Putting Mendel in His Place: How Curriculum Reform in Genetics and Counterfactual History of Science Can Work Together

History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences

Volumn 1, Issue , 2013, Pages 577-595

  Jamieson, Annie ^a   Radick, Gregory ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Dichotomous Trait; Genetic Determinism; Genetic Issue; Mendelian Genetic; Seed Shape

Indexed keywords

EID: 85098060273     PISSN: 22111948     EISSN: 22111956     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-6537-5_25     Document Type: Chapter

References (41)

1. Allchin, Douglas. 2000. Mending Mendelism. The American Biology Teacher 62(9): 633–639.
2. Allchin, Douglas. 2002. Dissolving dominance. In Mutating concepts, evolving disciplines: Genetics, medicine and society, ed. Lisa Parker and Rachel Ankeny, 43–61. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
3. Allchin, Douglas. 2005. The dilemma of dominance. Biology and Philosophy 20: 427–451.
4. Bateson, William. 1902. Mendel’s principles of heredity: A defence. With a translation of Mendel’s original papers on hybridisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Bizzo, Nelio, and Charbel N. El-Hani. 2009. Darwin and Mendel: Evolution and genetics. Journal of Biological Education 43(3): 108–114.
6. Castéra, Jérémy, and Pierre Clément. 2012. Teachers’ conceptions about the genetic determinism of human behaviour: A survey in 23 countries. Science & Education [online] (2012). doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-949-0. Accessed 18 Sept 2012.
7. Charnley, Berris, and Gregory Radick. 2013. Intellectual property, plant breeding and the making of Mendelian genetics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. [online] (2013). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.11.004. Accessed 25 Mar 2013.
8. Collins, Angelo, and James H. Stewart. 1989. The knowledge structure of Mendelian genetics. The American Biology Teacher 51(3): 143–149.
9. Condit, Celeste M. 2011. When do people deploy genetic determinism? A review pointing to the need for multi-factorial theories of public utilization of scientific discourses. Sociology Compass 5(7): 618–635.
10. Condit, Celeste M., Nneka Ofulue, and Kristine M. Sheedy. 1998. Determinism and mass-media portrayals of genetics. American Journal of Human Genetics 62: 979–984.
11. Donovan, M.P. 1997. The vocabulary of biology and the problem of semantics. Journal of College Science Teaching 26: 381–383.
12. Dougherty, Michael J. 2009. Closing the gap: Inverting the genetics curriculum to ensure an informed public. American Journal of Human Genetics 85: 6–12.
13. Falk, Raphael. 2001. The rise and fall of dominance. Biology and Philosophy 16(3): 285–323.
14. Gericke, Niklas M., Mariana Hagberg, Vanessa Carvalho dos Santos, Leyla Mariana Joaquim, and Charbel N. El-Hani. 2012. Conceptual variation or incoherence? Textbook discourse on genes in six countries. Science & Education [online] (2012). doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9499-8. Accessed 18 Sept 2012.
15. Gilbert, Scott F. 2010. Developmental biology, 9th ed. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.
16. Guilfoile, Patrick. 1997. Wrinkled peas & white-eyed fruit flies: The molecular basis of two classical genetic traits. The American Biology Teacher 59(2): 92–95.
17. Haldane, J.B.S., and Julian Huxley. 1927. Animal biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press at the Clarendon Press.
18. Kampourakis, K. 2013. Mendel and the path to genetics: Portraying science as a social process. Science & Education 22(2–3): 293–324.
19. Kim, Kyung-Man. 1994. Explaining scientific consensus: The case of Mendelian genetics. New York: Guilford Press.
20. Kitcher, Philip. 1997. The lives to come: The genetic revolution and human possibilities. London: Allen Lane/Penguin.
21. Lewis, Jenny. 2011. Genetics and genomics: Teaching secondary biology. In Teaching secondary biology, ed. M. Reiss, 173–214. London: Hodder Education.
22. Lewis, Jenny. 2012. Young people’s understandings of gene technology – From Flavr Savr tomatoes to stem cell therapy. Science & Education [online] (2012). doi: 10.1007/s11191-012-9523-z. Accessed 18 Sept 2012.
23. Lewontin, Richard. 1993. The doctrine of DNA: Biology as ideology. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
24. MacKenzie, D.A., and S.B. Barnes. 1974. Biometrician versus Mendelian: A controversy and its explanation, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie special edition 18, 165–196.
25. Mills-Shaw, R. Kenna, Katie Van Horne, Hubert Zhang, and Joann Boughman. 2008. Essay contest reveals misconceptions of high school students in genetics content. Genetics 178: 1157–1168.
26. Moore, David S. 2008. Espousing interactions and fielding reactions: Addressing laypeople’s beliefs about genetic determinism. Philosophical Psychology 21(3): 331–348.
27. Nowgen. 2011. Genomics in schools: An interim report from the Nowgen Schools Genomics Programme. Manchester: Biomedical Research Centre.
28. Olby, Robert. 1988. The dimensions of scientific controversy: The biometric-Mendelian debate. British Journal for the History of Science 22: 299–320.
29. Radick, Gregory. 2005. Other histories, other biologies. In Philosophy, biology and life, Supplement to philosophy, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, vol. 56, ed. O’Hear Anthony, 21–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Radick, Gregory. 2008. Why what if? Isis 99: 547–551.
31. Radick, Gregory. 2011. Physics in the Galtonian sciences of heredity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42: 129–138.
32. Russell, Peter J. 2006. iGenetics: A Mendelian approach. San Francisco/London: Pearson/ Benjamin Cummings.
33. Russell, Peter J. 2010. iGenetics: A molecular approach, 3rd ed. San Francisco/London: Benjamin Cummings/Pearson Education.
34. Schwartz, James. 2008. In pursuit of the gene: From Darwin to DNA. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Skopek, Jeffrey K. 2011. Principles, exemplars, and uses of history in early 20th century genetics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42: 210–225.
36. Smerecnik, Chris M.R. 2010. Lay responses to health messages about the genetic risk factors for salt sensitivity: Do mass media genetic health messages result in genetic determinism? Psychology, Health & Medicine 15(4): 386–393.
37. Stewart, James H. 1982. Difficulties experienced by high school students when learning basic Mendelian genetics. American Biology Teacher 44(2): 80–84, 89.
38. Sturm, Richard A., and Tony N. Frudakis. 2004. Eye colour: Portals into pigmentation genes and ancestry. Trends in Genetics 20(8): 327–332.
39. Weldon, W.F.R. 1902a. Mendel’s laws of alternative inheritance in peas. Biometrika 1(2): 228–254.
40. Weldon, W.F.R. 1902b. On the ambiguity of Mendel’s categories. Biometrika 2(1): 44–55.
41. Weldon, W.F.R. 1904–1905. Theory of inheritance. Ref 264/2D, Papers of Karl Pearson. Special collections, University College London, London.