Fragmented Knowledge and Missing Connections between Knowledge from Different Hierarchical Organisational Levels of Reproduction among Adolescents and Young Adults
Keywords:
knowledge, biology, misconceptions, genetics, reproduction
Abstract
Based on the responses of our sample (N = 310) of adolescents and young adults from Slovenia (students of secondary and tertiary schools, university students) to a number of tasks covering reproduction, from the molecular to organismal levels, it can be concluded that their knowledge is seriously flawed. Correlations of knowledge between individual tasks are low, or even negative, showing patchiness and missed connections between different aspects of reproduction. Our study confirms the well-known difficulties in building a consistent body of knowledge on the genetic–inheritance axis while expanding it to the anatomy and physiology of reproduction. It is crucial to stress the quality of elementary school biology, and science (biology) courses in secondary schools because, for most people, this will be the last formal contact with some important topics that could influence their life decisions.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
AHD. Reproduction. (n.d.) American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. (2011). Retrieved 11. 6. 2016 from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/reproduction.
Aivelo, T., & Uitto, A. (2015). Genetic determinism in the Finnish upper secondary school biology textbooks. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 11(2), 139–152.
Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2006). Twenty-five years of the didactic transposition. ICMI Bulletin, 58, 51–63. Retrieved 9. 3. 2017 from https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/54469/mod_resource/content/1/Texto%20ATD/25%20anos%20de%20ATD.pdf.
Castéra, J., & Clément, P. (2014). Teachers’ conceptions about the genetic determinism of human behaviour: A survey in 23 countries. Science & Education, 23(2), 417–443.
Castéra, J., Bruguière, C., & Clément, P. (2008). Genetic diseases and genetic determinism models in French secondary school biology textbooks. Journal of Biological Education, 42(2), 53–59.
Children’s ideas about reproduction and inheritance. National Curriculum Science Support Project, 1992. Retrieved 12. 6. 2016 from https://www.learner.org/courses/essential/life/support/pdf/4_Reproduction.pdf.
Choi, S. I., & Cho, H. H. (1987). An Analysis of Misconceptions about the Concepts of Cell-division, Reproduction and Fertilization in High School Biology Textbook I. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 7(1), 1–17.
Clément, P., & Castéra, J. (2014). Multiple representations of human genetics in biology textbooks. In D. F. Treagust & C. Y. Tsui (Eds.), Multiple representations in biological education (pp. 147–163). Springer. Netherlands.
De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 105–113.
De Meeûs, T., Prugnolle, F., & Agnew, P. (2007). Asexual reproduction: genetics and evolutionary aspects. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 64(11), 1355–1372.
Dikmenli, M. (2010). Misconceptions of cell division held by student teachers in biology: A drawing analysis. Scientific Research and Essay, 5(2), 235–247.
Dos Santos, V. C., Joaquim, L. M., & El-Hani, C. N. (2012). Hybrid deterministic views about genes in biology textbooks: A key problem in genetics teaching. Science & Education, 21(4), 543–578.
Engel Clough, E., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1985). Children’s understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19(4), 304–310.
Flowers-Coulson, P. A., Kushner, M. A., & Bankowski, S. (2000). The information is out there, but is anyone getting it? Adolescent misconceptions about sexuality education and reproductive health and the use of the internet to get answers. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 25(2-3), 178–188.
Folse, H. J., & Roughgarden, J. (2010). What is an individual organism? A multilevel selection perspective. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 85(4), 447–472.
Gericke, N. M., Hagberg, M., dos Santos, V. C., Joaquim, L. M., & El-Hani, C. N. (2014). Conceptual variation or incoherence? Textbook discourse on genes in six countries. Science & Education, 23(2), 381–416.
Gerstein, M. B., Bruce, C., Rozowsky, J. S., Zheng, D., Du, J., Korbel, J. O., ... & Snyder, M. (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome research, 17(6), 669–681.
