Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-f46jp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T23:26:01.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Strategies for Teaching Evolution in a High-Enrollment Introductory Paleontology Course for Non-Science Majors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2017

Patricia H. Kelley
Patricia H. Kelley*
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Geology, University of North Carolina Wilmington, Wilmington, NC 28403–5944 USA
Get access

Abstract

The high-enrollment introductory paleontology course, “Prehistoric Life,” taught at the University of North Carolina Wilmington fulfills general-education life-science credit. Most students enter the course with little knowledge of evolution (90% are non-science majors). Some assume evolution and religion are incompatible, and as non-science students, they have little incentive to learn about topics perceived to threaten their faith. Nevertheless, such students need to be prepared to make informed decisions on public-policy issues related to teaching evolution. Five principal strategies have been effective in teaching evolution to such students: 1) creating a student-centered classroom in which active/ collaborative learning engages student interest and prevents them from tuning out a threatening topic; 2) building a foundation for evolution by fostering understanding of the fossil record and geologic time; 3) in discussing evolution, focusing not only on the evidence for and mechanisms of evolution, but also clarifying the nature of science and differentiating it from religion, reinforcing that science and religion need not conflict; 4) giving students the opportunity to respond in writing to one of the position statements on evolution available from professional societies; this approach helps students formulate their own views, reassures them that their religious beliefs are respected, and fends off potential hostility during class; and 5) cultivating evolutionary thinking throughout the course (e.g., discuss evidence for evolutionary transitions and role of natural selection in evolution of various groups). These strategies have been successful in fostering student learning about evolution as indicated by teaching evaluations, student attendance, and comments in student reflection papers on evolution.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Special Publications , Volume 12: Teaching Paleontology in the 21st Century , 2012 , pp. 77 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 by The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association for the Advancement of Science. 2010. Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: a call to action. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 17 p.Google Scholar
Antolin, M. F., and Herbers, J. M. 2001. Perspective: Evolution's struggle for existence in American's public schools. Evolution, 55:2379–2388.Google Scholar
Arthurs, L., and Templeton, A. 2009. Coupled collaborative in-class activities and individual follow-up homework promote interactive engagement and improve student learning outcomes in a college-level Environmental Geology course. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57:356–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkman, M. B., Pacheco, J. S., and Plutzer, E. 2008. Evolution and creationism in America's classrooms: a national portrait. PLoS Biology 6(5): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060124 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bickmore, B. R., Thompson, K. R., Grandy, D. A., and Tomlin, T. 2009a. Commentary: On teaching the nature of science and the science-religion interface. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58:168–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickmore, B. R., Thompson, K. R., Grandy, D. A., and Tomlin, T. 2009b. Science as storytelling for teaching the nature of science and the science-religion interface. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58:178–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, D. 2009. Commentary: Darwin at 200. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57:94–95.Google Scholar
Brown, H. I. 1986. Creationism and the nature of science. Creation/Evolution, XVIII: 15–25.Google Scholar
Daeschler, E. B., Shubin, N. H., and Jenkins, F. A. 2006. A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan. Nature, 440:757–763.Google Scholar
Dodson, P. 1999. Faith of a paleontologist, p. 183–195. In Kelley, P.H., Bryan, J., and Hansen, T.A. (eds.), The Evolution-Creationism Controversy II: Perspectives on Science, Religion, and Geological Education. The Paleontological Society Papers, 5.Google Scholar
Eaton, T. T. 2009. Engaging students and evaluating learning progress using collaborative exams in introductory courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57:113–120.Google Scholar
Eldredge, N., and Gould, S. J. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: An alternative to phyletic gradualism, p. 82–115. In Schopf, T. J. M. (ed.), Models in Paleobiology. Freeman, Cooper, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. A. 2004. University student approaches to learning science through writing. International Journal of Science Education, 26:1835–1853.Google Scholar
Geological Society of America. 2009. Teaching of Evolution. Retrieved January 6, 2012, http://geosociety.org/positions/positionl.htm.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1981. Evolution as fact and theory. Discover, 2 (May 1981):34–37.Google Scholar
Grant, P. R., and Grant, B. R. 2009. The secondary contact phase of allopatric speciation in Dar-win's finches. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106:20141–20148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hake, R. R. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66:64–74.Google Scholar
