 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 15, Issue 2, Article 8 (Dec., 2014) |
A review of research instruments assessing levels of student acceptance of evolution
Pratchayapong YASRI
Institute for Innovative Learning, Mahidol University
999 Putthamonthon 4 Road, Salaya, Putthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom, 73170, THAILAND
E-mail: pratchayapong.yas@mahidol.ac.th
Received 8 Oct., 2014
Revised 5 Dec., 2014
Contents
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Quasi-continuous scales for classifying levels of student acceptance of evolution
- A binary classification scheme for levels of student acceptance of evolution
- A ternary classification scheme for levels of student acceptance of evolution
- A multi-dimensional classification scheme for levels of student acceptance of evolution
- A preferred instrument assessing student acceptance of evolution
- Summary and recommendation
- Acknowledgement
- References
- Appendix A: The Measure of Acceptance of the Theory of Evolution (MATE) by Rutledge and Warden (2000)
- Appendix B: A multi-dimensional classification by McKeachie et al. (2002)
Darwin’s theory of evolution by means of natural selection, called evolution for short, is perceived as a unifying theme in biology, forming a major part of all biology syllabuses. It is reported that student acceptance of evolution associates with conceptual understandings of biological contents, nature of science, as well as motivations to learn. Studies on student acceptance of evolution have been carried out intensively, contributing to a large number of research instruments assessing different levels of student acceptance. This article therefore aims to review currently used research instruments which include quasi-continuous scales of acceptance, a binary classification scheme commonly used in quantitative studies, a ternary classification scheme commonly used in qualitative studies, and a multi-dimensional classification scheme based on the relationship between evolution and creation. It also provides discussion on advantages and drawbacks of these instruments. In addition, it suggests a preferred instrument which is believed to be able to elicit student levels of acceptance more effectively.
