldon, 1988; Jensen & Finley, 1996; Lawson & Thompson, 1988; Lucas, 1971; Passmore & Stewart, 2002; Rutledge & Warden, 2000, 2002; Samarapungavan & Wiers, 1997; Sandoval & Morrison, 2003; Settlage, 1994; Sinatra, Southerland, McConaughy, & Demastes,…”
A Comparison of the Collaborative Scientific Argumentation Practices of Two High and Two Low Performing Groups (2011, background): “Based on the work of Stewart and colleagues (Cartier and Stewart 2000; Passmore and Stewart 2002; Stewart et al. 2005), our framework calls for students to use both empirical criteria (e.g., how well the explanation fits with available data, the predictive power of the explanation, the sufficiency”
Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students’ understanding of genetics (2007, background): “The conceptual problems are not easily separated from the empirical because they are tightly entwined so when students deal with empirical problems using models in similar ways to scientists, they also enhance their conceptual understanding (Stewart and Rudolph 2001; Passmore and Stewart 2002 ).”
What Teachers of Science Need to Know about Models: An overview (2011, methodology): “If a model fails to meet such evaluative scrutiny, it may be discarded or revised continuously as it is used for probing new phenomena and collecting further data (Passmore & Stewart, 2002).”