Clusters of concepts in molecular genetics: A study of Swedish upper secondary science students understanding

Journal of Biological Education

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 73-83

  Gericke, Niklas ^a   Wahlberg, Sara ^a  

^a Department of Nursing Sciences   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Concept map; Genetics; Protein synthesis; Students conceptual understanding; Upper secondary school

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878831791     PISSN: 00219266     EISSN: 21576009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00219266.2012.716785     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Andersson, S., A. Sonesson, B. Stålhandske, A. Tullberg, and L. Rydén. 2007. Gymnasiekemi B. Stockholm, Sweden: Liber AB.
2. Bahar, M., A.H. Johnstone, and M.H. Hansell. 1999. Revisiting learning difficulties in biology. Journal of Biological Education 33, no. 2: 84-6.
3. Ball, D.L., and S. Feiman-Nemser. 1988. Using textbooks and teachers' guides: A dilemma for beginning teachers and teacher educators. Curriculum Inquiry 18, no. 4: 401-23.
4. Cadogan, A. 2000. Biological nomenclature: Standard terms and expressions used in the teaching of biology. London: The Institute of Biology.
5. DiGisi, L.L., and J.B. Wilett. 1995. What high school biology teachers say about their textbook use: A descriptive study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 32, no. 2: 123-42.
6. Duncan, R.G. 2007. The role of domain specific knowledge in generative reasoning about complicated multileveled phenomena. Cognition and Instruction 25, no. 4: 271-336.
7. Duncan, R.G., and B.J. Reiser. 2007. Reasoning across ontologically distinct levels: Students' understanding of molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 44, no. 7: 938-59.
8. Ekvall, U. 2001. Den styrande läroboken. In Verklighetens texter: Sjutton fallstudier, ed. B. Melander and B. Olsson, 43-80. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
9. Fisher, K.M. 2000. Overview of knowledge mapping. In Mapping biology knowledge, ed. K.M. Fisher, J.H. Wandersee, and D.E. Moody, 5-23. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
10. Gericke, N.M., and M. Hagberg. 2007. Definition of historical models of gene function and their relation to students' understanding of genetics. Science and Education 16, no. 7-8: 849-81.
11. Gericke, N.M., and M. Hagberg. 2010a. Conceptual incoherence as a result of the use of multiple historical models in school textbooks. Research in Science Education 40, no. 4: 605-23.
12. Gericke, N.M., and M. Hagberg. 2010b. Conceptual variation in the depiction of gene function in upper secondary school textbooks. Science and Education 19, no. 10: 963-94.
13. Gericke, N.M., M. Hagberg, and D. Jorde. 2012. Upper secondary students' understanding of the use of multiple models in biology textbooks: The importance of conceptual variation and incommensurability. Research in Science Education, DOI: 10.1007/s11165-012-9288-z.
14. Glaser, R., and M. Bassok. 1989. Learning theory and the study of instruction. Annual Review of Psychology 40, no. 1: 631-666.
15. Grennon, J., and M.G. Brooks. 1999. In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
16. Karlsson, J., B.O. Molander, and P.O. Wickman. 2008. Biologi B. Stockholm, Sweden: Liber AB.
17. Kinchin, I.M., and D.B. Hay. 2000. How a qualitative approach to concept map analysis can be used to aid learning by illustrating patterns of conceptual development. Educational Research 42, no. 1: 43-57.
18. Knippels, M.C.P.J. 2002. Coping with the abstract and complex nature of genetics in biology education - The yo-yo learning and teaching strategy. Utrecht, Netherlands: CD-b Press.
19. Kvale, S. 1989. Issues of validity in qualitative research. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
20. Lewis, J., and U. Kattmann. 2004. Traits, genes, particles and information: Re-visiting students' understandings of genetics. International Journal of Science Education 26, no. 2: 195-206.
21. Lewis, J., J. Leach, and C. Wood-Robinson. 2000. All in the genes? - Young people's understanding of the nature of genes. Journal of Biological Education 34, no. 2: 74-9.
22. Marbach-Ad, G. 2001. Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts. Journal of Biological Education 35, no. 4: 183-9.
23. Marbach-Ad, G., and R. Stavy. 2000. Students' cellular and molecular explanations of genetic phenomena. Journal of Biological Education 34, no. 4: 200-5.
24. Martinez-Gracia, M.V., M.J. Gil-Quilez, and J. Osada. 2006. Analysis of molecular genetics content in Spanish secondary school textbooks. Journal of Biological Education 40, no. 2: 53-60.
25. Moody, D.E. 2000. The paradox of the textbook. In Mapping biology knowledge, ed. K.M. Fisher, J.H. Wandersee, and D.E. Moody, 167-84. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
26. Moss, L. 2003. What genes can't do. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Novak, J.D., and D.B. Gowin. 1985. Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Pearsson, J.T., and W.J. Hughs. 1988. Problems with use of terminology in genetics education: 2, some examples from published materials and suggestions for ratifying the problem. Journal of Biological Education 22, no. 4: 267-74.
29. Pittman, K.M. 1999. Student generated analogies: another way of knowing? Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36, no. 1: 1-22.
30. Robson, C. 2008. Real world research. New York: Blackwell Publishing.
31. Rosenberg, A. 1985. The structure of biological science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Scott, P., H. Asoko, and J. Leach. 2007. Student conceptions and conceptual learning in science. In Handbook of research on science education, ed. S. K. Abell and N.G. Lederman, 31-56. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Smith, A.L., and M.J. Williams. 2007. "It's the X and Y thing": Cross-sectional and longitudinal changes in children's understanding of genes. Research in Science Education 37, no. 4: 407-22.
34. Smith, A.K., W.B. Wood, W.K. Adams, C. Wieman, J.K. Knight, N. Guild, and T.T. Su. 2009. Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science 323, no. 5910: 122-4.
35. Tseng, Y.H., C.Y. Chang, S.N. Chang Rundgren, and C.J. Rundgren. 2010. Mining concept maps from news stories for measuring civic scientific literacy in media. Computers and Education 55, no. 1: 165-77.
36. Van Zele, E., J. Lenaerts, and W. Wieme. 2004. Improving the usefulness of concept maps as a research tool for science education. International Journal of Science Education 26, no. 9: 1043-64.
37. Venville, G.J., and D.F. Treagust. 1998. Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 35, no. 9: 1031-55.
38. Venville, G.J., S.J. Gribble, and J. Donovan. 2005. An exploration of young children's understanding of genetics concepts from ontological and epistemological perspectives. Science Education 89, no. 4: 614-33.