Development and Evaluation of the Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection

2002 
Natural selection as a mechanism of evolution is a central concept in biology; yet, most nonbiology-majors do not thoroughly understand the theory even after instruction. Many alternative conceptions on this topic have been identified, indicating that the job of the instructor is a difficult one. This article presents a new diagnostic test to assess students' understanding of natural selection. The test items are based on actual scientific studies of natural selection, whereas previous tests have employed hypothetical situations that were often misleading or oversimplified. The Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection (CINS) is a 20-item multiple choice test that employs common alternative conceptions as distractors. An original 12-item version of the test was field-tested with 170 nonmajors in 6 classes and 43 biology majors in 1 class at 3 community colleges. The test scores of one subset of nonmajors (n ¼ 7) were compared with the students' performances in semistructured interviews. There was a positive correlation between the test scores and the interview scores. The current 20-item version of the CINS was field-tested with 206 students in a nonmajors' general biology course. The face validity, internal validity, reliability, and readability of the CINS are discussed. Results indicate that the CINS will be a valuable tool for instructors. 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 39: 952-978, 2002 Natural selection is the principal mechanism of evolution, and the theory of evolution is of great importance as a unifying theory in biology education according to the National Science Standards (National Research Council, 1996). Yet, natural selection is misunderstood by many students. The litany of alternative conceptions regarding natural selection and evolution is long (Mayr, 1982; Clough & Driver, 1986; Good, Trowbridge, Demastes, Wandersee, Hafner, & Cummins, 1992; Scharmann & Harris, 1992; Cummins, Demastes & Hafner, 1994). Some studies
    • Correction
    • Source
    • Cite
    • Save
    • Machine Reading By IdeaReader
    54
    References
    445
    Citations
    NaN
    KQI
    []