Students' perceptions of the nature of evolutionary theory

166 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Development and Preliminary Evaluation of the Measure of Understanding of Macroevolution: Introducing the MUM (2009, background): “BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION is often described as a central organizing principle of the biological sciences (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], 1993; Dobzhansky, 1973; National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Indeed, in the Atlas of Science Literacy (AAAS, 2001), the AAAS describes ”
More from the Horse’s Mouth: What scientists say about science as a social practice (2010, background): “What we are planning is an approach that emphasizes the discipline‐specific and context‐specific nature of scientific practice, as advocated by Rudolph ( 2000 , 2003 ), Dagher and BouJaoude ( 2005 ) and Samarapungavan et al.”
Current Status of Research in Teaching and Learning Evolution: I. Philosophical/Epistemological Issues (2010, background): “about the origin of species? Many students are unwilling to consider historical nondemonstrative evidence as valid (Dagher and BouJaoude 2005; Dagher et al. 2004).”
The Importance of Understanding the Nature of Science for Accepting Evolution (2008, background): “Although many states include “the nature of science” in their science standards, students often have robust misconceptions about the nature of science, and some science teachers share these misconceptions (e.g., Lederman 1992; Scharmann and Harris 1992; Carey and Smith 1993; Solomon et al. 1996; Dag”