Hybrid Deterministic Views About Genes in Biology Textbooks: A Key Problem in Genetics Teaching

Science and Education

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 543-578

  dos Santos, Vanessa Carvalho ^a   Joaquim, Leyla Mariane ^a   El Hani, Charbel Niño ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF BAHIA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858281330     PISSN: 09267220     EISSN: 15731901     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11191-011-9348-1     Document Type: Article

References (115)

1. Abrantes, P. (1999). Simulação e realidade (Simulation and reality). Revista Colombiana de Filosofía de la Ciencia, 1(1), 9-40.
2. Abrougui, M., & Clément, P. (1996). Human genetics in French and Tunisian secondary school books: Presentation of a school books analysis method. In H. Bayerhuber & F. Brinkman (Eds.), What?-Why?-How? research of didaktik of biology (pp. 103-114). Kiel, Germany: IPN-Materialen.
3. Adami, C. (2004). Information theory in molecular biology. Physics of Life Reviews, 1(1), 3-22.
4. Agorram, B., Clement, P., Selmaoui, S., Khzami, S., Chafik, J., & Chiadli, A. (2010). University students' conceptions about the concept of gene: Interest of historical approach. US-China Education Review, 7(2), 9-15.
5. Aubusson, P. J., Harrison, A. G., & Ritchie, S. M. (2005). Metaphor and analogy in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
6. Ball, D. L., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (1988). Using textbooks and teachers' guides: A dilemma for beginning teachers and teacher educators. Curriculum Inquiry, 18(4), 401-423.
7. Banet, E., & Ayuso, E. (2000). Teaching genetic at secondary school: A strategy for teaching about the location of inheritance information. Science Education, 84(3), 313-351.
8. Banet, E., & Ayuso, G. E. (2003). Teaching of biological inheritance and evolution of living beings in secondary school. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 373-407.
9. Bardin, L. (2000). Análise de conteúdo (Content analysis). Lisboa, Portugal: Edições 70.
10. Beltrán, I. B., Ramalho, B. L., Silva, I. P., & Campos, A. N. (2003). A seleção dos livros didáticos: Um saber necessário ao professor. O caso do ensino de Ciências (Textbook selection: A necessary knowledge for the teacher. The case of science education). Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 25/04/03. http://www. rieoei. org/deloslectores/427Beltran. pdf. Accessed 8 December 2009.
11. Benzer, S. (1957). The elementary units of heredity. In W. McElroy & B. Glass (Eds.), The chemical basis of heredity (pp. 70-93). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press.
12. Bizzo, N. (1994). From Down House landlord to Brazilian high school students: What has happened to evolutionary knowledge on the way? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 537-556.
13. Black, M. (1962). Models and metaphors: Studies in language and philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
14. Burian, R. M. (1985). On conceptual change in biology: The case of the gene. In D. J. Depew & B. H. Weber (Eds.), Evolution at a crossroads: The new biology and the new philosophy of science (pp. 21-24). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Campbell, N. A., & Reece, J. B. (2005). Biology (7th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Pearson Education.
16. Carlson, A. E. (1966). The gene: A critical history. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders.
17. Carlson, A. E. (1991). Defining the gene: An evolving concept. American Journal of Human Genetics, 49(2), 475-487.
18. Cástera, J., Clément, P., Abrougui, M., et al. (2008). Genetic determinism in school textbooks: A comparative study among sixteen countries. Science Education International, 19(2), 163-184.
19. Chattopadhyay, A. (2005). Understanding of genetic information in higher secondary students in Northeast India and the implications for genetics education. Cell Biology Education, 4(1), 97-104.
20. Cho, H. M., Kahle, J. B., & Nordland, F. H. (1985). An investigation of high school biology textbooks as sources of misconceptions and difficulties in genetics and some suggestions for teaching genetics. Science Education, 69(5), 707-719.
21. Coll, R., France, B., & Taylor, I. (2005). The role of models and analogies in science education: Implications from research. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 183-198.
22. Danusso, L., Testa, I., & Vicentini, M. (2010). Improving prospective teachers' knowledge about scientific models and modeling: Design and evaluation of a teacher education intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 871-905.
23. Dawkins, R. (1982). The extended phenotype. Oxford: L W. H. Freeman.
24. Develaki, M. (2007). The model-based view of scientific theories and the structuring of school science programs. Science & Education, 16(7-8), 725-749.
