Empirical refinements of a molecular genetics learning progression: The molecular constructs
Empirical refinements of a molecular genetics learning progression: The molecular constructs
复制标题
分子遗传学学习进程的实证改进：分子结构
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2016
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lisa Kenyon
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Amber Todd;Lisa Kenyon
这篇文章描述了对邓肯分子遗传学学习进展的八个结构中的四个的修订[邓肯，罗卡特和亚登，(2009)]。由于学习进展在被多轮实证研究证实之前仍然是假设模型，这些修订是验证这一进展的重要一步。我们的修订是基于从三个课堂情境(n = 121)中获得的十年级学生的经验数据；尽管我们的研究是在进展的上限的学生中完成的，但学生在教学之前持有天真的想法，这使得我们能够在一个学年的过程中跟踪他们的想法通过每个结构的所有水平。我们使用学生的前后评估和访谈，修改了围绕遗传学分子模型的四个结构。我们发现，十年级学生确实持有与假设水平一致的想法，以及几个不包括在内的中间想法。我们的修订包括增加学生的想法，这些想法是每个结构中重要的概念垫脚石，以及其他修改，如拆分和组合级别，将想法转移到其他结构，改变结构的概念进程和拆分结构。除了修订，我们还确定了每个构造中的挑战。即使在授课结束后，学生们也很难理解基因编码蛋白质，蛋白质连接基因和特征，以及差异基因表达如何导致特定细胞内不同的蛋白质谱系。我们的发现表明，课堂教学应该更多地关注蛋白质：它们是如何产生的，它们的功能是什么，以及细胞如何表达不同的蛋白质。
This article describes revisions to four of the eight constructs of the Duncan molecular genetics learning progression [Duncan, Rogat, & Yarden, (2009)]. As learning progressions remain hypothetical models until validated by multiple rounds of empirical studies, these revisions are an important step toward validating the progression. Our revisions are based on empirical data obtained from tenth grade students in three classroom contexts (n = 121); although our study was done with students at the upper bounds of the progression, students held naive ideas prior to instruction which allowed us to track their ideas through all the levels of each construct during the course of one academic year. We revised the four constructs that center around the molecular model of genetics using students’ pre/post assessments and interviews. We found that tenth grade students do hold ideas consistent with the hypothesized levels in the progression as well as several intermediate ideas not included. Our revisions include adding student ideas that are important conceptual stepping stones in each construct as well as other modifications such as splitting and combining levels, moving ideas to other constructs, changing the conceptual progression of a construct and splitting a construct. Along with the revisions, we identified challenges in each construct. Even after instruction, students had difficulties understanding that genes code for proteins, that proteins connect genes and traits, and how differential gene expression leads to different repertoires of proteins inside of specialized cells. Our findings indicate that classroom instruction should focus more on proteins: how they are created, what their functions are, and how cells express different proteins.