Students fail to transfer knowledge of chromosome structure to topics pertaining to cell division

CBE Life Sciences Education

Volumn 11, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 425-436

  Newman, Dina L ^a   Catavero, Christina M ^a   Kate Wright, L ^a  

^a ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ALLELE; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOLOGY; CELL DIVISION; CHEMISTRY; CHROMOSOME; EDUCATION; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; MEIOSIS; STUDENT;

ALLELES; BIOLOGY; CELL DIVISION; CHROMOSOMES; DNA; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; MEIOSIS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; STUDENTS;

EID: 84871350386     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19317913     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1187/cbe.12-01-0003     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Alberts B, Johnson A, Lewis J, Raff M, Roberts K, Walter P (2002). Molecular Biology of the Cell, 4th ed., New York: Garland Science, chap. 20.
2. Bahar M, Johnstone AH, Hansell MH (1999). Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. J Biol Educ 33, 84.
3. Barnett SM, Ceci SJ (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychol Bull 128, 612-637.
4. Benson PJ (1997). Problems in picturing text: a study of visual/verbal problem solving. Tech Comm Quart 6, 141-160.
5. Bowling BV, Acra EE, Wang L, Myers MF, Dean GE, Markle GC, Moskalik CL, Huether CA (2008). Development and evaluation of a Genetics Literacy Assessment Instrument for undergraduates. Genetics 178, 15-22.
6. Bransford JD, Schwartz DL (1999). Rethinking transfer: a simple proposal with multiple implications. Rev Res Educ 24, 61-100.
7. Brown CR (1990). Somemisconceptions in meiosis shownby students responding to an advanced level practical examination question in biology. J Biol Educ 24, 182-186.
8. Chi MTH, Feltovich PJ, Glaser R (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cogn Sci 5, 121-152.
9. Creswell JW (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, ThousandOaks, CA: Sage Publications.
10. Dikmenli M (2010). Misconceptions of cell division held by student teachers in biology: a drawing analysis. Sci Res Essay 5, 235-247.
11. Fisher KM, Lipson JI, Hildebrand AC, Miguel L, Schoenberg N, Porter N (1986). Student misconceptions and teacher assumptions in college biology. J Coll Sci Teach 15, 276-280.
12. Gerstein MB, Bruce C, Rozowsky JS, Zheng D, Du J, Korbel JO, Emanuelsson O, Zhang ZD, Weissman S, Snyder M (2007). What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition. Genome Res 17, 669-681.
13. Hammer D (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. Am J Phys 68, S52-S59.
14. Holstein JA, Gubrium JF (2003). Inside Interviewing: New Lenses, New Concerns, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
15. Johnstone AH, Mahmoud NA (1980). Isolating topics of high perceived difficulty in school biology. J Biol Educ 14, 163-166.
16. Kelly R, Jones L (2007). Exploring how different features of animations of sodium chloride dissolution affect students' explanations. J Sci Educ Technol 16, 413-429.
17. Kelly RM, Jones LL (2008). Investigating students' ability to transfer ideas learned from molecular animations of the dissolution process. J Chem Educ 85, 303.
18. Kindfield ACH (1991). Confusing chromosome number and structure: a common student error. J Biol Educ 25, 193-200.
19. Kindfield ACH (1994a). Biology diagrams: tools to think with. J Learning Sci 3, 1-36.
20. Kindfield ACH (1994b). Understanding a basic biological process: expert and novice models of meiosis. Sci Educ 78, 255-283.
21. Kleckner N (1996). Meiosis: how could it work. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93, 8167-8174.
22. Kozma R, Russell J (1997). Multimedia and understanding: expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. J Res Sci Teach 34, 949-968.
23. Lave J (1988). Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24. Lewis J, Kattmann U (2004). Traits, genes, particles and information: re-visiting students' understandings of genetics. Int J Sci Educ 26, 195-206.
25. Lewis J, Leach J, Wood-Robinson C (2000). All in the genes?-young people's understanding of the nature of genes. J Biol Educ 34, 74-79.
26. Marbach-Ad G (2001). Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. J Biol Educ 35, 183-189.
27. Martin PY, Turner BA (1986). Grounded theory and organizational research. J Appl Behav Sci 22, 141-157.
28. Mestre JP (2002). Probing adults' conceptual understanding and transfer of learning via problem posing. J Appl Dev Psychol 23, 9-50.
29. Mestre JP (2005). Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective, Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
30. Mills Shaw KR, Van Horne K, Zhang H, Boughman J (2008). Essay contest reveals misconceptions of high school students in genetics content. Genetics 178, 1157-1168.
31. Pearson H (2006).What is a gene? Nature 441, 398-401.
32. Perkins DN, Salomon G (1988). Teaching for transfer. Educ Leadership 46, 22-32.
33. Perkins DN, Salomon G (1992). Transfer of learning. In: International Encyclopedia of Education, Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.
34. Scherr RE (2007). Modeling student thinking: an example from special relativity. Am J Phys 75, 272-280.
35. Schoenfeld AH, Herrmann DJ (1982). Problem perception and knowledge structure in expert and novice mathematical problem solvers. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 8, 484-494.
36. Schwartz D, Martin T (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: the hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cogn Instruct 22, 129-184.
37. Schwartz DL, Bransford JD (1998). A time for telling. Cogn Instruct 16, 475-5223.
38. Schwartz DL, Chase CC, Oppezzo MA, Chin DB (2011). Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: the effects of telling first on learning and transfer. J Educ Psychol 103, 759-775.
39. Shi J, Wood WB, Martin JM, Guild NA, Vicens Q, Knight JK (2010). A diagnostic assessment for introductory molecular and cell biology. CBE Life Sci Educ 9, 453-461.
40. Smith MK, Wood WB, Adams WK, Wieman C, Knight JK, Guild N, Su TT (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science 323, 122-124.
41. Smith MK, Wood WB, Knight JK (2008). The Genetics Concept Assessment: a new concept inventory for gauging student understanding of genetics. CBE Life Sci Educ 7, 422-430.
42. Smith MU (1991). Teaching cell division: student difficulties and teaching recommendations. J Coll Sci Teach 21, 28-33.
43. Stewart J, Dale M (1989). High school students' understanding of chromosome/gene behavior during meiosis. Sci Educ 73, 501-521.
44. Stewart J, Hafner B, Dale M (1990). Students' alternate views of meiosis. Am Biol Teach 52, 228-232.
45. Strauss AL, Corbin JM (1997). Grounded Theory in Practice, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
46. Wood-Robinson C, Lewis J, Leach J (2000). Young people's understanding of the nature of genetic information in the cells of an organism. J Biol Educ 35, 29-36.
47. Wright LK, Newman DL (2011). An interactive modeling lesson increases students' understanding of ploidy during meiosis. Biochem Mol Biol Educ 39, 344-351.