25. Diehl, V., & Reese, D. D. (2010). Elaborated metaphors support viable inferences about difficult science concepts. Educational Psychology, 30, 771-791.
26. Durant, J., Hansen, A., & Bauer, M. (1999). Public understanding of the new genetics. In T. Marteau & M. Richards (Eds.), The troubled helix: Social and psychological implications of the new human genetics (pp. 235-248). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27. Dutra, L. H. (2009). Introdução à teoria da ciência. Florianópolis: UFSC.
28. El-Hani, C. N. (2007). Between the cross and the sword: The crisis of the gene concept. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 30(2), 297-307.
29. El-Hani, C. N., Queiroz, J., & Emmeche, C. (2006). A semiotic analysis of the genetic information system. Semiotica, 60(1-4), 1-68.
30. El-Hani, C. N., Roque, N., & Rocha, P. B. (2007). Brazilian high school biology textbooks: Results from a national program. In Proceedings of the IOSTE international meeting on critical analysis of school science textbook (pp. 505-516). Hammamet, Tunisia: University of Tunis.
31. El-Hani, C. N., Queiroz, J., & Emmeche, C. (2009). Genes, information, and semiosis. Tartu, Estonia: Tartu University Press, Tartu Semiotics Library.
32. El-Hani, C. N., Roque, N., & Rocha, P. B. (in press). Livros didáticos de biologia do ensino médio: Resultados do PNLEM/2007 (High School Biology Textbooks: Results of PNLEM/2007). Educação em Revista.
33. Falk, R. (1986). What is a gene? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 17(2), 133-173.
34. Falk, R. (2000). The gene-a concept in tension. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.-J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 317-348). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Finley, F. N., Stewart, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers' perception of important and difficult science content: the report of a survey. Science Education, 66(4), 531-538.
36. Flodin, V. (2009). The necessity of making visible concepts with multiple meanings in science education: The use of the gene concept in a biology textbook. Science & Education, 18(1), 73-94.
37. Fogle, T. (1990). Are genes units of inheritance? Biology and Philosophy, 5(3), 349-371.
38. Forissier, T., & Clément, P. (2003). Teaching 'biological identity' as genome/environmental interaction. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 85-90.
39. Gayán, E., & García, P. E. (1997). Como escoger un libro de texto? Desarrollo de un instrumento para evaluar los libros de texto de ciencias experimentales (How to choose a textbook? Development of a tool to evaluate the experimental sciences textbooks). Enseñanza de las Ciencias (Número Extra, V Congresso), pp. 249-250.
40. Gericke, N. M. (2008). Science versus school-science-Multiple models in genetics: The depiction of gene function in upper secondary textbooks and its influence on students' understanding. PhD Dissertation, Karlstad, Sweden: Karlstad University Studies.
41. Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2007a). Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students' understandings of genetics. Science & Education, 16(7-8), 849-881.
42. Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2007b). The phenomenon of gene function in textbooks for upper secondary school in Sweden-a comparative analysis with historical models of gene function. In Proceedings of the IOSTE international meeting on critical analysis of school science textbooks (pp. 554-563). Hammamet, Tunisia: University of Tunis.
43. Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010a). Conceptual incoherence as a result of the use of multiple historical models in school textbooks. Research in science Education, 40(4), 605-623.
44. Gericke, N. M., & Hagberg, M. (2010b). Conceptual variation in the depiction of gene function in upper secondary school textbooks. Science & Education, 19(10), 963-994.
45. Gerstein, M. B., Bruce, C., Rozowsky, J. S., Zheng, D., Du, J., Korbel, J. O., et al. (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome Research, 17(6), 669-681.
46. Gifford, F. (2000). Gene concepts and genetic concepts. In P. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.-J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The concept of the gene in development and evolution: Historical and epistemological perspectives (pp. 40-66). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. (Eds.). (2000). Developing models in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
48. Glynn, S. M. (1995). Conceptual bridges: Using analogies to explain scientific concepts. The Science Teacher, 62, 25-27.
49. Grandy, R. E. (2003). What are models and why do we need them? Science & Education, 12(8), 773-777.
50. Griffiths, P. E. (2001). Genetic information: A metaphor in search of a theory. Philosophy of Science, 68(3), 394-403.
51. Griffiths, P. E., & Neumann-Held, E. (1999). The many faces of the gene. BioScience, 49(8), 656-662.
52. Hackling, M., & Treagust, D. (1984). Research data necessary for meaningful review of grade ten high school genetics curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(2), 197-209.
53. Halloun, I. A. (2007). Mediated modeling in science education. Science & Education, 16, 653-697.
54. Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1011-1026.
55. Hesse, M. B. (1963). Models and analogies in science. London: Seed and Ward.
56. Hoffmeyer, J., & Emmeche, C. (1991). Code-duality and the semiotics of nature. In M. Anderson & F. Merrell (Eds.), On semiotic modeling (pp. 117-166). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
57. Jablonka, E. (2002). Information: Its interpretation, its inheritance, and its sharing. Philosophy of Science, 69(4), 578-605.
58. Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Transformation through language use: Children's spontaneous metaphors in elementary school science. Science & Education, 16, 267-289.
59. Johannsen, W. (1909). Elemente der exakten erblichkeitslehre. Jena, Germany: Gustav Fischer. http://caliban. mpiz-koeln. mpg. de/johannsen/elemente/johannsen_elemente_der_exakten_erblichkeitslehre_2. pdf. Accessed 27 July 2010.
60. Johnstone, A. H., & Mahmoud, N. A. (1980). Isolating topics of high perceived difficulty in school biology. Journal of Biological Education, 14(2), 163-166.
61. Justi, R., & Gilbert, J. K. (1999). History and philosophy of science through models: The case of chemical kinetics. Science & Education, 8, 287-307.
62. Kay, L. E. (2000). Who wrote the book of life? A history of the genetic code. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
63. Keller, E. F. (2000). The century of the gene. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
64. Keller, E. F. (2005). The century beyond the gene. Journal of Biosciences, 30(1), 3-10.
65. Keller, E. F., & Harel, D. (2007). Beyond the gene. PLoS One, 2(11), e1231.
66. Kipnis, N. (1998). Theories as models in teaching physics. Science & Education, 7, 245-260.
67. Kipnis, N. (2005). Scientific analogies and their use in teaching science. Science & Education, 14, 199-233.
68. Kitcher, P. (1982). Genes. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 33(4), 337-359.
69. Kuhn, T. S. (1970/1996). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
70. LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31-60.
71. Leite, M. (2006). Retórica determinista no genoma humano (Deterministic rhetoric in the human genome). Scientiae Studia, 4(3), 421-452.
72. Leite, M. (2007). Promessas do genoma (Promises of the genome). São Paulo, SP: UNESP.
73. Lewis, J. (2000). Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance-do students see any relationship? International Journal of Science Education, 22(2), 177-195.
74. Lewis, J., & Kattmann, U. (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: Re-visiting students' understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 195-206.
75. Lewis, J., Leach, J., & Wood-Robinson, C. (2000). All in the genes?-Young people's understanding of the nature of genes. Journal of Biological Education, 34(2), 74-79.
76. Lewontin, R. C. (1983). The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Scientia, 118, 63-83.
77. Lewontin, R. C. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
78. Marcelos, M. F., & Nagem, R. L. (2010). Comparative structural models of similarities and differences between vehicle and target in order to teach Darwinian evolution. Science & Education, 19, 599-623.
79. Martins, I. (2006). Analisando livros didáticos na perspectiva dos estudos do discurso: Compartilhando reflexões e sugerindo uma agenda para a pesquisa (Analyzing textbooks from the perspective of discourse studies: Sharing reflections and suggesting an agenda for research). Pro-Posições, 17(1), 117-136.
80. Matthews, M. R. (2007). Models in science and science education: an introduction. Science & Education, 16(7-8), 647-652.
81. Mendel, G. J. (1865/1965) Experiments in plant hybridisation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
82. Morange, M. (2006). Post-genomics, between reduction and emergence. Synthese, 151, 355-360.
83. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
84. Mortimer, E. F., Scott, P., Amaral, E. R, & El-Hani, C. N. (2010). Modeling modes of thinking and speaking with conceptual profiles. In: S. D. J. Pena (Ed.). Themes in transdisciplinary research (pp. 105-139). Belo Horizonte, MG: UFMG.
