sh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Conceptual profiles for Doll’s four R's.
Södertörn University, School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Biology.
Södertörn University, School of Natural Sciences, Technology and Environmental Studies, Biology.
2016 (English)In: Electronic Proceedings of the ESERA 2015 Conference: Science education research: Engaging learners for a sustainable future, Part 1 / [ed] J. Lavonen, K. Juuti, J. Lampiselkä, A. Uitto & K. Hahl (Eds.);(co-eds. O. Finlayson & R. Pinto, Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2016, 72-77 p.Conference paper, (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

As academic organisers and teachers with different positions teacher training programs at Södertörn University we have had the opportunity to develop and assess different types of pedagogic activities and use, e.g., the 4 R´s proposed by Doll, recursion, relations, richness, and rigor in assessments. Here pre-service teacher student reflections assessed by use of the 4R’s are compared with other texts by the same students in order to assess the quality of their understanding of evolutionary theory. Written performances of biology students are also compared with those of pre-service teacher students in order to reveal differences in the use of scientific concepts between the groups. Analysis of student performances show a relation between the use of the 4R’s, and the use of scientific concepts. Analyses of texts by students in evolution theory show a relatively low use of scientific concepts often regarded as important in scientific text. This may be explained by students’ good skills in giving scientific explanations in every-day language. Teacher students used more biological and evolutionary concepts compared to biology students. The emphasis on the use of concepts, especially in school, may be exaggerated. Professional biologists have to communicate with people outside the scientific community but teachers often cares about a strict scientific language. This is also found here where teacher students use the concepts to a larger extent than biology students. School biology should focus on the basic processes of organic evolution as the foundation of all teaching in order to enhance the students’ deeper understanding.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Helsinki: University of Helsinki, 2016. 72-77 p.
Keyword [en]
biology, evolution, primary school, concepts
National Category
Learning
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-31699ISBN: 978-951-51-1541-6 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:sh-31699DiVA: diva2:1065320
Conference
ESERA 2015, Helsinki, August 31-September 4, 2015.
Available from: 2017-01-15 Created: 2017-01-15 Last updated: 2017-01-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Part 1

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mattsson, Jan-EricMutvei, Ann
By organisation
Biology
Learning

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Total: 53 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf