한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제37권4호
  • /
  • Pages.659-668
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

진화개념의 역사에 근거한 한국과 미국 대학생의 진화개념 수준 비교

A Comparison between Korean and American College Students' Evolution Concepts based on the History of Evolutionary Ideas

  • 투고 : 2017.05.22
  • 심사 : 2017.08.05
  • 발행 : 2017.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구는 진화 개념의 발달 단계가 전공과 국가에 따라서 유의미한 차이가 있는지 확인하기 위하여 진행되었다. 이 연구를 위하여 한국과 미국의 대학생의 자료를 생물 전공과 비생물 전공에 따라 구분하여 수집하였다. Ha(2007)이 개발한 도구를 사용하여 Ha(2016)의 분석방법에 근거하여 순위선다형으로 분석하였다. 연구 결과 진화적 사고의 과학사적 발달 과정(창조, 목적, 의도, 용불용설, 자연선택)을 토대로 순위선다방식으로 분석하는 방법이 한국과 미국, 전공과 비전공 학생에게도 적합하게 적용될 수 있는 방법임이 확인되었다. 진화 개념의 발달 단계를 확인한 결과 우리나라 대학생들은 용불용설 수준, 미국의 대학생들은 목적론적 설명 수준에 있는 것으로 확인되었다. 전공과 국가에 따른 진화 개념의 발달 수준은 진화 설명소재와 교호작용효과가 있는지 확인한 결과 유의미한 교호작용효과가 없는 것으로 확인되었다. 진화 개념의 발달 단계와 종교성은 유의미한 관련성이 있었다. 이 연구 결과들을 토대로 진화 개념의 발달 특성에 대해서 논의한다.

This study was conducted to identify whether there is a significant difference in the developmental stages of the evolution concept depending on the major and the country. For this study, college students (both biology major and non-biology major) in Korea and the United States answered evolution concept assessment developed by Ha (2007). The data were analyzed based on the method of developed by Ha (2016). As a result of this study, Cronbach alpha for internal consistency reliability and MNSQ indices for item response fitness of the ordered multiple choice method providing 0 to 4 point scores to creationism, teleology, intentionality, use/disuse, and natural selection respectively, satisfied the benchmark. The level of Korean college students' evolution concepts was located in use/disuse and the level of USA college students' evolution concepts was located in teleology. No interaction effect was found between the difference of conceptual progressions of evolution concept by major and country and evolution contexts (human, animal, and plant). There was a significant relationship between developmental stages of evolution concept and their religiosity. Based on the results of this study, we discuss developmental characteristics of evolutionary concepts.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Banerjee, K., & Bloom, P. (2014). Why did this happen to me? Religious believers' and non-believers' teleological reasoning about life events. Cognition, 133(1), 277-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.06.017
  2. Bartsch, K., & Wellman, H. M. (1995). Children talk about the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch Analysis in The Human Sciences. Dordrecht: Springer.
  4. Bowler, P. J. (2009). Evolution: The history of an idea. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  5. Brumby, M. N. (1984). Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students. Science Education, 68(4), 493-503. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730680412
  6. Choi, I., Dalal, R., Kim-Prieto, C., & Park, H. (2003). Culture and judgement of causal relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(1), 46-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.46
  7. Colburn, A., & Henriques, L. (2006). Clergy views on evolution, creationism, science, and religion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 419-442. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20109
  8. Dagher, Z. R., & BouJaoude, S. (1997). Scientific views and religious beliefs of college students: The case of biological evolution. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 34(5), 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199705)34:5<429::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-S
  9. Downie, J. R., & Barron, N. J. (2000). Evolution and religion: attitudes of Scottish first year biology and medical students to the teaching of evolutionary biology. Journal of Biological Education, 34(3), 139-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2000.9655704
  10. Fysh, R., & Lucas, K. B. (1998). Religious beliefs in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 28(4), 399-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461507
  11. Gotthelf, A. (1976). Aristotle's conception of final causality. Review of Metaphysics, 30, 226-254.
  12. Ha, M. (2007). Development of the instructional strategies of evolution based on the cross-sectional analysis of evolution conception. Unpublished master thesis. Cheong-ju: Korean National University of Education.
  13. Ha, M. (2016). Examining the validity of history-of-science-based evolution concept assessment and exploring conceptual progressions by contexts. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(3), 509-517. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.3.0509
  14. Ha, M. (2016a). The comparative analysis of evolution conceptions in pre- and in-service biology teachers. Biology Education, 44(2), 277-288. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2016.44.2.277
  15. Ha, M. (2016b). Examining the validity of history-of-science-based evolution concept assessment and exploring conceptual progressions by contexts. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 36(3), 509-517. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.3.0509
  16. Ha, M. Cha, H. Y., & Ku, S. (2012). A comparative study of Korean and United States college students' degree of religiosity, evolutionary interest, understanding and acceptance and their structures. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(10), 1537-1550.
  17. Ha, M., & Cha, H. Y. (2007). A qualitative cross-sectional study on explanation about evolution mechanism. Biology Education, 35(1), 106-116. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2007.35.1.106
  18. Ha, M., & Nehm, R. H. (2014). Darwin's difficulties and students' struggles with trait loss: cognitive-historical parallelisms in evolutionary explanation. Science & Education, 23(5), 1051-1074. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9626-1
  19. Ha, M., Lee, J. K., & Cha, H. Y. (2006). A cross-sectional study of students' conceptions on evolution and characteristics of conception formation about it in terms of the subjects: Human, animals and plants. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 26(7), 813-825.
  20. Heddy, B. C. & Nadelson, L. S. (2013). Variables associated to public acceptance of evolution in the United States. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 6(3) 1-14.
  21. Heredia, S. C., Furtak, E. M., & Morrison, D. (2016). Exploring the influence of plant and animal item contexts on student response patterns to natural selection multiple choice items. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 9(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-016-0052-0
  22. Hergovich, A., & Arendasy, M. (2005). Critical thinking ability and belief in the paranormal. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1805-1812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.11.008
  23. Heywood, B. T., & Bering, J. M. (2014). "Meant to be": how religious beliefs and cultural religiosity affect the implicit bias to think teleologically. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 4(3), 183-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2013.782888
  24. Hodgson, G. M. (2004). Darwinism, causality and the social sciences. Journal of Economic Methodology, 11(2), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501780410001694118
  25. Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2002). Young Children's Naive Thinking about the Biological World. New York: Psychology Press.
  26. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2007). Students' preconceptions about evolution: How accurate is the characterization as "Lamarckian" when considering the history of evolutionary thought? Science & Education, 16(3-5), 393-422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9019-9
  27. Kampourakis, K., & Zogza, V. (2008). Students' intuitive explanations of the causes of homologies and adaptations. Science & Education, 17(1), 27-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9075-9
  28. Kanazawa, S. (2010). Why liberals and atheists are more intelligent. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(1), 33-57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272510361602
  29. Kelemen, D., & DiYanni, C. (2005). Intuitions about origins: Purpose and intelligent design in children's reasoning about nature. Journal of Cognition and Development, 6(1), 3-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327647jcd0601_2
  30. Kelemen, D., Rottman, J., & Seston, R. (2013). Professional physical scientists display tenacious teleological tendencies: Purpose-based reasoning as a cognitive default. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(4), 1074. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030399
  31. Kim, S. Y., & Nehm, R. H. (2011). A cross-cultural comparison of Korean and American science teachers' views of evolution and the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 197-227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903563819
  32. Kirsh, D. (2009). Problem Solving and Situated Cognition. In, Philip Robbins & M. Aydede (Eds.) (pp. 264-306) The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  33. Lee, S. N., & Cha, H. (2014). Qualitative case study of biology teachers' recognition process of evolutionary explanations included in teaching not the title of evolution in biology, Biology Education, 42(4), 450-466. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2014.42.4.450
  34. Lombrozo, T., Thanukos, A., & Weisberg, M. (2008). The importance of understanding the nature of science for accepting evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1(3), 290-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-008-0061-8
  35. Meir, E., Perry, J., Herron, J. C., & Kingsolver, J. (2007). College students' misconceptions about evolutionary trees. The American Biology Teacher, 69(7), 71-76. https://doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2007)69[71:CSMAET]2.0.CO;2
  36. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
  37. Nehm, R. H., & Ha, M. (2011). Item feature effects in evolution assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(3), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20400
  38. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9062-7
  39. Nehm, R. H., Kim, S. Y., & Sheppard, K. (2009). Academic preparation in biology and advocacy for teaching evolution: biology versus nonbiology teachers. Science Education, 93(6), 1122-1146. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20340
  40. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving (Vol. 104, No. 9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  41. Opfer, J. E., Nehm, R. H., & Ha, M. (2012). Cognitive foundations for science assessment design: knowing what students know about evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 744-777. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21028
  42. Pesta, B. J., McDaniel, M. A., & Bertsch, S. (2010). Toward an index of well-being for the fifty US states. Intelligence, 38(1), 160-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2009.09.006
  43. Razmyar, S., & Reeve, C. L. (2013). Individual differences in religiosity as a function of cognitive ability and cognitive style. Intelligence, 41(5), 667-673. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.09.003
  44. Rutledge, M. L., & Warden, M. A. (2000). Evolutionary theory, the nature of science & high school biology teachers: Critical relationships. The American Biology Teacher, 62(1), 23-31. https://doi.org/10.2307/4450822
  45. Settlage Jr, J. (1994). Conceptions of natural selection: a snapshot of the sense-making process. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 449-457. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310503
  46. Sherkat, D. E. (2011). Religion and scientific literacy in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 92(5), 1134-1150.
  47. 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
  48. Sinatra, G. M., Southerland, S. A., McConaughy, F., & Demastes, J. W. (2003). Intentions and beliefs in students' understanding and acceptance of biological evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 510-528. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10087
  49. 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451708
  50. Willard, A. K., & Norenzayan, A. (2013). Cognitive biases explain religious belief, paranormal belief, and belief in life's purpose. Cognition, 129(2), 379-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.016
  51. Wright, B.D. & Linacre, J.M. (1994). Reasonable mean-square-fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8(3), 370.
  52. Zuckerman, M., Silberman, J., & Hall, J. A. (2013). The relation between intelligence and religiosity: A meta-analysis and some proposed explanations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(4), 325-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313497266