85. Moss, L. (2001). Deconstructing the gene and reconstructing molecular developmental systems. In S. Oyama, P. Griffiths, & R. Gray (Eds.), Cycles of contingency: Developmental systems and evolution (pp. 85-97). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
86. Moss, L. (2003). What genes can't do. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
87. Nascimento, T. G., & Martins, I. (2005). O texto de genética no livro didático de ciências: Uma análise retórica crítica (The genetics text in the science textbook: A critical rhetoric analysis). Investigações em Ensino de Ciências, 10(2), 255-278.
88. Neumann-Held, E. (1999). The gene is dead-long live the gene: Conceptualizing genes the constructionist way. In P. Koslowski (Ed.), Sociobiology and bioeconomics: The theory of evolution in biological and economic thinking (pp. 105-137). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
89. Nijhout, H. F. (1990). Metaphors and the role of genes in development. BioEssays, 12, 441-446.
90. Oyama, S. (1985/2000). The ontogeny of information: Developmental systems and evolution (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
91. Oyama, S., Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (Eds.). (2001). Cycles of contingency: Developmental systems and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
92. Pigliucci, M., & Boudry, M. (2010). Why machine-information metaphors are bad for science and science education. Science & Education. doi: 10. 1007/s11191-010-9267-6.
93. Pitombo, M. A., Almeida, A. R., & El-Hani, C. N. (2008). Gene concepts in higher education cell and molecular biology textbooks. Science Education International, 19(2), 219-234.
94. Radford, A., & Bird-Stewart, J. A. (1982). Teaching genetics in schools. Journal of Biological Education, 16(3), 177-180.
95. Richards, M. P., & Ponder, M. (1996). Lay understanding of genetics: A test of hypothesis. Journal of Medical Genetics, 33(12), 1032-1036.
96. Santos, V. C. (2008). Genes, Informação e Semiose: Do conhecimento de referência ao ensino de Biologia (Genes, Information and Semiosis: From the reference knowledge to Biology teaching). Master Dissertation, Universidade Federal da Bahia.
97. Scherrer, K., & Jost, J. (2007a). The gene and the genon concept: A functional and information-theoretic analysis. Molecular System Biology, 3(1), 1-11.
98. Scherrer, K., & Jost, J. (2007b). The gene and the genon concept: Coding versus regulation. A conceptual and information-theoretic analysis storage and expression in the light of modern molecular biology. Theory in Biosciences, 126(2-3), 65-113.
99. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
100. 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.
101. Smolicz, J. J., & Nunan, E. E. (1975). The philosophical and sociological foundations of science education: The demythologizing of school science. Studies in Science Education, 2(1), 101-143.
102. Stavy, R., & Tirosh, D. (1993). When analogy is perceived as such. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1229-1239.
103. Sterelny, K., & Griffiths, P. E. (1999). Sex and death: An introduction to the philosophy of biology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
104. Stewart, J. (1988). Potential learning outcomes from solving genetics problems: A typology of problems. Science Education, 72(2), 237-254.
105. Stewart, J., Hafner, R., & Dale, M. (1990). Students' alternative views of meiosis. The American Biology Teacher, 52(4), 228-232.
106. Stotz, K., Griffiths, P. E., & Knight, R. (2004). How biologists conceptualize genes: An empirical study. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 35(4), 647-673.
107. Tolman, R. (1982). Difficulties in genetics problem solving. The American Biology Teacher, 44(9), 525-527.
108. Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., Joslin, P., & Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers' use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 413-422.
109. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
110. Watson, J. D., & Crick, F. C. (1953). A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature, 171, 737-738.
111. Weismann, A. (1893/2005). The germ-plasm: A theory of heredity. Boston, MA: Elibron Classics.
112. Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and natural selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
113. Wood-Robinson, C. (1994). Young people's ideas about inheritance and evolution. Studies in Science Education, 24(1), 29-47.
114. Wood-Robinson, C., Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2000). Young people's understanding of the nature of genetic information in the cells of an organism. Journal of Biological Education, 35(1), 29-35.
115. Xavier, M., Freire, A., & Moraes, M. (2006). A nova (moderna) biologia e a genética nos livros didáticos de ensino médio (The new (modern) biology and genetics in high school textbooks). Ciência & Educação, 12(3), 275-289.