Hamani, Y., Sciaki-Tamir, Y., Deri-Hasid, R., Miller-Pogrund, T., Milwidsky, A., & Haimov-
Kochman, R. (2007). Misconceptions about oral contraception pills among adolescents and
physicians. Human reproduction, 22(12), 3078–3083.
Haque, F., Gottesman, I. I., & Wong, A. H. (2009). Not really identical: epigenetic differences in monozygotic twins and implications for twin studies in psychiatry. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C: Seminars in Medical Genetics, 151(2), 136–141). Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company.
Knippels, M. C. P. J. (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education: The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Utrecht. Online: http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/219.
Kurt, H., & Ekici, G. (2013). Determining cognitive structures and alternative conceptions on the concept of reproduction (The case of pre-service biology teachers). Creative Education, 4(9), 572–587.
Lewis, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance-do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177–195.
Lin, S. W. (2004). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of flowering plant growth and development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 175–199.
Martins, L. A. C. P. (2010). The dissemination of the chromosome theory of Mendelian heredity by Morgan and his collaborators around 1915: a case study on the distortion of science by scientists. Filosofia e História da Biologia, 5(2), 327–367.
Merchant, J. S., Brown, P. R., Cecil, H., Grimley, D., & Oh, M. K. (2000,). Adolescents and sexually transmitted diseases: Lack of common knowledge and false beliefs. Journal of Investigative Medicine, 48(1), 139A–139A.
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why humans have sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(4), 477–507.
Mintzes, J. J., Trowbridge, J. E., Arnaudin, M. W., & Wandersee, J. H. (1991). Children’s biology: Studies on conceptual development in the life sciences. In S. Glynn, R. Yeany & B. Britton (Eds.), The psychology of learning science (pp. 179–202). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nguyen, S. P., & Rosengren, K. S. (2004). Parental reports of children’s biological knowledge and misconceptions. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(5), 411–420.
Obeso, J. R. (2004). A hierarchical perspective in allocation to reproduction from whole plant to fruit and seed level. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6(4), 217–225.
Pinedaâ€Krch, M., & Lehtilä, K. (2004). Costs and benefits of genetic heterogeneity within organisms. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 17(6), 1167–1177.
Prokop, P., & FanÄoviÄova, J. 2006. Students’ ideas about the human body: do they really draw what they know? Journal of Baltic Science Education, 10(2), 86–95.
Prokop, P., & FanÄoviÄová, J. (2008). Students’understanding of human pregnancy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 7(1), 37–47.
Reiss, M. J., Tunnicliffe, S. D., Andersen, A. M., Bartoszeck, A., Carvalho, G. S., Chen, S. Y., ... & Mulemwa, J. (2002). An international study of young peoples’ drawings of what is inside themselves. Journal of Biological Education, 36(2), 58–64.
Schussler, E. E. (2008). From flowers to fruits: How children’s books represent plant reproduction. International Journal of Science Education, 30(12), 1677–1696.
Sesli, E., & Kara, Y. (2012). Development and application of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of cell division and reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 214–225.
Smith, M. U., & Adkison, L. R. (2010). Updating the Model Definition of the Gene in the Modern Genomic Era with Implications for Instruction. Science & Education, 19(1), 1–20.
Smolkin, L. B., & Donovan, C. A. (2015). Science and Literacy: Considering the Role of Texts in Early Childhood Science Education. In K. C. Trundle & M. Sackes (Eds.), Research in Early Childhood Science Education (pp. 211–236). Springer. Netherlands.
Å orgo, A., & AmbrožiÄâ€DolinÅ¡ek, J. (2010). Knowlege of, attitudes toward, and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among prospective teachers of biology, home economics, and grade school in Slovenia. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 38(3), 141–150.
Šorgo, A., & Ambrozis-Dolinsek, J. (2009). The relationship among knowledge of, attitudes toward and acceptance of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among Slovenian teachers. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 12(4), 1–2.
Šorgo, A., Ambrozic-Dolinsek, J., Usak, M., & Özel, M. (2011). Knowledge about and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among pre-service teachers: a comparative study of Turkey and Slovenia. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 14(4), 5.
Šorgo, A., Usak, M., Aydogdu, M., Keles, O., & Ambrozic-Dolinsek, J. (2011). Biology teaching in upper secondary schools: comparative study between Slovenia and Turkey. Energy education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3(3), 305–314.
Å orgo, A., Usak, M., Kubiatko, M., FanÄoviÄova, J., Prokop, P., Puhek, M., ... & Bahar, M. (2014). A cross-cultural study on freshmen’s knowledge of genetics, evolution, and the nature of science. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(1), 6–18.
Šorgo, A., & Špernjak, A. (2012). Practical work in biology, chemistry and physics at lower secondary and general upper secondary schools in Slovenia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(1), 11–19.
Å traus, M., & Markelj, N. (2011). Doseganje temeljnih in najviÅ¡jih ravni pismenosti slovenskih uÄenk in uÄencev v rezultatih raziskave PISA. [Attainment of Baseline and Highest Levels of Literacy Among Slovene Students According to PISA Study Results]. Sodobna Pedagogika, 62(2), 158–198.
Tsui, C. Y., & Treagust, D. (2010). Evaluating Secondary Students’ Scientific Reasoning in Genetics Using a Twoâ€Tier Diagnostic Instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1073–1098.
Tuomi, J., & Vuorisalo, T. (1989). Hierarchical selection in modular organisms. Trends in ecology & evolution, 4(7), 209–213.
Veiga, L., Teixeira, F., Martins, I., & Meliçoâ€Silvestre, A. (2006). Sexuality and human reproduction: a study of scientific knowledge, behaviours and beliefs of Portuguese future elementary school teachers. Sex Education, 6(1), 17–29.
Visscher, P. M., Hill, W. G., & Wray, N. R. (2008). Heritability in the genomics era–concepts and misconceptions. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9(4), 255–266.
Wandersee, J. H., Fisher, K. M., & Moody, D. E. (2000). The nature of biology knowledge; Mapping biology knowledge (pp. 25–37). Norwell: Kluwer.
Wynn, L. L., Foster, A. M., & Trussell, J. (2009). Can I get pregnant from oral sex? Sexual health misconceptions in e-mails to a reproductive health website. Contraception, 79(2), 91–97.
Yip, D. Y. (1998). Children’s misconceptions on reproduction and implications for teaching. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 21–26.
Aivelo, T., & Uitto, A. (2015). Genetic determinism in the Finnish upper secondary school biology textbooks. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 11(2), 139–152.
Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2006). Twenty-five years of the didactic transposition. ICMI Bulletin, 58, 51–63. Retrieved 9. 3. 2017 from https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/54469/mod_resource/content/1/Texto%20ATD/25%20anos%20de%20ATD.pdf.
Castéra, J., & Clément, P. (2014). Teachers’ conceptions about the genetic determinism of human behaviour: A survey in 23 countries. Science & Education, 23(2), 417–443.
Castéra, J., Bruguière, C., & Clément, P. (2008). Genetic diseases and genetic determinism models in French secondary school biology textbooks. Journal of Biological Education, 42(2), 53–59.
Children’s ideas about reproduction and inheritance. National Curriculum Science Support Project, 1992. Retrieved 12. 6. 2016 from https://www.learner.org/courses/essential/life/support/pdf/4_Reproduction.pdf.
Choi, S. I., & Cho, H. H. (1987). An Analysis of Misconceptions about the Concepts of Cell-division, Reproduction and Fertilization in High School Biology Textbook I. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 7(1), 1–17.
Clément, P., & Castéra, J. (2014). Multiple representations of human genetics in biology textbooks. In D. F. Treagust & C. Y. Tsui (Eds.), Multiple representations in biological education (pp. 147–163). Springer. Netherlands.
De Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 105–113.
De Meeûs, T., Prugnolle, F., & Agnew, P. (2007). Asexual reproduction: genetics and evolutionary aspects. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 64(11), 1355–1372.
Dikmenli, M. (2010). Misconceptions of cell division held by student teachers in biology: A drawing analysis. Scientific Research and Essay, 5(2), 235–247.
