EvoSketch: Simple simulations for learning random and probabilistic processes in evolution, and effects of instructional support on learners' conceptual knowledge

4Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Students' knowledge of scientific principles of evolution is often inadequate, despite its recognized importance for understanding biology. Moreover, difficulties associated with underlying abstract concepts such as randomness and probability can hinder successful learning of evolutionary concepts. Studies show that visualizations, particularly simulations together with appropriate instructional support, facilitate the learning of abstract concepts. Therefore, we have developed interactive, web-based simulation software called EvoSketch in efforts to help learners grasp the nature and importance of random and probabilistic processes in evolutionary contexts. We applied EvoSketch in an intervention study comparing four self-directed study conditions: learning with EvoSketch (1) alone, (2) combined with interpretative support, (3) combined with reflective support, and (4) using texts about randomness and probability instead of EvoSketch. All conditions received no support from any instructors. Knowledge about evolution as well as randomness and probability in the context of evolution, time-on-task, and perceived cognitive load were measured. A sample of 269 German secondary school students (M age = 15.6 years, SD = 0.6 years) participated in the study. Results: Learners using EvoSketch without additional support obtained higher follow-up test scores regarding their knowledge of randomness and probability than those using the text-based approach. However, use of the simulations together with given instructional support (interpretative or reflective) did not increase students' performance, relative to the text-based approach. In addition, no significant between-intervention differences were found concerning the knowledge of evolution, while significant differences between the groups were detected concerning students' perceived cognitive load and time-on-task. Conclusions: From our findings, we conclude that EvoSketch seems to have a very small positive effect on students' understanding of randomness and probability. Contrary to our expectations, additional self-directed instructional support did not improve students' understanding, probably because it was not necessary to understand EvoSketch simulations. When using EvoSketch in the classroom, we recommend increasing the intervention timeframe to several sessions and a variety of evolutionary examples for which EvoSketch serves as an underlying framework.

References Powered by Scopus

Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items

6480Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement

5942Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning

4926Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Towards common ground in measuring acceptance of evolution and knowledge about evolution across Europe: A systematic review of the state of research

38Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring biology trainee teachers’ professional knowledge about evolution—introducing the Student Inventory

12Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Is book reading always best? Children learn and transfer complex scientific explanations from books or animations

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fiedler, D., Tröbst, S., Großschedl, J., & Harms, U. (2018). EvoSketch: Simple simulations for learning random and probabilistic processes in evolution, and effects of instructional support on learners’ conceptual knowledge. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-018-0089-3

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘250481216

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 13

59%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

18%

Lecturer / Post doc 3

14%

Researcher 2

9%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 9

50%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4

22%

Arts and Humanities 3

17%

Environmental Science 2

11%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Social Media
Shares, Likes & Comments: 15

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0