A conceptual guide to natural history museum visitors' understanding of evolution |
| |
| Authors: | E Margaret Evans Amy N Spiegel Wendy Gram Brandy N Frazier Medha Tare Sarah Thompson Judy Diamond |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan, 300 N. Ingalls Building, 10th Floor, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109‐5406;2. Department of Educational Psychology, Center for Instructional Innovation, University of Nebraska‐Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588‐0384;3. Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73072‐7029;4. Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2430 Campus Road, Gartley Hall 110, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822‐2294;5. Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 400400, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904;6. University of Michigan Exhibit Museum of Natural History, 1109 Geddes Ave, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109‐1079;7. University of Nebraska State Museum of Natural History, University of Nebraska‐Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska 68588‐0374 |
| |
| Abstract: | Museum visitors are an ideal population for assessing the persistence of the conceptual barriers that make it difficult to grasp Darwinian evolutionary theory. In comparison with other members of the public, they are more likely to be interested in natural history, have higher education levels, and be exposed to the relevant content. If museum visitors do not grasp evolutionary principles, it seems unlikely that other members of the general public would do so. In the current study, 32 systematically selected visitors to three Midwest museums of natural history provided detailed open‐ended explanations of biological change in seven diverse organisms. They were not told that these were evolutionary problems. Responses were coded as: informed naturalistic reasoning, featuring some understanding of key evolutionary concepts, novice naturalistic reasoning, featuring intuitive explanations that are also present in childhood, and creationist reasoning, featuring supernatural explanations. All visitors were mixed reasoners, using one or more of these patterns in different permutations across the seven organisms: 72% used a combination of informed naturalistic reasoning and novice naturalistic reasoning, while a further 28% added creationist reasoning to this mix. Correlational analyses indicated that for many visitors these reasoning patterns were coherent rather than fragmented. The theoretical model presented in this article contributes to an analysis of the developmental and cultural factors associated with these patterns. This could help educators working in diverse educational settings understand how to move visitors and students toward more informed reasoning patterns. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47:326–353, 2010 |
| |
| Keywords: | evoluation museums conceptual change intuitive beliefs creationist beliefs cognitive development culture |
|
|