Dos Santos, V. C., Joaquim, L. M., & El-Hani, C. N. (2012). Hybrid deterministic views about genes in biology textbooks: A key problem in genetics teaching. Science & Education, 21(4), 543–578.
Engel Clough, E., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1985). Children’s understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19(4), 304–310.
Flowers-Coulson, P. A., Kushner, M. A., & Bankowski, S. (2000). The information is out there, but is anyone getting it? Adolescent misconceptions about sexuality education and reproductive health and the use of the internet to get answers. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 25(2-3), 178–188.
Folse, H. J., & Roughgarden, J. (2010). What is an individual organism? A multilevel selection perspective. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 85(4), 447–472.
Gericke, N. M., Hagberg, M., dos Santos, V. C., Joaquim, L. M., & El-Hani, C. N. (2014). Conceptual variation or incoherence? Textbook discourse on genes in six countries. Science & Education, 23(2), 381–416.
Gerstein, M. B., Bruce, C., Rozowsky, J. S., Zheng, D., Du, J., Korbel, J. O., ... & Snyder, M. (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome research, 17(6), 669–681.
Hamani, Y., Sciaki-Tamir, Y., Deri-Hasid, R., Miller-Pogrund, T., Milwidsky, A., & Haimov-
Kochman, R. (2007). Misconceptions about oral contraception pills among adolescents and
physicians. Human reproduction, 22(12), 3078–3083.
Haque, F., Gottesman, I. I., & Wong, A. H. (2009). Not really identical: epigenetic differences in monozygotic twins and implications for twin studies in psychiatry. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part C: Seminars in Medical Genetics, 151(2), 136–141). Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company.
Knippels, M. C. P. J. (2002). Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education: The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Utrecht. Online: http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/219.
Kurt, H., & Ekici, G. (2013). Determining cognitive structures and alternative conceptions on the concept of reproduction (The case of pre-service biology teachers). Creative Education, 4(9), 572–587.
Lewis, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance-do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177–195.
Lin, S. W. (2004). Development and application of a two-tier diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of flowering plant growth and development. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 175–199.
Martins, L. A. C. P. (2010). The dissemination of the chromosome theory of Mendelian heredity by Morgan and his collaborators around 1915: a case study on the distortion of science by scientists. Filosofia e História da Biologia, 5(2), 327–367.
Merchant, J. S., Brown, P. R., Cecil, H., Grimley, D., & Oh, M. K. (2000,). Adolescents and sexually transmitted diseases: Lack of common knowledge and false beliefs. Journal of Investigative Medicine, 48(1), 139A–139A.
Meston, C. M., & Buss, D. M. (2007). Why humans have sex. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(4), 477–507.
Mintzes, J. J., Trowbridge, J. E., Arnaudin, M. W., & Wandersee, J. H. (1991). Children’s biology: Studies on conceptual development in the life sciences. In S. Glynn, R. Yeany & B. Britton (Eds.), The psychology of learning science (pp. 179–202). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Nguyen, S. P., & Rosengren, K. S. (2004). Parental reports of children’s biological knowledge and misconceptions. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28(5), 411–420.
Obeso, J. R. (2004). A hierarchical perspective in allocation to reproduction from whole plant to fruit and seed level. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 6(4), 217–225.
Pinedaâ€Krch, M., & Lehtilä, K. (2004). Costs and benefits of genetic heterogeneity within organisms. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 17(6), 1167–1177.
Prokop, P., & FanÄoviÄova, J. 2006. Students’ ideas about the human body: do they really draw what they know? Journal of Baltic Science Education, 10(2), 86–95.
Prokop, P., & FanÄoviÄová, J. (2008). Students’understanding of human pregnancy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 7(1), 37–47.
Reiss, M. J., Tunnicliffe, S. D., Andersen, A. M., Bartoszeck, A., Carvalho, G. S., Chen, S. Y., ... & Mulemwa, J. (2002). An international study of young peoples’ drawings of what is inside themselves. Journal of Biological Education, 36(2), 58–64.
Schussler, E. E. (2008). From flowers to fruits: How children’s books represent plant reproduction. International Journal of Science Education, 30(12), 1677–1696.
Sesli, E., & Kara, Y. (2012). Development and application of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic test for high school students’ understanding of cell division and reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 46(4), 214–225.
Smith, M. U., & Adkison, L. R. (2010). Updating the Model Definition of the Gene in the Modern Genomic Era with Implications for Instruction. Science & Education, 19(1), 1–20.
Smolkin, L. B., & Donovan, C. A. (2015). Science and Literacy: Considering the Role of Texts in Early Childhood Science Education. In K. C. Trundle & M. Sackes (Eds.), Research in Early Childhood Science Education (pp. 211–236). Springer. Netherlands.
Å orgo, A., & AmbrožiÄâ€DolinÅ¡ek, J. (2010). Knowlege of, attitudes toward, and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among prospective teachers of biology, home economics, and grade school in Slovenia. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 38(3), 141–150.
Šorgo, A., & Ambrozis-Dolinsek, J. (2009). The relationship among knowledge of, attitudes toward and acceptance of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) among Slovenian teachers. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 12(4), 1–2.
Šorgo, A., Ambrozic-Dolinsek, J., Usak, M., & Özel, M. (2011). Knowledge about and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among pre-service teachers: a comparative study of Turkey and Slovenia. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 14(4), 5.
Šorgo, A., Usak, M., Aydogdu, M., Keles, O., & Ambrozic-Dolinsek, J. (2011). Biology teaching in upper secondary schools: comparative study between Slovenia and Turkey. Energy education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 3(3), 305–314.
Å orgo, A., Usak, M., Kubiatko, M., FanÄoviÄova, J., Prokop, P., Puhek, M., ... & Bahar, M. (2014). A cross-cultural study on freshmen’s knowledge of genetics, evolution, and the nature of science. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(1), 6–18.
Šorgo, A., & Špernjak, A. (2012). Practical work in biology, chemistry and physics at lower secondary and general upper secondary schools in Slovenia. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(1), 11–19.
Å traus, M., & Markelj, N. (2011). Doseganje temeljnih in najviÅ¡jih ravni pismenosti slovenskih uÄenk in uÄencev v rezultatih raziskave PISA. [Attainment of Baseline and Highest Levels of Literacy Among Slovene Students According to PISA Study Results]. Sodobna Pedagogika, 62(2), 158–198.
Tsui, C. Y., & Treagust, D. (2010). Evaluating Secondary Students’ Scientific Reasoning in Genetics Using a Twoâ€Tier Diagnostic Instrument. International Journal of Science Education, 32(8), 1073–1098.
Tuomi, J., & Vuorisalo, T. (1989). Hierarchical selection in modular organisms. Trends in ecology & evolution, 4(7), 209–213.
Veiga, L., Teixeira, F., Martins, I., & Meliçoâ€Silvestre, A. (2006). Sexuality and human reproduction: a study of scientific knowledge, behaviours and beliefs of Portuguese future elementary school teachers. Sex Education, 6(1), 17–29.
Visscher, P. M., Hill, W. G., & Wray, N. R. (2008). Heritability in the genomics era–concepts and misconceptions. Nature Reviews Genetics, 9(4), 255–266.
Wandersee, J. H., Fisher, K. M., & Moody, D. E. (2000). The nature of biology knowledge; Mapping biology knowledge (pp. 25–37). Norwell: Kluwer.
Wynn, L. L., Foster, A. M., & Trussell, J. (2009). Can I get pregnant from oral sex? Sexual health misconceptions in e-mails to a reproductive health website. Contraception, 79(2), 91–97.
Yip, D. Y. (1998). Children’s misconceptions on reproduction and implications for teaching. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 21–26.
Published
2017-03-31
How to Cite
Šorgo, A., & Šiling, R. (2017). Fragmented Knowledge and Missing Connections between Knowledge from Different Hierarchical Organisational Levels of Reproduction among Adolescents and Young Adults. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 7(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.15
Section
FOCUS
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
