Mendelian Genetics as a Platform for Teaching About Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry: The Value of Textbooks

The purpose of this study was to analyze seven widely used high school biology textbooks in order to assess the nature of science knowledge (NOS) and scientific inquiry (SI) aspects they, explicitly or implicitly, conveyed in the Mendelian genetics sections. Textbook excerpts that directly and/or fully matched our statements about NOS and SI were labeled as explicit and excerpts that partially and/or indirectly matched our statements about NOS and SI were labeled as implicit. There was a running count of each NOS and SI aspect that was identified in the textbooks and the instances were noted to be either implicit or explicit. There were 365 instances of NOS and SI aspects counted in 140 textbook excerpts. Of the 365 instances, 237 (65 %) were NOS aspects and 128 (35 %) were SI aspects. The analysis also revealed far more implicit than explicit instances of NOS and SI. Of the 365 instances, 362 (99 %) were implicit and three (1.0 %) were explicit. The three explicit instances were all SI aspects. In conclusion, the Mendelian genetics sections demonstrated a multitude of opportunities to teach NOS and SI explicitly, although what was included in textbooks was virtually all implicit. This study demonstrates the importance and value for science educators to examine how teachers use instances of NOS and SI in textbooks. Understanding how teachers use instances of NOS and SI would provide information that could be immediately implemented into professional development programs. Lastly, this research would provide textbook developers with compelling information to update the supplemental instruction materials provided to teachers.

[1]  G. Radick,et al.  Putting Mendel in His Place: How Curriculum Reform in Genetics and Counterfactual History of Science Can Work Together , 2013 .

[2]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  Nature of Science, Scientific Inquiry, and Socio-Scientific Issues Arising from Genetics: A Pathway to Developing a Scientifically Literate Citizenry , 2014 .

[3]  F. Churchill Hertwig, Weismann, and the Meaning of Reduction Division circa 1890 , 1970, Isis.

[4]  Randy L. Bell,et al.  Assessing Understanding of the Nature of Science: A Historical Perspective , 1998 .

[5]  J. B. Reid,et al.  Mendel’s Genes: Toward a Full Molecular Characterization , 2011, Genetics.

[6]  Kenneth Tobin,et al.  Second international handbook of science education , 2012 .

[7]  R. C. Laugksch Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview , 2000 .

[8]  Robert Nola,et al.  A Family Resemblance Approach to the Nature of Science for Science Education , 2011 .

[9]  Leif Östman,et al.  Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy , 2011 .

[10]  Lily E. Kay,et al.  Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code , 2000 .

[11]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  The Development, Use, and Interpretation of Nature of Science Assessments , 2014 .

[12]  Jan Sapp,et al.  Genesis: The Evolution of Biology , 2003 .

[13]  Randy L. Bell,et al.  The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural , 1998 .

[14]  M. R. Matthews International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching , 2014 .

[15]  P. Dear The Intelligibility of Nature: How Science Makes Sense of the World , 2006 .

[16]  Kostas Kampourakis The philosophy of biology : a companion for educators , 2013 .

[17]  M. R. Matthews Science teaching : the role of history and philosophy of science , 1994 .

[18]  Mary Ratcliffe,et al.  What “ideas‐about‐science” should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community , 2003 .

[19]  William Bechtel,et al.  Discovering Cell Mechanisms: The Creation of Modern Cell Biology , 2005 .

[20]  Irwin W. Sherman,et al.  Biology: a human approach , 1975 .

[21]  Eugene L. Chiappetta,et al.  Analysis of Five High School Biology Textbooks Used in the United States for Inclusion of the Nature of Science , 2007 .

[22]  Norman G. Lederman The Development of Scientific Literacy: A Function of the Interactions and Distinctions Among Subject Matter, Nature of Science, Scientific Inquiry, and Knowledge About Scientific Inquiry , 2010 .

[23]  G. Hamoir,et al.  The discovery of meiosis by E. Van Beneden, a breakthrough in the morphological phase of heredity. , 1992, The International journal of developmental biology.

[24]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  Nature of Scientific Knowledge and Scientific Inquiry: Building Instructional Capacity Through Professional Development , 2012 .

[25]  Mike U. Smith,et al.  Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science educators , 1999 .

[26]  J. Shea National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[27]  Eugene L. Chiappetta,et al.  A quantitative analysis of high school chemistry textbooks for scientific literacy themes and expository learning aids , 1991 .

[28]  Peter J. Bowler,et al.  Making Modern Science: A Historical Survey , 2005 .

[29]  Chris Sauer,et al.  25th anniversary edition , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[30]  Robert Olby,et al.  Origins of Mendelism , 1966 .

[31]  Douglas A. Roberts,et al.  Scientific Literacy/Science Literacy , 2013 .

[32]  Norman G. Lederman Nature of Science: Past, Present, and Future , 2013 .

[33]  Norman G. Lederman,et al.  Handbook of Research on Science Education , 2023 .

[34]  E. Mayr The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance , 1983 .

[35]  P. Bowler Evolution: The History of an Idea , 1984 .

[36]  Kostas Kampourakis,et al.  Mendel and the Path to Genetics: Portraying Science as a Social Process , 2013 .

[37]  E. Keller The Century of the Gene , 2000 .

[38]  A History of Model Organisms , 2010 .

[39]  D. Allchin Scientific myth-conceptions† , 2003 .

[40]  J. A. Moore,et al.  Science as a Way of Knowing: The Foundations of Modern Biology , 1993 .