STEM and Non-STEM Misconceptions About Evolution: Findings from 5 Years of Data

Abstract

Even though it is widely held that the theory of evolution is one of the pillars of the biological sciences, as we begin the third decade of the twenty-first century, it is alarming how little we know about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors and non-STEM majors’ misconceptions about evolution in countries such as Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Greece, to name a few. The situation is even more complicated if we acknowledge that contemporary educational approaches (e.g., student-centered learning) mean that students’ misconceptions are one of the multiple aspects that influence the construction of meaningful learning. Here, we present a picture of Colombian STEM/non-STEM majors’ misconceptions about evolution. Participants were 547 students from different STEM/non-STEM majors (278 females and 269 males, 16–24 years old). During 5 years (10 academic semesters), data were collected from students’ responses to an 11-item questionnaire administered in a Colombian university. We hypothesized that the academic semester within these 5 years in which each student completed the instrument as well as respondents’ age, gender, and/or major may influence their misconceptions about evolution. Results reveal that participants had a moderate understanding of evolution. Also, we found a limited understanding of microevolution among participants. Furthermore, cross-sectional analyses of differences in undergraduates’ responses across demographic variables showed that despite apparent differences, these were not reliable since the differences were not statistically significant. Implications for evolution education are discussed.

Investigating factors that influence students’ ability to seek online bilingual scientific information

“…Basically, an analysis of differences in students’ responses across tasks (Task 1 and Task 2), languages (Spanish and English) and demographic variables was carried out with the Mann–Whitney test (George and Mallery, 2022, p. 245). As in the study by Archila et al (2023), we assume that one variable influences students’ performance if the result of the Mann–Whitney test is statistically significant. A p -value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.…”

“…In the case of only one of the two toxins chosen by the student, at least one possible way to prevent it reaching food(s) is specified in Spanish or in English 2 (Maximum) In the case of the two toxins chosen by the student, at least one possible way to prevent each reaching food(s) is specified in Spanish and in English Maximum total score 14 Source: Authors' own work ILS 124,11/12 analysis of differences in students' responses across tasks (Task 1 and Task 2), languages (Spanish and English) and demographic variables was carried out with the Mann-Whitney test (George and Mallery, 2022, p. 245). As in the study by Archila et al (2023), we assume that one variable influences students' performance if the result of the Mann-Whitney test is statistically significant. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.…”