A comparison study of human examples vs. non-human examples in an evolution lesson leads to differential impacts on student learning experiences in an introductory biology course.
A comparison study of human examples vs. non-human examples in an evolution lesson leads to differential impacts on student learning experiences in an introductory biology course.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12052-021-00148-w
复制
发表时间：
2021
期刊：
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Brownell SE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Grunspan DZ;Dunk RDP;Barnes ME;Wiles JR;Brownell SE
教师可以使用任意数量的物种背景来教授进化论。然而，并非所有物种的环境都是平等的，分类单元的选择可以改变学习的认知和情感要素。在使用人类例子教授进化论时尤其如此，这是一种很有前途的进化论教学方法，但也带来了独特的挑战。在这项研究中，我们测试了与使用非人类哺乳动物示例的同一课程相比，以人类示例为重点的进化课程如何影响学生的参与度、感知内容相关性、学习收益和不适程度。我们使用这个同构课程和在分部分的介绍性生物学课堂上进行的前后研究设计来隔离物种背景的重要性。对于四种兴趣测量中的两种，如果不考虑学生背景，就无法理解使用人类示例的效果。对于学习收益而言，课前内容知识较多的学生从人类示例中受益更多，而知识水平较低的学生则从非人类示例中受益更多。对于感知相关性，更接受人类进化的学生表明人类示例的内容相关性更大。无论情况如何，进化论接受度较低的学生都对课程表示了更大程度的不适。我们的结果说明了使用人类例子来教授进化论的复杂性。虽然这些例子对许多学生来说是有益的，但对于那些不太接受进化论的学生和那些进入课程时知识内容较少的学生来说，它们导致了更糟糕的结果。这些发现表明，在建立使用人类例子来教授进化论的最佳实践时，需要考虑不同的学生背景。在线版本包含可在 10.1186/s12052-021-00148-w 获取的补充材料。
Instructors can teach evolution using any number of species contexts. However, not all species contexts are equal, and taxa choice can alter both cognitive and affective elements of learning. This is particularly true when teaching evolution using human examples, a promising method for evolution instruction that nevertheless comes with unique challenges. In this study, we tested how an evolution lesson focused on a human example may impact students’ engagement, perceived content relevance, learning gains, and level of discomfort, when compared to the same lesson using a non-human mammal example. We use this isomorphic lesson and a pre-post study design administered in a split-section introductory biology classroom to isolate the importance of the species context. For two of the four measurements of interest, the effect of using human examples could not be understood without accounting for student background. For learning gains, students with greater pre-class content knowledge benefited more from the human examples, while those with low levels of knowledge benefited from the non-human example. For perceived relevance, students who were more accepting of human evolution indicated greater content relevance from the human example. Regardless of condition, students with lower evolution acceptance reported greater levels of discomfort with the lesson. Our results illustrate the complexities of using human examples to teach evolution. While these examples were beneficial for many students, they resulted in worse outcomes for students that were less accepting of evolution and those who entered the course with less content knowledge. These findings demonstrate the need to consider diverse student backgrounds when establishing best practices for using human examples to teach evolution. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12052-021-00148-w.