Students’ Preconceptions About Evolution: How Accurate is the Characterization as “Lamarckian” when Considering the History of Evolutionary Thought?

By Kostas Kampourakis, Vasso Zogza. 2007

93 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/905d72397f9b6100dacea01652f12e33f395f214

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. T. Gregory
2. E. Evans
3. Vasso Zogza
4. Kostas Kampourakis
5. Mike U. Smith

In History and Philosophy of Science

1. T. Gregory
2. E. Evans
3. Vasso Zogza
4. Kostas Kampourakis
5. Mike U. Smith

In Social Psychology

1. T. Gregory
2. E. Evans
3. Vasso Zogza
4. Kostas Kampourakis
5. Mike U. Smith

Citations in the corpus

• A Conceptual Guide to Natural History Museum Visitors’ Understanding of Evolution (2009, background): “Psychologically, there is a key distinction to be made Journal of Research in Science Teaching between internal/intrinsic and external/extrinsic teleological processes (for a philosophical equivalent, see Kampourakis & Zogza, 2007, p. 395).”
• Conceptual Change and Evolutionary Biology: A Developmental Analysis (2008, background): “…about this research is the extensive documentation of the overlap between students’ intuitive notions of evolutionary change and pre-Darwinian evolutionary concepts (e.g., Chambers, 1994; Mayr, 1982; Shtulman, 2006), though they are certainly not identical (Evans, 2001; Kampourakis & Zogza, 2007).”
• Understanding Natural Selection: Essential Concepts and Common Misconceptions (2009, background): “For recent critiques of the tendency to describe various misconceptions as Lamarckian, see Geraedts and Boersma (2006) and Kampourakis and Zogza (2007).”
• Preliminary Evolutionary Explanations: A Basic Framework for Conceptual Change and Explanatory Coherence in Evolution (2009, background): “However, it has been shown that this characterization does not adequately describe secondary students’ preconceptions ( Kampourakis and Zogza 2007 ).”
• Students’ intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations (2008, background): “In many of the aforementioned studies, students’ preconceptions have been characterized as Lamarckian; however this characterization does not adequately describe their (predominantly teleological) intuitive explanations ( Kampourakis and Zogza 2006 ).”