Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evidence for the Success of a Quantitative Assessment Instrument for Teaching Evolution in Primary Schools in England

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolution Education Re-considered

Abstract

Teaching evolution in primary schools is important, not only to form the foundation of a planned spiral curriculum but also to address alternative conceptions before they have a chance to become entrenched. However, there is little research into how best to teach evolution in primary schools, with some doubting that abstract concepts of evolution can be understood in this age group. While there are several untested proposed lessons, there is little evidence that evolution understanding in this age group can be fairly assessed in a quantitative framework. We present an assessment instrument with items selected and modified from the AAAS Project 2061 Evolution and Natural Selection test base and show that it is fit for purpose. We also report initial results, employing this tool, from a large trial (n > 1000) in 17 primary and middle schools. We show that a four-lesson scheme of work (variation, natural selection , geological timelines and homology/common ancestry) leads to increased understanding (mean increase in score ~16%) in students of all abilities. We additionally show evidence for both longer-term retention and waning of understanding. Using the successful intervention, we sought to identify parameters that might explain variation in response. We examined three student-level predictors of improvement and, after control for pre-test score, found that ability and gender (females > males) have predictive ability, while age does not. In an exploratory analysis, we considered numerous class-/school-level predictors and reported that teacher acceptance of evolution was the only factor that significantly correlated with student improvement in score (but not after Bonferroni correction). We conclude that the assessment method is fit for purpose and the intervention shows evidence of working well, including for longer-term retention. We aim to replicate these results with a second tranche of independent data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aguillard, D. W. (1998). An analysis of factors influencing the teaching of biological evolution in Louisiana public secondary schools (Vol. 60-03). ProQuest dissertations and theses; Thesis (Ph.D.), Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College, 1998, Dissertation Abstracts International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, S., & Saffer, J. (2013). Can children read evolutionary trees? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 59(2), 221–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerson, V., & Donnelly, L. A. (2010). Teaching nature of science to K-2 students: What understandings can they attain? International Journal of Science Education, 32(1), 97–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allgaier, J. (2009). Scientific experts and the controversy about teaching creation/evolution in the UK Press. Science & Education, 19(6–8), 797–819. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9195-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alters, B. J. (2005). Teaching biological evolution in higher education: Methodological, religious, and nonreligious issues. Jones & Bartlett Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alters, B. J., & Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56(10), 1891–1901.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 952–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. (1992). Gender stereotyping of school subjects. The Psychologist, 5(2), 66–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandoli, J. H. (2008). Do state science standards matter? Comparing student perceptions of the coverage of evolution in Indiana & Ohio public high schools. The American Biology Teacher, 70(4), 212–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beard, M. N. C. E. N. J. (1996). Better biology teaching by emphasizing evolution & the nature of science. The American Biology Teacher, 58(6), 332–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley, P. M., Bloom, M. V., & Wise, S. B. (2012). Challenges and opportunities for teaching and designing effective K-12 evolution curricula. In Evolution challenges: Integrating research and practice in teaching and learning about evolution (p. 287).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, M., & Plutzer, E. (2010). Evolution, creationism, and the battle to control America’s classrooms. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkman, M., & Plutzer, E. (2011). Defeating creationism in the courtroom, but not in the classroom. Science, 331(6016), 404–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berti, A. E., Toneatti, L., & Rosati, V. (2010). Children’s conceptions about the origin of species: A study of Italian children’s conceptions with and without instruction. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(4), 506–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, K. L. (2008). The evolution battles in high-school science classes: Who is teaching what? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 6(2), 69–74. https://doi.org/10.1890/070013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brem, S. K., Ranney, M., & Schindel, J. (2003). Perceived consequences of evolution: College students perceive negative personal and social impact in evolutionary theory. Science Education, 87(2), 181–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browning, E., & Hohenstein, J. (2013). The use of narrative to promote primary school children’s understanding of evolution. Education 3-13 (ahead-of-print), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campos, R., & Sá-Pinto, A. (2013). Early evolution of evolutionary thinking: Teaching biological evolution in elementary schools. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 6(1), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: Bradford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2007). Why aren’t more women in science. In Top researchers debate the evidence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanet, B., & Lusignan, F. (2008). Teaching evolution in primary schools: An example in French classrooms. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(1), 136–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0095-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, L., & Saccheri, I. (2012). The peppered moth and industrial melanism: Evolution of a natural selection case study. Heredity, 110(3), 207–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deniz, H., & Donnelly, L. A. (2011). Preservice secondary science teachers’ acceptance of evolutionary theory and factors related to acceptance. Reports of the National Center for Science Education, 31(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodick, J., & Orion, N. (2003). Cognitive factors affecting student understanding of geologic time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 415–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engel Clough, E., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1985). Children’s understanding of inheritance. Journal of Biological Education, 19(4), 304–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, E. M. (2008). Conceptual change and evolutionary biology: A developmental analysis. In International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 263–294).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fail, J. (2008). A no-holds-barred evolution curriculum for elementary and junior high school students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1(1), 56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, M., & Chi, M. T. (1998). The nature of naive explanations of natural selection. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1231–1256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan, J. C., & Roseman, J. E. (2011). Assessing middle and high school students’ understanding of evolution with standards-based items. Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting, Orlando, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, S. R., & Meisels, G. G. (2010). Florida teachers’ attitudes about teaching evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 72(2), 96–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geary, D. C. (2006). Evolutionary developmental psychology: Current status and future directions. Developmental Review, 26(2), 113–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaze, A. L., & Goldston, M. J. (2015). US science teaching and learning of evolution: A critical review of the literature 2000–2014. Science Education, 99(3), 500–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldston, M. J., & Kyzer, P. (2009). Teaching evolution: Narratives with a view from three southern biology teachers in the USA. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(7), 762–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales, P., Guzmán, J. C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D., & Williams, T. (2004). Highlights from the trends in international mathematics and science study (TIMSS), 2003. NCES 2005-005. US Department of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, T. R. (2009). Understanding natural selection: Essential concepts and common misconceptions. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 156–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, J. A., & Brem, S. K. (2004). Teaching evolutionary biology: Pressures, stress, and coping. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 791–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ha, M., Haury, D. L., & Nehm, R. H. (2012). Feeling of certainty: Uncovering a missing link between knowledge and acceptance of evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 95–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R., & Saccuzzo, D. (1997). Psychological testing: Principles, applications and issues (4e éd.). Pacific Grove: Brooks: Cole Publishing (1re éd. 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, D., Emmons, N. A., Seston Schillaci, R., & Ganea, P. A. (2014). Young children can be taught basic natural selection using a picture-storybook intervention. Psychological Science, 25(4), 893–902. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613516009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, D., & Rosset, E. (2009). The human function compunction: Teleological explanation in adults. Cognition, 111(1), 138–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Jr., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S. (1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (automated readability index, fog count and flesch reading ease formula) for navy enlisted personnel. Retrieved from.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, A. E., & Thompson, L. D. (1988). Formal reasoning ability and misconceptions concerning genetics and natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(9), 733–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legare, C. H., Lane, J. D., & Evans, E. M. (2013). Anthropomorphizing science: How does it affect the development of evolutionary concepts? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 59(2), 168–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, P. J., & Guillaume, A. M. (2010). Teachers, evolution, and religion: No resolution in sight. Review of Religious Research, 349–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Losh, S. C., & Nzekwe, B. (2011). Creatures in the classroom: Preservice teacher beliefs about fantastic beasts, magic, extraterrestrials, evolution and creationism. Science & Education, 20(5–6), 473–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majerus, M. E. (2009). Industrial melanism in the peppered moth, Biston betularia: An excellent teaching example of Darwinian evolution in action. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(1), 63–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International results in science. ERIC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead, R., Hejmadi, M., & Hurst, L. D. (2017). Teaching genetics prior to teaching evolution improves evolution understanding but not acceptance. Biology: Public Library of Science.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nadelson, L., Culp, R., Bunn, S., Burkhart, R., Shetlar, R., Nixon, K., & Waldron, J. (2009). Teaching evolution concepts to early elementary school students. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(3), 458–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-009-0148-x.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadelson, L., & Nadelson, S. (2010). K-8 educators perceptions and preparedness for teaching evolution topics. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 843–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadelson, L., & Sinatra, G. M. (2008). Educational professionals’ knowledge and acceptance of evolution. Evolutionary Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nehm, R. H., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2007). Does increasing biology teacher knowledge of evolution and the nature of science lead to greater preference for the teaching of evolution in schools? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(5), 699–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nehm, R. H., & Schonfeld, I. S. (2008). Measuring knowledge of natural selection: A comparison of the CINS, an open-response instrument, and an oral interview. Journal of research in science teaching, 45(10), 1131–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelkin, D., & Lindee, S. (1995). The DNA mystique. WH Freeman & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nosek, B. A., Smyth, F. L., Sriram, N., Lindner, N. M., Devos, T., Ayala, A. … Gonsalkorale, K. (2009). National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10593–10597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliva, J. M. (2003). The structural coherence of students’ conceptions in mechanics and conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 25(5), 539–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049–1079.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulou, P., Stanissavljevic, J., Katakos, E., & Athanasiou, K. (2011). Acceptance and understanding of evolution theory: A comparative study of Greek and Serbian teachers. Paper presented at the Science learning and Citizenship, E-book Proceedings of the ESERA 2011 Conference, Lyon, France. http://lsg.ucy.ac.cy/esera/e_book/base/index.html.

  • Piaget, J., & Cook, M. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children (Vol. 8). New York: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, M. L., & Sadler, K. C. (2007). Reliability of the measure of acceptance of the theory of evolution (MATE) instrument with university students. The American Biology Teacher, 69(6), 332–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samarapungavan, A., & Wiers, R. W. (1997). Children’s thoughts on the origin of species: A study of explanatory coherence. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 147–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinatra, G. M., Brem, S. K., & Evans, E. M. (2008). Changing Minds? Implications of conceptual change for teaching and learning about biological evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1(2), 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0037-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, G. E. (2002). Birth, kind and naïve biology. Developmental Science, 5(2), 213–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P., & Findlay, S. (2009). Getting to Darwin: Obstacles to accepting evolution by natural selection. Science & Education, 19(6–8), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9204-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trani, R. (2004). I won’t teach evolution; it’s against my religion. And now for the rest of the story…. The American Biology Teacher, 66(6), 419–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle, J. A. (1990). Elementary school mathematics, teaching developmentally. ERIC.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, E. M., & Kattmann, U. (2009). Teaching evolution with historical narratives. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(3), 479–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G., & Donovan, J. (2005). Searching for clarity to teach the complexity of the gene concept.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G., & Donovan, J. (2007). Developing year 2 students’ theory of biology with concepts of the gene and DNA. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1111–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venville, G., Gribble, S. J., & Donovan, J. (2005). An exploration of young children’s understandings of genetics concepts from ontological and epistemological perspectives. Science Education, 89(4), 614–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagler, R. (2010). A missing link: K-4 biological evolution content standards. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 3(3), 443–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagler, R. (2012). Assessing “the framework” for kindergarten through fifth grade biological evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 5(2), 274–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, M., & Dreesmann, D. C. (2014). Aspirations and expectations: Comparing scientist and teacher views as a source of ideas for teaching evolution. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(5), 421–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiles, J. R., & Alters, B. (2011). Effects of an educational experience incorporating an inventory of factors potentially influencing student acceptance of biological evolution. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2559–2585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. A., & Cavallo, A. M. (1995). reasoning ability, meaningful learning, and students’ understanding of physics concepts: Relating students’ reasoning ability and learning styles to their physics misconceptions. Journal of College Science Teaching, 311–314.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the dedicated teachers and their students who participated in this study, enabling the development of resources and collection of such high-quality data. Without their help, this research would not have been possible. We are also grateful to the Evolution Education Trust as the funder of this research and to Jonathan Milner for his support and continued interest in evolution education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology and Biochemistry, The Milner Centre for Evolution, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK

    Loredana L. Buchan, Momna V. Hejmadi & Laurence D. Hurst

Authors
  1. Loredana L. Buchan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Momna V. Hejmadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurence D. Hurst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Loredana L. Buchan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. IPN - Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education at Kiel University, Kiel, Germany

    Ute Harms

  2. Institute of Education, University College London, London, UK

    Michael J. Reiss

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Buchan, L.L., Hejmadi, M.V., Hurst, L.D. (2019). Evidence for the Success of a Quantitative Assessment Instrument for Teaching Evolution in Primary Schools in England. In: Harms, U., Reiss, M. (eds) Evolution Education Re-considered. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14698-6_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14698-6_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-14697-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-14698-6

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation