Evolution and the nature of science: On the historical discord and its implications for education

Research in the teaching and learning of evolutionary biology has revealed persistent difficulties in student understanding of fundamental Darwinian concepts. These difficulties may be traced, in part, to science instruction that is based on philosophical conceptions of science that are no longer viewed as adequately characterizing the diverse nature of scientific practice, especially in evolutionary biology. This mismatch between evolution as practiced and the nature of science as perceived by researchers and educators has a long history extending back to the publication of Darwin's theory of natural selection. An examination of how this theory was received by the scientific community of the time may provide insight into some of the difficulties that students have today in learning these important biological concepts. The primary difficulties center around issues of metaphysics and scientific method, aspects of the nature of science too often ignored in science education. Our intent is not to offer a specific course of action to remedy the problems educators currently face, but rather to suggest an alternative path one might take to eventually reach a solution. That path, we argue, should include the use of broader models of science that incorporate these elements of scientific practice to structure teaching and education research in evolution. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 35: 1069–1089, 1998     

A value‐added study of the impact of science curriculum reform using the National Pupil Database

This article compares the examination performance of students following General Certificate of Secondary Education Applied Science and Double Award science on a value‐added basis. It uses data from the National Pupil Database, which are analysed by a variety of methods, including multilevel modelling. It argues that the claims made within Office for Standards in Education reports on the impact of the new Applied Science course are inaccurate, and in some cases positively wrong. The authors' analysis, based on the second (2003–05) cohort of students following the course, shows that students of lower attainment at Key Stage 3 appear to perform better than would have been predicted from their Key Stage 3 attainment, but that higher attaining pupils perform less well. Schools offering Applied Science show greater diversity in the value‐added effects they produce than they do with Double Award science. The article argues that analyses of this kind are of value in seeking to understand the impact of curriculum reform, but that they are dangerous as a generalized guide for policy. They must be complemented by work in schools in which the sources of the effects observed and of school diversity are examined.     

Justification and Persuasion about Cloning: Arguments in Hwang’s Paper and Journalistic Reported Versions

We examine the argumentative structure of Hwang et al.’s (2004) paper about human somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT, or ‘therapeutic cloning’), contrasted with four Journalistic Reported Versions (JRV) of it, and with students’ summaries of one JRV. As the evaluation of evidence is one of the critical features of argumentation (Jiménez-Aleixandre 2008), the analysis focuses on the use of evidence, drawing from instruments to analyze written argumentation (Kelly et al. 2008) and from studies about the structure of empirical research reports (Swales 2001). The objectives are: 1) To examine the use of evidence and the argumentative structure of Hwang et al.’s Science, 303: 1669–1674 (2004) original paper in terms of the criteria: a) pertinence of the evidence presented to the claims; b) sufficiency of the evidence for the purpose of supporting the claims; and c) coordination of the evidence across epistemic levels. 2) To explore how the structure of Hwang’s paper translates into the JRV and into university students’ perceptions about the evidence supporting the claims. The argumentative structure of Hwang’s paper is such that its apparently ostensible main claim about NT constitutes a justification for a second claim about its therapeutic applications, for which no evidence is offered. However, this second claim receives prominent treatment in the JRV and in the students’ summaries. Implications for promoting critical reading in the classroom are discussed.     

Supporting Teaching and Learning Using Authentic Scientific Texts: A Rejoinder to Danielle J. Ford

In her commentary Danielle J. Ford mainly focused on three issues that highlight the promises and challenges for the use of Adapted Primary Literature (APL) in science curricula: the possible contribution of APL to authentic experiences in secondary schools, implementation issues of APL including the support required for the teachers, and the possibilities to extend the use of APL to younger and older students. In this rejoinder, we first offer some general comments on Ford’s commentary. Then we offer more specific comments on two areas of her response, authenticity and the support for teachers.     

What do students consider useful about student ratings?

Although measures of student ratings of instruction have been developed and examined empirically, students' attitudes about the utility of these ratings have yet to be meaningfully quantified. Using survey responses from 1229 students at a major Canadian university, we developed a psychometrically sound measure of the usefulness of student ratings. A principal components analysis with oblique rotation was conducted and three factors (Instructor characteristics, Course characteristics and Instructor's relative ranking) were obtained that explained 64% of the variance in six iterations. The usefulness of these three types of ratings information differs according to several student and course characteristics. The present results provide evidence for both reliability and validity of the instrument as an indicator of the utility of teaching evaluation for students.     

Effectiveness of peers in delivering programs or motivating older people to increase their participation in physical activity: Systematic review and meta-analysis

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of peers to deliver programs or encourage older people to be physically active and improve physical outcomes. Peer reviewed articles published in English between January 1976 and June 2016, retrieved from six databases according to the predefined inclusion criteria were included. Where possible results were pooled and meta-analyses conducted. Eighteen articles were included in the review, a total of 3,492 intervention participants, average age 66.5 years and 67.1% were female. Overall, study quality was medium to high. Interventions mainly included resistance, flexibility and cardiovascular training, however there was one aquatic exercise group. Eight studies were delivered by peers and five utilised peer support, which included advice and being positive but was not directly linked to an exercise intervention. While 16 of the 18 studies reported improvement in levels of physical activity and/or noted physical benefits by peer involvement, the meta-analyses findings supported the control groups for the six-minute-walk-test and the timed-up-and-go test. Findings from this review suggest exercise programs involving peers can promote and maintain adherence to exercise programs. However, results were inconclusive as to whether peers have a positive effect on improving older people’s physical function.