Iannarelli, B. A., Bardlsey, M. E., and Foote, C. J. 2010. Here's your syllabus, see you next week: A review of the first day practices of outstanding professors. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 10:29–41.Google Scholar
Kelley, P.H. 2000. Studying evolution and keeping the faith. Geotimes 45(12):22–23, 41.Google Scholar
Kelley, P.H. 2009. Teaching evolution during the week and Bible study on Sunday: Perspectives on science, religion, and Intelligent Design, p. 163–179. In Schneiderman, J. S., and Allmon, W. D. (eds.). For the Rock Record: Geologists On Intelligent Design Creationism. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Kelley, P. H., Bryan, J., and Hansen, T.A. (eds.). 1999. The Evolution-Creationism Controversy II: Perspectives on Science, Religion, and Geological Education. The Paleontological Society Papers 5, 244 p.Google Scholar
Kenny, R. F., and Wirth, J. 2009. Implementing participatory, constructivist learning experiences through best practices in live interactive performance. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 9:34–47.Google Scholar
Kitano, J., Ross, J. A., Mori, S., Kume, M., Jones, F. C., Chan, Y. F., Absher, D. M., Grimwood, J., Schmutz, J., Myers, R. M., Kingsley, D. M., and Peichel, C. L. 2009. A role for a neo-sex chromosome in stickleback speciation. Nature, 461:1079–1083.Google Scholar
Leydens, J. A., and Santi, P. 2006. Optimizing faculty use of writing as a learning tool in geoscience education. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54:491–502.Google Scholar
Libarkin, J. C., and Anderson, S. W. 2005. Assessment of learning in entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience Concept Inventory. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53:394–401.Google Scholar
Libarkin, J. C., Kurdziel, J. P., and Anderson, S. W. 2007. College student conceptions of geological time and the disconnect between ordering and scale. Journal of Geoscience Education, 55: 413–422.Google Scholar
Matsumura, M. 1995. Voices for Evolution. National Center for Science Education, Berkeley, California, 176 p.Google Scholar
Mavárez, J., Salazar, C. A., Bermingham, E., Salcedo, C., Jiggins, C. D., and Linares, M. 2006. Speciation by hybridization in Heliconius butterflies. Nature, 441:868–871.Google Scholar
Mazur, E. 2009. Farewell, lecture? Science, 323:50–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. D., Scott, E. C., and Okamoto, S. 2006. Public acceptance of evolution. Science, 313:765–766 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, K. 1999. Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution. Cliff Street Books, New York.Google Scholar
Montgomery, K. 2009. Using a historical controversy to teach critical thinking, the meaning of “theory,” and the status of scientific knowledge. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57: 214–221.Google Scholar
Moore, R., Cotner, S., and Bates, A. 2009. The influence of religion and high school biology courses on students' knowledge of evolution when they enter college. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 9:34–47.Google Scholar
Mora, G. 2010. Peer instruction and lecture tutorials equally improve student learning in introductory geology classes. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58:286–296.Google Scholar
Moran, T. J. 2009. Teaching radioisotope dating using the geology of the Hawaiian Islands. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57:101–105.Google Scholar
Morris, H. 1977. Circular reasoning in evolutionary biology. Acts & Facts, 6 (6).Google Scholar
Morris, H. 1980. The tenets of creationism. Acts & Facts, 9 (7).Google Scholar
National Center for Science Education. 2009. Science and Religion. Retrieved January 6, 2012, http://ncse.com/religion.Google Scholar
Science Education Resource Center. 2010. Starting Point-Teaching Entry Level Geoscience. Retrieved January 6, 2012, http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/index.html.Google Scholar
Scott, E. 1999. Problem concepts in evolution: cause, purpose, design, and chance, p. 169–181. In Kelley, P. H., Bryan, J., and Hansen, T.A. (eds.). The Evolution-Creationism Controversy II: Perspectives on Science, Religion, and Geological Education. The Paleontological Society Papers, 5.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. S. 1982. Marginalia: The meanings of evolution. American Scientist 70:529–531.Google Scholar
Werth, A. J. 2009. Clearing the highest hurdle: Human-based case studies broaden students' knowledge of core evolutionary concepts. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 9(2):38–53.Google Scholar
Wise, D. U. 2001. Creationism's propaganda assault on deep time and evolution. Journal of Geoscience Education, 49:30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, D. A. 1999. The Biblical flood as a geological agent: a review of theories, p. 119–134. In Kelley, P. H., Bryan, J., and Hansen, T.A. (eds.). The Evolution-Creationism Controversy II: Perspectives on Science, Religion, and Geological Education. The Paleontological Society Papers, 5.Google Scholar
Yuretich, R. F., Kahn, S. A., Leckie, R. M., and Clement, J. J. 2001. Active-learning methods to improve student performance and scientific interest in a large introductory oceanography class. Journal of Geoscience Education, 49:111–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zen, A. 2001. What is deep time and why should any-one care? Journal of Geoscience Education, 49:5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, E. C. 1970. Adaptive radiation in Hawaii with special reference to insects. Biotropica, 2:32–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar